Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Laura Doughty appointed deputy chief executive of Stonewall

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. No doubt another Common Purpose graduate and paid up Fabian positioned by NuLabour.

  2. Robert, ex pat Brit 22 Jan 2010, 9:29pm

    Another useless position for an organisation that doesn’t even believe in full marriage equality for gays and full equality for straights vis a vis civil partnerships.

  3. This woman, and the entire Stonewall Quango means nothing to me.

    Never has, never will.

    As an individual human poof on this rotating rock, I neither need or want a “Deputy Chief Executive”.

    What do these people think they are going to achieve by bureaucratically attempting to force my sexual preference into perceived normality.

    The exact opposite is occurring in that anything these idiots do, is seen as PC.

    By their actions they are destroying everything recent that went on before.

    However. They don’t care. Its their JOB.

  4. Congrats Laura!

    I’d rather have Stonewall fighting for gay causes that Peter Tatchell!

  5. your wasting your time sweetheart unless your goal is to attend loads of drinkies with some gay celebs. Turn your back on real gay issues, like marriage equality, and turn us homos into volvo loving, hetro wannabes, middle income turn coats.

  6. Pumpkin Pie 23 Jan 2010, 3:48pm

    Who?

  7. Stonewall Supporter 23 Jan 2010, 3:51pm

    Many Congratulations Laura.

    Your appointment is well deserved as you have worked tirelessly fundraising for Stonewall over the last 5 years. Keep up the good work!

  8. Robert, ex pat Brit 23 Jan 2010, 6:47pm

    Really, Squidgy? You honestly believe StonewallUK actually fights for full equality? You’re delusional. I could accept its existence as valid provided it acknowledged that there is a huge number of gay people in the UK who want the right to get married and forgo civil partnerships that have nothing to do with full equality. It won’t even support their right let alone lend assistance to achieve it. It does NOT speak for the majority of British gays either. Segregating an entire group of people of 3 million or more with similar rights as the majority doesn’t even equate equality. What you accept then is second class citizenship, legal segregation. In a true democracy and there are few except eight countries (we and the US, among others are excluded) everybody, regardless of their sexual orientation should and must enjoy identical rights without changing terminology to appease bigots who object to what they should be called based on religious beliefs which is why we don’t have marriage for gays in the UK. Are civil partnerships better than nothing? Yes, but why settle for that and give up the pursuit for FULL equality? If catholic countries such as Spain, Portugal and Belgium can do it, that proves that there was absolutely NO excuse for the UK not to. A confrontation with the state cult was just a canard. Why do you think 8 countries abandoned civil unions for marriage, countries that had these inferior unions long before the UK ever conceived of them? Leave the UK my friend in a civil partnership and you’ll find they aren’t that equal. All countries that do not have same-sex marriage but various forms of legal unions don’t even have identical rights that can be reciprocated with another country. France is a classic example of that with its equally unequal PACs that offer less than half of the rights in civil partnerships. How could you even think that’s equal? Marriage is the only legal union that has comparable equal rights in the majority of western countries, same-sex marriage notwithstanding. Think outside the box, see the bigger picture and the implications when you segregate an entire group of people from the mainstream. Its nothing more than regression.

  9. theotherone 23 Jan 2010, 11:08pm

    bet she’s got a nice fat pay cheque to pay for her Hetronormitive lifestyle.

  10. Mihangel apYrs 24 Jan 2010, 8:29pm

    it’s a fact thqt all campaigning organisations start with activists and end up as bureaucracies run by apparatchiks with careerists at the top. With the activists marginalised or expelled.

