When new ideas emerge in society there is usually discussion about them. It’s a sound general principle — the best way to evaluate new ideas is to explore them critically and freely. These issues of sex and gender are of importance to society as a whole. Women especially will want to debate all of this. Surely we can agree that women should have the right to discuss it?

But that is not how this is playing out.

Instead of open, respectful discussion, today’s trans activism too often seeks to prevent women from discussing the issues in trans ideology which directly affect their lives.

For example, a recent meeting due to be held by the campaigning organisation Woman’s Place UK at the Brighton Quakers’ Friends Meeting House had to be relocated after trans activists targeted the venue with claims that Woman’s Place UK was a hate group. The Quakers cancelled the booking and the event had to take place elsewhere. Woman’s Place UK routinely has to keep its locations secret until the very last moment to prevent trans activists targeting venue owners.

This example demonstrates how trans activism’s tactics have developed since the QUN protest. In 2008, there were no attempts to persuade the venue to cancel the event, there were no targeted email campaigns directed at the festival’s funders or board of trustees.

But today such tactics are commonplace.

Why is this happening? How have we reached this degraded state of affairs in which members of one marginalised group try to prevent another from talking.

Here is where the role of Stonewall is so important.

Stonewall has a powerful reputation earned primarily through its invaluable work in the 1990s and early 2000s on issues such as the equal age of consent and civil partnerships. The Stonewall brand has huge impact. What Stonewall says — and doesn’t say — really matters.

Stonewall is failing in two key ways.

Firstly, it is too willing to label those who question ideas within trans ideology as transphobic. For example, the small group of lesbians who protested at London Pride in July 2018 were denounced by Stonewall CEO Ruth Hunt as transphobes. This was unfair.

Stonewall’s liberal use of this derogatory label also acts as a dog whistle to the most aggressive of trans activists who then abuse gender critical women online. Some of this online abuse is horrific. It is almost always misogynistic.

So far, apart from a general boilerplate statement, Stonewall appears to have done nothing specific to discourage this behaviour. Of course, Stonewall is not directly responsible for the bad behaviour of some trans activists — but that is not to say it is entirely disconnected from any responsibility.

When writing this article, I asked Stonewall whether it had taken any specific actions to discourage trans activists from meting out misogynistic abuse to women who question trans ideology. Stonewall has refused to comment on the basis that this article is not written for a recognised news outlet. If Stonewall would like to respond to this article I will gladly incorporate any relevant statement they wish to make.

I have been thinking about writing this for several years but — to be frank — I have been nervous of coming out as gender critical. So many women have now spoken up — often at considerable risk to themselves —whereas, since I left QUN, I have not. That has started to make me look somewhat cowardly. So here we are.

It’s undeniable that trans issues were marginalised in LGBT politics for a long time. Many in the trans community are angry and I don’t blame them. I do not argue for meek, timid activism — positive change only comes to those who are willing to make a stink.

For what it’s worth, I think this is the challenge facing us all: to advance trans rights and liberation without compromising natal women’s sex-based rights and protections. This must be done in an atmosphere of mutual respect in which anyone is free to critically discuss anything they wish, using whatever (respectful) terminology they choose. The underlying issues of sex and gender must be seen for what they are: nobody’s exclusive property.

We are a long, long way from this ideal state of affairs.