When it comes to charities, what’s sauce for the goose doesn’t appear to be sauce for the non-binary gander.
In 2022 the Charities Commission deregistered Family First for advocacy that could “more properly be considered propaganda or indoctrination.”
This decision prompted Resist Gender Education to request the commission deregister rainbow charity InsideOUT for engaging in similar activities.
RGE’s complaint was based on two major issues listed by Charities Services as those warranting investigation. They argued InsideOUT caused serious harm and is involved in oppressive or discriminatory conduct.
RGE said InsideOUT did not support all rainbow and takatapui young people as claimed in its mission statement. InsideOUT emphasised the needs of trans, gender diverse and intersex students, at the expense of lesbian and gay students. The word lesbian appeared seven times in the resource on trans or gender descriptions. The word trans appeared 63 times.
While InsideOUT claims it is discriminatory for students not able to play on a sports team or use a bathroom facility that aligns with their gender identity, they ignore surveys showing that the public reject this as a right.
Also the notion of sex aligning or not aligning with their gender identity is a political viewpoint. The scientific reality is that sex is binary, immutable and observed at birth.
InsideOUT promotes gender ideology, which is an unverifiable ideology or set of beliefs. In practice, InsideOUT is peddling scientific falsehoods, such as people can be born in the wrong body and they can change sex.
RGE says InsideOUT provides no information about the growing body of research highlighting the serious negative effects of medical transition or the lack of evidence regarding the efficacy of medical treatment as a solution to gender dysphoria. This oversight is harmful, says RGE. InsideOUT is not providing appropriate support or education to gender questioning young people.
But when it came to Family First, the Charities Commission found their main purpose was to promote “particular points of view about family life.” Said Brendan Ward, the general manager of Charities Services in an interview May 2023: “Under the Act promoting a controversial point of view is a political purpose. Family First does not advance religion or education, nor promote a benefit to all New Zealanders as determined by the Act.”
Using this same criterion, RGE points out that InsideOUT’s main purpose is also to promote a particular point of view (unscientific gender ideology) that is controversial, has a political purpose and does not promote a benefit to all New Zealanders as determined by the Act.
RGE says InsideOUT’s advocacy is not fair, balanced or respectful, therefore its advocacy is not charitable. The test of fair, balanced and respectful is where Family First fell afoul of the Supreme Court’s determination to deregister them.
But there is ample international evidence to show that support for the treatment of gender distress as promoted by InsideOut is weak.
While InsideOUT refutes findings of the Cass Review as “trash” and “methodologically flawed and ideologically driven,” it does not provide evidence to support its comments.
Nevertheless Team Leader Registration at Charities Services, Andrew Patrick rejected all RGE’s claims. Patrick said there was no evidence of harm to InsideOUT’s beneficiaries and no evidence of oppressive or discriminatory conduct. Also their views and activities were consistent with charitable purposes to promote mental health, social rehabilitation, human rights and to advance education.
Even encouraging people to sign a petition to ban conversion therapy (widely regarded as a Trojan horse for gender ideology) and other petitions is linked to its charitable purposes. Advocacy involves speaking for LGBTQIA+ people and is considered charitable.
All of which goes to show that the Charities Commission is as captured by the gibberish of gender ideology as the Labour party, the National Council of Women and numerous government departments.
Requests to the Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector, Louise Upston, for clarification as to the criterion employed by Charities Services, have gone unanswered.
Yvonne van Dongen is a journalist, travel writer, playwright and non-fiction author. This article was originally published by The Platform and is published here with kind permission.
This decision prompted Resist Gender Education to request the commission deregister rainbow charity InsideOUT for engaging in similar activities.
RGE’s complaint was based on two major issues listed by Charities Services as those warranting investigation. They argued InsideOUT caused serious harm and is involved in oppressive or discriminatory conduct.
RGE said InsideOUT did not support all rainbow and takatapui young people as claimed in its mission statement. InsideOUT emphasised the needs of trans, gender diverse and intersex students, at the expense of lesbian and gay students. The word lesbian appeared seven times in the resource on trans or gender descriptions. The word trans appeared 63 times.