    Stonewall has followed the money and become institutionalised, with smoothies leading it and taking big money salaries. It may be the way to gain influence, especially if you’re not challenging fundamental heterosexual paradigms, but it doesn’t necessarily benefit those on whose behalf you imply you speak

  11. Brian Burton 25 Jan 2010, 10:12am

    Not much support for the Lady…Is the Lady for Burning? Maybe The Ex-Pat would like to light the torch. The Ex-Pats arguements (They are convincing ones) are set to rumble on and on, untill enough MPs with the clout and indeed the will to make the change from Civil to full Marrage. My Partner and I CPd in 2006 and being the age we are and a bit world weary, we are not kicking the Marrage door down. Ex-Pat you are a very passionate man from what I have witnessed of you now and in the past. It is people who think like you who will win out in the end.

  12. Dave, How can Stonewall be a Quango? It takes hardly any government money, as its accounts on their website show. It’s supported by thousands of individual people.

  13. Another Stonewall Supporter 25 Jan 2010, 11:59am

    It is unfair to blame Stonewall if there is not yet full equality in relation to CP v marriage, I agree full equality needs to happen eventually but Stonewall are obviously aware of this and are constantly fighting for equality. Can’t help wonder if some of these comments are lesbi-phobic, I also would hardly think that Stonewall Employees are on ‘fat’ salaries and would probably be earning much more if they were working in other sectors,it is obvious Laura (google her name) gave up a much’ fatter’ pay cheque in order to work in the charity sector.Stonewall have done so much for the LGB community does anyone stop to think what would happen to us without their campaigning/lobbying?

  14. Simon Murphy 25 Jan 2010, 12:25pm

    Stonewall do NOT support equality for LGB people.

    They refuse (even in principle) to support the idea of marriage equality between gay and straight people, despite the huge numbers of LGB people who do support equality.

    They have an active membership of 30,000 supports (which is about 1% of the LGBT population.)

    Stonewall ONLY represents 1% of the LGBT population.

    I support legal equality for LGBT people.

    Therefore I do not and cannot support Stonewall who remain happy for LGB people to remain 2nd class citizens legally speaking.

  15. theotherone 25 Jan 2010, 12:40pm

    oh come on ‘another stonewall supporter’ – Stonewall refuse not only to suport full equality for LGB people but refuse point blank to support T people and you expect me to love them for it?

    As to claiming that not supporting them is phobic towards Lesbians: what then should we say about Stonewall’s attitude towards Transpeople?

  16. Yet another supporter 25 Jan 2010, 2:21pm

    To Simon Murphy: there is a huge difference between an organisation’s membership and the number of people they campaign for. Stonewall may have 30,000 members, but they campaign on behalf of the UK’s LGB population; similarly, the main political parties only have a few hundred thousand members, but millions vote for them in an election. In other words, membership numbers are in no way indicative of any given organisation’s demographic reach. Of course, with the UK’s LGB population at around 5,000,000, not everyone is going to agree with everything that Stonewall say. What cannot be denied, however, is that the organisation is a definite force for good, having raised (and continuing to do so) LGB issues to the top of the agenda. Surely this has to be a good thing?

    The suggestion that Stonewall wishes LGB people to remain second class citizens is also odd: perhaps those posting these comments are too young to remember Section 28 and the tireless (and ultimately successful) work Stonewall undertook to remove it from the statute books.

    To ‘theotherone’ (and I speak as someone who has been ‘T’ for thirty years), where is it written that trans people should be represented by Stonewall. In my experience, trans people are gay, straight and bi, and while there is some crossover with the aspirations of the LGB community, the issues are sufficiently distinct to warrant a separate campaigning group. The lack of a ‘T’ in Stonewall’s ‘LGB’ has long been a bugbear of the trans community so I have a suggestion: start your own group for trans equality and let’s see, in 20 years’ time, if you have been as successful as Stonewall is today.

    Finally, I have no idea what Ms Doughty earns, but I’ll wager a pound to a penny that she could get more in the private sector.

  17. and another 25 Jan 2010, 3:27pm

    How can you complain that Stonewall is “heteronormative” and then say you want marriage? Shome mishtake shurely

  18. theotherone 25 Jan 2010, 4:01pm

    oh well if the group that has the ear of the government cares not a jot for Trans people then that’s OK, it means nothing, it most definitely does not mean that Transpeople are left out of Equalities legislation or that equalities legislation is drafted in ways that seem to deliberately exclude Transpeople.

