@victor_madrigal 's report quotes from Meet the Moment : A call for Progressive Philanthropic Response to the Anti Gender Movement by the Global Philanthropy Project group of LGBT funders
They report how anti-gender movements "funnel" money overseas (sounds dodgy doesn't it?)
While their members "distribute it"
(What's the difference you might ask? There isn't any)
The headline figure is that there is $1 billion over 9 years being "funnelled" into the anti gender movement.
But look a bit closer 99% of that is one org: the Christian Broadcasting Network
What's that then?
It's Pat Robertson's evangelical broadcasting company, which does what it says on the tin.
(So the answer to "where is my right wing money?" is unless you are want to host a Christian radio show don't expect any)
The GPP report (an advocacy document put together by staff in foundations who want to get more resources for their area) compares LGBTI funding with the billion going into Christian broadcasting and say they are dwarfed.
But this is not comparing like with like.
I'm no fan of Pat Robertson but if you are going to compare the funding of his whole outfit with the "pro-gender" philanthropy movement then that's what you should do.
GPP identify 800 foundations and NGOs that fund pro-gender LGBTI projects and activities...
They are well coordinated together
It is what you could call a Financial Architecture
But they only count the 31c in $100 that goes directly to LGBTI specific projects
About half a billion over two years, mainly in North America
But overall we are talking about $160 bn by these orgs over 2 years. Much more than Pat Robinson's $1bn over 9 years
This is money for all sorts of progressive causes: medical research, international aid, education, women's rights, environment etc.
But orgs are adopting gender ideology stances and language internally in their other work and are hostile to gender critical dissent.
Try getting funding for women's rights while being gender critical.
Try getting (or keeping) a job in the voluntary sector or progressive philanthropy while being gender critical.
The takeaway: there is no vast pool of rightwing money. There is money and influence and foundations doing what they do.
All of this (both sides) is worthy of respect in a democratic society, AND also worthy of scrutiny
Working in a big foundation is one of the cushiest jobs in the voluntary sector.
There is a culture of performative introspection while not rocking the boat....
Still, I hope *someone* in big philanthropy is thinking "is it really progress to sterilise gay children, demonise older women and clamp down on freedom of speech? Have we gone wrong here?"
Being a transgender is not (so they say) a medical condition.
The Equality Act protected characteristic does not require medical diagnosis.
Yet the EqA protected characteristic is being used as a lever to remove safeguards from extreme medical treatment
Their case is that whatever safeguards are put in place around "trans children" should be compared to "non trans children": as if the EqA was there to protect people's right to be sterilised without consent!
No one is sterilising non trans children to make them look better
MUST READ: This is Dr Marci Bowers, transwoman, WPATH Board Member, world-renowned vaginoplasty specialist who operated on Jazz Jennings talking to @AbigailShrier
This is Erica Anderson, clinical psychologist at the University of California San Francisco’s Child and Adolescent Gender Clinic, transwoman WPATH Board member
They are saying the things that have got @ALLIANCELGB and @Transgendertrd called "Hate Groups" by Stonewall and Mermaids, that have got @JamesEsses investigated, James Caspian's research stopped, & @LisaLittman1 & Abigail Shrier hounded.
Q "has the TERF responsible been fired" ...
A"its an understandable but incorrect assumption that a TERF was responsible"
This is extraordinarily unprofessional & concerning from @RainbowNHSBadge scheme.
40 NHS Trusts are part of the "NHS Rainbow Badge assessment model"
Try that exchange substituting a slur for a person with any other protected characteristic in place of "TERF" and ask yourself if this is an acceptable way for a public body to behave?
At 38 minutes - Robin Moira White "the go to lawyer for trans cases". Some good questions from @Emmabarnett. She has done her homework bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0…
Robin gives advice on toilets - both in workplaces and in education. We don't have segregated workplaces any more. there used to be race segregation in NASA. There used to sex segregation.
(dodges the question of why we still have sex segregation in toilets)
Says an example of proportionate means to a legitimate aim of trans exclusion would be "breast screening", a higher degree of nakedness. It may be legitimate to say to a trans user that they need to come at a different time. That is the extreme of the position. [No case law here]