A note for UK readers about all the money we don’t have, and all the things we don’t do

We regularly see gender identity extremists in the UK and Ireland assert that the Hands Across The Aisle Coalition is funding gender critical activities in the United Kingdom.

This is false.

At present, we’re an unincorporated volunteer network.

We don’t have either an official corporate status or a bank account. We take no money, because we have no means of accepting funds if we were offered any, which we haven’t been. We pay no one, because we have no money. We run on free software and the uncompensated contributions of our members’ time and wherewithal.

This might change someday. At present, any statement that we have previously funded, or are now funding anyone, anyone at all, is either an expression of ignorance or a potentially malicious falsehood.

We’re also busy enough in our own country, and the implication that women in the UK would need the help of anyone in the US to organize meetings or demonstrations is ridiculous on its face. It’s insulting to the political acumen and experience of the many women targeted by gender activists in the UK, with the clear intent of effecting the total destruction of their reputations and public lives.

It’s obvious that this claim is made to support the assertion of gender identity extremists that no one would disagree with them if there hadn’t been someone whispering in their ears. This is a reversal of reality in the UK, certainly, where only 18 percent of the public agree with self-ID without medical supervision.

People have asserted that our coalition of women from across the political spectrum is a religious or partisan organization, or that we campaign against abortion and same-sex marriage.

As a coalition, we have no religious opinion, though our members have a great many of them.

As a coalition, we have no partisan affiliation and take no position on any electoral contest.

As a coalition, we have no position on either abortion or same-sex marriage, while our members probably have all possible opinions on these subjects. We do no work on these topics as a group, and we take no position on them, for or against.

Our members have all agreed to remain neutral in the above-mentioned ways as part of our work together, regardless of our personal beliefs. If we ever do formalize our network, these conditions would have to hold.

Though just as the claims that only a small minority disagree with gender identity extremism are a reversal of reality, so are the claims that opposition to their ideas have to be motivated by conservatism. The proposed changes to the UK Gender Recognition Act were originally a Conservative Party policy, which transgender advocates have had significant input into, without anyone that we’ve heard of criticizing them for the ostensible crime of talking to people who aren’t offended to be called conservative.

img_0845
Clara Barker, a man who says that he’s a woman, standing at the door of 10 Downing Street.

It seems that speaking with or knowing conservatives is only a crime to gender identity activists when women who disagree with them do it.

Regardless of whether the characters of the left or right in the US and UK are more different than the commonality of the terms might imply, portraying opposition to gender identity as necessarily “conservative” is a tactic with the obvious and sole purpose of socially ostracizing dissenters on this issue within the left.

In the meantime, statements and insinuations such as the following social media comments, recorded as screenshots of Twitter posts, are false. If any UK residents feel they’ve been maliciously misrepresented by statements such as these, we’d like to let them know that they can contact us for whatever sort of evidence we can reasonably provide that would be useful in seeking redress.

This next one’s particularly ridiculous. This person is pretending that they are afraid of a small group of women holding peaceful, public meetings to discuss policy affecting their lives, all while getting serious threats from gender activists that have been extensively reported in the press. This is another reversal of reality, in addition to the ridiculous suggestion that they’re being funded by a group of nonpartisan, US volunteers with no money to spend.

Here’s a link to the original tweet pictured in the next image, by the way. Does this mean that CaseyExplosion is bankrolled by the Evangelical movement? If a link is all that takes, congratulations on all your new funding!

In further answer to this next, last tweet, the list of sites Casey refers to are our reading list, otherwise known as a blog roll. They haven’t endorsed us, and our inclusion of them on lists of sites whose gender identity commentary we sometimes agree with also isn’t an endorsement. No one’s paying anyone. Not least because, as stated, the Hands Across the Aisle Coalition currently neither accepts nor distributes any funds.

We just don’t believe that humans can change sex. We don’t believe that it’s a good idea to sterilize healthy minors for cosmetic purposes. No one needed to pay any of the women in our coalition to refuse to ignore the evidence of our own eyes; in another reversal of reality, refusing to lie about this has cost many of us dearly. We don’t even have the money, as a group, to reimburse the volunteer who covers our website fees out of her own pocket.

The same can’t be said of the kinds of people who’d spend $900,000 to win a ballot initiative in Anchorage.

Where’s their money coming from? Maybe gender identity activists talk so much about the money we don’t have because they don’t want anyone else talking about their very real cash on hand, their constant requests for more, and how a group that’s supposedly so ‘marginalized‘ managed to get so very much money and influence seemingly overnight, both in the US and Europe.