    Yet another supporter: do you support Stonewall ignoring your needs as a Transperson? Do you give money to a group that ignores you? marginalizes you? Thinks it’s acceptable to call for acts of violence to be perpetrated against our community?

    ‘You can get another group you know.’ – why? There’s supposed to be a Queer Rights group talking to government but they’re not talking about us.

    As to and another: I do not want ‘Gay Marriage’ but other people do so why does Stonewall refuse to discuss it? Is it because our Christian Labour government wants marriage to be a heterosexual thing? A religious privilege?

  19. Simon Murphy 25 Jan 2010, 4:05pm

    No 16: “Stonewall may have 30,000 members, but they campaign on behalf of the UK’s LGB population”

    They have absolutely no mandate to speak on behalf of ANYONE except their 30,000 supporters. Escpecially when they are so blatantly out of touch with majority opinion on the matter of legal equality for LGBT people.

    “The suggestion that Stonewall wishes LGB people to remain second class citizens is also odd”

    No it is not ‘odd’. They do not support legal equality for gay relationships. Why then is it odd to acknowledge the FACT that they want LGBT people to remain 2nd class citizens.

    It is nowhere nearly as odd as a situation where a group such as Stonewall (who even though they only represent a tiny minority of LGB people) which positions itself as being representative of the wider LGB population, do not support legal equality for LGB people.

    Through their opposition to marriage equality Stonewall delegitimises all the other worthwhile work they are doing.

    A group like Stonewall which does not think I deserve legal equality simply because I am gay, is quite clearly not to be trusted.

    Why would any LGBT person trust a group which is opposed to LGBT equality.

    Stonewall needs to wake up. They are on a sinking ship unless they accept that LGBT people deserve legal equality, and that their refusal to accept this means they are consigning themselves to history.

    Civil Partnerships are a product of their time (the late 20th Century). They are inadequate and offensive. And Stonewall’s support of them is inadequate and offensive.

  20. Simon Murphy 25 Jan 2010, 4:11pm

    Does Laura Doughty support marriage equality for LGBT people?

    If not then why not?

  21. theotherone 25 Jan 2010, 4:12pm

    may I suggest simon that it’s because the Government does not support Gay Marriage?

  22. Simon Murphy 25 Jan 2010, 4:17pm

    “may I suggest simon that it’s because the Government does not support Gay Marriage? ”

    Are you suggesting perhaps that Stonewall’s main purpose is to rubberstamp the government’s decisions about LGBT people? And that Stonewall have no interest in achieving legal equality for LGBT people?

    If this is what you are suggesting then I fully agree.

    Stonewall needs to start advertising the fact that they are opposed to legal equality for LGBT people.

    I would guess that quite a few LGBT people are not aware of the fact that Stonewall wants them to remain 2nd class citizens.

  23. theotherone 25 Jan 2010, 4:21pm

    would Stonewall care that no one would support them? They’re getting glasses of Champaign at No. 10. Why would they care about lesser humans like us?

  24. theotherone 25 Jan 2010, 4:37pm

    I wonder what she gets paid…good expenses I hope.

  25. Lesbian and Proud 25 Jan 2010, 4:42pm

    Simon Murphy what an idiotic comment. ‘Does Laura Doughty support marriage equality for LGBT people’ How can it be a question of what Laura Doughty supports, Stonewall are the to lobby the government for Equality not for Laura Doughty;s own personal views. Also, may I suggest that although Stonewall have 30,000 members they have a lot more support in the LGB community from LGB’s why are not active members.To suggest they support 1% of our community is insulting.
    I support the labour party for example but am not a member. These comments are looking increasingly personalised and misogynist.