While InsideOUT claims it is discriminatory for students not able to play on a sports team or use a bathroom facility that aligns with their gender identity, they ignore surveys showing that the public reject this as a right.
Also the notion of sex aligning or not aligning with their gender identity is a political viewpoint. The scientific reality is that sex is binary, immutable and observed at birth.
InsideOUT promotes gender ideology, which is an unverifiable ideology or set of beliefs. In practice, InsideOUT is peddling scientific falsehoods, such as people can be born in the wrong body and they can change sex.
RGE says InsideOUT provides no information about the growing body of research highlighting the serious negative effects of medical transition or the lack of evidence regarding the efficacy of medical treatment as a solution to gender dysphoria. This oversight is harmful, says RGE. InsideOUT is not providing appropriate support or education to gender questioning young people.
But when it came to Family First, the Charities Commission found their main purpose was to promote “particular points of view about family life.” Said Brendan Ward, the general manager of Charities Services in an interview May 2023: “Under the Act promoting a controversial point of view is a political purpose. Family First does not advance religion or education, nor promote a benefit to all New Zealanders as determined by the Act.”
Using this same criterion, RGE points out that InsideOUT’s main purpose is also to promote a particular point of view (unscientific gender ideology) that is controversial, has a political purpose and does not promote a benefit to all New Zealanders as determined by the Act.
RGE says InsideOUT’s advocacy is not fair, balanced or respectful, therefore its advocacy is not charitable. The test of fair, balanced and respectful is where Family First fell afoul of the Supreme Court’s determination to deregister them.
But there is ample international evidence to show that support for the treatment of gender distress as promoted by InsideOut is weak.
While InsideOUT refutes findings of the Cass Review as “trash” and “methodologically flawed and ideologically driven,” it does not provide evidence to support its comments.
Nevertheless Team Leader Registration at Charities Services, Andrew Patrick rejected all RGE’s claims. Patrick said there was no evidence of harm to InsideOUT’s beneficiaries and no evidence of oppressive or discriminatory conduct. Also their views and activities were consistent with charitable purposes to promote mental health, social rehabilitation, human rights and to advance education.
Even encouraging people to sign a petition to ban conversion therapy (widely regarded as a Trojan horse for gender ideology) and other petitions is linked to its charitable purposes. Advocacy involves speaking for LGBTQIA+ people and is considered charitable.
All of which goes to show that the Charities Commission is as captured by the gibberish of gender ideology as the Labour party, the National Council of Women and numerous government departments.
Requests to the Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector, Louise Upston, for clarification as to the criterion employed by Charities Services, have gone unanswered.
Yvonne van Dongen is a journalist, travel writer, playwright and non-fiction author. This article was originally published by The Platform and is published here with kind permission.
5 comments:
The worm has turned in the UK. It's time for NZ to follow suit and get these gender-benders out of impressionable kids' faces. I would go so far as to say that the State is failing in its duty of care to children in allowing this lot to go anywhere near school kids to spread their nefarious propaganda.
They get away with it because you let them.
If enough parents pulled their kids out of classes they did not want them involved with (gender/sexuality, revisionist history, Maori language & culture, DEI etc) & stated openly in PTA meetings that they would no longer be complicit in allowing these subjects to be taught, then I imagine things would change.
The kids time would be better spent in the library researching topics that are valid & hold their interest, or outside getting some fresh air...
When a charity, extensively funded by taxpayers, can increase it's cash balance from $50 million to $68 million in one year, questions must be asked. The rules for charities and the organisation that oversees them are long overdue for an overhaul.
Unless it has generous donors who give a charity money without conditions how can a charity make a "profit" of millions of dollars.
David Seymour, another one for your hit list!
I would go as far as saying NZ schools are now unsafe for children. Parents need to gather together and share homeschooling supervision. Home schoolers achieve better academically since the academic standard are as bad as the indoctrination . Then there is the bullying and other atroious behaviours as well.
I’m no economist, but it seems to me that the tax take from the man in the street is becoming more and more, given many charities, who pay no tax, are nothing more than business conglomerates. Similarly, with divesting more to Māori, not only are we compensating for supposed colonial injustices, but we continue to affect income streams forever. The whole system has to change.
Post a Comment