  26. theotherone 25 Jan 2010, 4:50pm

    gosh Lesbian and proud so if you question the motives of a member of Stonewall then you’re Misogynistic? Way to shut down debate…

  27. theotherone 25 Jan 2010, 4:52pm

    and may I also ask if Stonewall, given they lobby for Equality, be lobbying for the Equality of LGB Transpeople?

  28. Simon Murphy 25 Jan 2010, 5:02pm

    No 25: Lesbian and Proud: you say:

    “may I suggest that although Stonewall have 30,000 members they have a lot more support in the LGB community from LGB’s who are not active members.”

    Please explain how Stonewall has a mandate to speak on behalf of ANYONE other than the 1% of the LGBT people who support them?

    The vast majority of LGBT people support legal equality for LGBT people. Stonewall however are opposed to legal equality for LGBT people.

    It is insulting and offensive to suggest that Stonewall speaks on anyone’s behalf other than their tiny membership.
    Especially seeing as a majority of LGBT people would oppose Stonewall’s clearly stated opposition to LGBT equality.

    CP’s are not equality regardless of how Stonewall tries to pretend they are.

  29. Simon Murphy 25 Jan 2010, 5:11pm

    “Simon Murphy what an idiotic comment. ‘Does Laura Doughty support marriage equality for LGBT people’ How can it be a question of what Laura Doughty supports, Stonewall are the to lobby the government for Equality not for Laura Doughty;s own personal views. ”

    But Stonewall DON’T lobby the government for legal equality for LGBT people.

    Stonewall are happy for LGBT people to be treated as 2nd class citizens who are denied access to the civil contract of marriage simply because they are gay.

    How can you defend an organisation which doesn’t believe you deserve equal rights because of your sexual orientation?

  30. Yet another supporter 25 Jan 2010, 5:14pm

    Equality is not equivalence.

  31. Simon Murphy 25 Jan 2010, 5:22pm

    “Equality is not equivalence.”

    And Stonewall is opposed to equality for LGBT people simply because of their sexual orientation.

    So I don’t understand your point.

    Stonewall refuses to explain why they oppose legal equality for LGBT people. Ben Summerskill when asked by Pink News why Stonewall is opposed to equality for LGBT people gave the absurdly offensive response ‘Because some gay people don’t want to get married”

  32. theotherone 25 Jan 2010, 5:27pm

    oh now Simon, you’re just being misogynistic now (or something like that.)

    I suspect all these ‘supporters’ are one person.

  33. Lesbian and Proud 25 Jan 2010, 5:29pm

    Simon – in my experience Stonewall do little else other than lobby for LGB equality. However, Rome wasn’t built in a day, and sometimes you get to a destination more quickly by taking small, easy steps, than giant strides.

    Having said that, over the past few years Stonewall has helped bring in CPs, gays in the military, anti-homophobia campaigns in schools and in association with the Football Association, and much more. And, most importantly, they are STILL campaigning. You seem to be making your judgement based on where we are now, not where we are going.

    For the record, I do not think Stonewall pretends that CP is the same as marriage, but it is a massive step in the right direction for equality. A little over 40 years ago it was illegal to be gay in the UK, so let’s congratulate those who have helped change the climate rather than berate them for what is yet to be done.

  34. theotherone 25 Jan 2010, 5:30pm

    lesbian: what about Transpeople? Are you ignoring my post?

  35. Simon Murphy 25 Jan 2010, 5:36pm

    Lesbian and Proud – Civil Partnerships are already fully legal.

    You speak of small, easy steps to get equality.

    In my view it a very small easy step for Stonewall to support legal equality for LGBT people. We already have CP’s. Is Stonewall asking us to wait until the Tories are ready to grant us equality?

    Stonewall’s downright refusal to support equality for LGBT people (even in principle) is evidence that they are severely out of touch with the LGBT population.

    By opposing LGBT equality Stonewall are declaring themselves irrelevant and redundant.

  36. I’m amused to note, as I look at this web-page, that pinknews is proud to use the banner ‘Stonewall Publication of the year 2006-7′ This, presumably, means they are pleased to accept the obsequies lavished upon them by Stonewall, and surely undercuts their claim to be ‘Europe’s largest gay news service’. Because, I learn form these posts, Stonewall does not support LGB equality.

    A surprising assertion, given evidence to the contrary. So:

    Simon. Please can you tell us which organisations you actually approve of do more for LGB equality; what are their tangible achievements; and what you personally do to demonstrate your support.

    Theotherone. Without resorting to slagging off Stonewall, which you do aplenty, please can you tell us exactly WHY they SHOULD be campaigning on trans issues, any more than, say, Age Concern or Barnardo’s or the RSPCA? BTW, if you mention Julie Bindel then you’re avoiding the question.

    Robert Ex-pat. Lots of people just don’t care as much about the marriage thing as you do – most of my friends that are in a CP don’t give a toss – even the ones of faith. My sister is getting hitched to her partner next month, and doesn’t give a toss. Her partner, who has been, y’know, properly married twice, isn’t particularly bothered about revisiting the territory. So I can see that there is a range of feeling about the matter. Meantime, kids are getting bullied in schools, gay people baulk a the thought of going into any kind of public life, and asylum seekers are woefully mis-served under the UK’s system. A prospective conservative administration needs to be held to account for its sudden sea-change on gay rights. So I’m happy to go with that agenda for the time-being.

    To get back to the original subject of this post, congratulations to Laura Doughty – I’m sure she’s worked hard for it, and we can wait and see if she proves her worth. You can look at Stonewall’s financial statements on the web, and see what their salary bill is. 1.2m in 2007, for about 40 staff – about £30k a head. One person paid over £60k. Presumably BS. Modest by comparison with many orgainisations across public and private sector, and especially as they are based in London. Doubtless some will still be sucking their teeth at these lavish emoluments, but while Stonewall is a charity, its employees are not.

  37. Simon Murphy 26 Jan 2010, 11:10am

    Chameleon – I support MarriagEquality – an Irish Gay Rights group that is campaigning for civil marriage for gay people in Ireland.

    I also support Outrage who have done FAR more than the Uncle Tom’s of Stonewall in raising awareness of issues affecting LGBT people (Stonewall were obviously better at doing the donkey work – at least until Stonewall abandoned the goal of equality for LGBT people. )

    Can you explain to me why Stonewall refuses to support equality for LGBT people?

    Stonewall have NEVER given an explanation as to why they are opposed equality for LGBT people (Ben Summerskill’s statement to the effect that ‘Some gay people do not want to get married’ is not a valid reason).

    Stonewall needs to disband. The campaigns they are involved in are worthwhile but there’s nothing that wouldn’t allow a group which supports equality for LGBT people to continue them.

    Stonewall is the enemy of the LGBT population while it supports laws that discriminate against us purely on the basis of our sexual orientation.

    Laura Doughty would do far better if she worked for an organisation which thought she deserved legal equality. As it is she works for Stonewall – a group opposed to her equality.

    Stonewall only represent 1% of the LGB population and they are damaging the cause of LGBT equality by rubberstamping and approving of homophobic discrimination against the other 99% of the LGBT population which Stonewall does NOT represent.

  38. theotherone 26 Jan 2010, 12:01pm

    why should stonewall support Trans rights? Because we’re part of the Queer community.

    There, and not a mention of Miss Bindle in sight.

  39. Simon Murphy 26 Jan 2010, 1:08pm

    And Stonewall seem utterly unwilling to face up to their growing irrelevancy.

    Thanks to their opposition to LGBT equality Stonewall have fallen behind the Lib Dems in their support for LGBT equality.

    It is a truly pathetic reflection on the self-proclaimed leading LGB Rights group in Britain, that a mainstream political party is more supportive of LGBT equality than they are.

  40. Ian Michael 26 Jan 2010, 2:56pm

    I hope that Laura Doughty is either L or B as it would be outrageous not to have gay people leading a leading gay right’s charity.

    Simon Murphy- to suggest Stonewall have fallen behind lib-dems on gay rights is ludicrous.

  41. Simon Murphy 26 Jan 2010, 3:33pm

    “Simon Murphy- to suggest Stonewall have fallen behind lib-dems on gay rights is ludicrous.”

    No it is not ludicrous.

    It is true.

    Nick Clegg supports the principle of LGB couples being allowed to enter contracts of civil marriage on the same basis as heterosexual couples.

    Stonewall are opposed to LGB couples being allowed to enter contracts of civil marriage on the same basis as heterosexual couples.

    Therefore the Lib Dems are greater allies of LGBT equality than Stonewall are.

  42. Si – glad to you know you support something, even if it is devoted to the single issue of civil marriage in a foreighn country, which as currently some way behind the UK on LGB equality. You still haven’t directed us to a UK org that is doing more on LGB equality, or more effectively, than Stonewall, your approbation of OutRage! notwithstanding. And I still don’t know what you actually do in the name of your support foe whoever-it-is. I’m also curious, now, to know your take on GLEN? Are they as irrelevant as you claim Stonewall to be?

    Theo – love the idea of the ‘Queer’ community. What is it, and pray tell, where do I go to find it?

    Ian Michael – I wouldn’t claim to know LD well, but I have met her partner. Nice woman. However, Stonewall would be hoist by its own petard if it discrminated against employees on the grounds of their sexual orientation.

  43. theotherone 27 Jan 2010, 12:13am

    So I take it Chameleon you either:

    1. Are a self loathing Queen who screams ‘there’s no Community!’ because one young man wouldn’t such your cock

    or

    2. You accept Transpeople are a part of the ‘Gay’ Community (if you prefer that term)?

    If we are a part of the community then there is no excuse for ignoring our needs.

  44. Simon Murphy 27 Jan 2010, 3:53pm

    No 42: Chameleon: “glad to you know you support something, even if it is devoted to the single issue of civil marriage in a foreighn country”

    Have a look at my surname. Ireland is not a foreign country to me. It is where I am from. I live in the UK as a foreigner.

    “I’m also curious, now, to know your take on GLEN? Are they as irrelevant as you claim Stonewall to be?”

    GLEN support marriage equality in principle and it is part their policy that civil partnerships are necessary but are not the end goal. They are nowhere near as irrelevant as Stonewall have become as at least they acknowledge that the 2nd class citizenship offered by CP’s are a necessary stepping stone on the road to equality.

    Stonewall are asking the LGBT population to accept 2nd class citizenship as the final destination which is appallingly offensive.

    I really don’t understand how Stonewall can waste their time on campaigning for religious buildings to be allowed to hold discriminatory Civil Partnerships; yet refuse to support marriage equality even in principle.

    Unless of course they are opposed to marriage as an institution. But that’s not true either as they don’t support the right of straight couples to enter CP’s either.

  45. Simon Murphy 27 Jan 2010, 3:58pm

    Chameleon: do you support Stonewall?

    If so please explain how you can support a group which does not think you are deserving of legal equality based on your sexual orientation?@

    And can you explain WHY they are opposed to equality (the fact that ‘some’ gay people don’t want to get married as Ben Summerskill states is an inadequate reason by the way)

  46. S’murph. I’d clocked your surname, but resisted the temptation to assume that you are an Irish national, just because of that. Charity begins at home, so why don’t you focus your efforts there? Yes, I support Stonewall. I’m not wealthy, but I’ve got off my butt and fund-raised for things like Education for All, to the tune of many £000s. I happen to think homophobic bullying is a more pressing concern, in the UK, than the marriage/partnership thing. So it does get up my nose when you snipe from the sidelines and say ‘Stonewall aren’t working for LGB equality’, and yet I have no clear impression that you do anything other than bash this nonsense into your keyboard.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all