X Close

Trans charity Mermaids let off lightly by investigation

'Mermaids has become a child transition machine.' Credit: Getty

'Mermaids has become a child transition machine.' Credit: Getty

October 24 2024 - 4:00pm

Child transition charity Mermaids will today be grateful for a very easy ride from the Charity Commission.

A 22-page report, which took two years to complete, has found that “there has been mismanagement in the administration of the charity by the trustees”. The document concludes that this was because the “governance, culture and practices had failed to keep pace with its growing size”.

It is true that the charity has expanded rapidly, its income swelling from under £84,000 in 2016 to almost £2.3m in 2023. And, over the years, its approach has changed, too.

In 2009, Mermaids’ website included the statement “Gender Identity Disorders in infancy, childhood and adolescence are complex and have varied causes: in the majority of cases the eventual outcome will be homosexuality or bisexuality. Only a small proportion of cases will result in a transexual outcome.” Yet in the intervening period Mermaids has become a child transition machine, aggressively pushing for legal and medical changes to recognise the existence of so-called “transgender children”.

When Hilary Cass this year published her report into the scandal-struck gender identity services at the Tavistock clinic, Mermaids was aghast. The charity responded with a breathless statement, complaining that the findings of the world-leading paediatrician had been misrepresented in the press and Parliament. Rather than digesting Cass’s findings, it promised to continue to advocate for “access to medical interventions such as puberty suppressing and cross gender hormones”. The Charity Commission has rebuked Mermaids for this, instructing it to “give further consideration to the findings and conclusions of the Cass Review Final Report”.

This seems unlikely. Today, Mermaids is an ideology-led lobby group, not a support group that simply follows the science. Controversial campaigns launched by Mermaids include the right of students to take legal action, without parental consent, against schools which do not refer to them by their chosen names and pronouns; the provision of cross-sex hormones for children under 16; and a ban on any therapeutic treatment that does not affirm a child’s cross-sex or non-binary identity. Arguably even more concerning are the charity’s attempts to silence critics.

In 2021 Mermaids, with the help of the Good Law Project, launched legal action against the decision of the Charity Commission to award LGB Alliance charitable status. Then-CEO Susie Green claimed: “The work of the LGB Alliance is clearly designed to divide the LGBTQ+ community in an attempt to undermine and isolate trans people.” The case failed, and shortly afterwards the Charity Commission launched its investigation into Mermaids.

What was found by the Charity Commission is the tip of a murky genderberg. The remit of the report was narrow, based on 62 complaints and press coverage. Yet the Commission confirmed that Mermaids had appointed a trustee with a somewhat laissez-faire attitude to paedophilia, that breast binders (devices to flatten breast tissue) had been sent to young girls behind their parents’ backs, and that Mermaids had been unclear about whether medical information offered was “factual evidence” or merely the organisation’s own opinion.

Had a donkey sanctuary in rural Wales been found to have been so poorly managed, it might not matter so much. But Mermaids not only deals with a vulnerable group of children, it has been feted by celebrities and political figures across the world. These include Prince Harry, actor Emma Watson and US congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The story of former CEO Susie Green, a woman who took her own child to Thailand for sex reassignment surgery for his 16th birthday, inspired the ITV television series Butterfly and the charity advised on the BBC Radio 4 series Just a Girl. Make no mistake, Mermaids has created ripples across the global and media landscape.

The line between activism and charitable work is often blurred. But when it comes to the physical and mental health of children, one would hope that evidence might outweigh ideology. Mermaids does not deserve a ticking off: it deserves to be struck off the charitable register altogether.


Josephine Bartosch is assistant editor at The Critic and co-author of Pornocracy.

jo_bartosch

China is threatening America in the AI race

Reports sugget Zhipu AI  has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

Reports sugget Zhipu AI has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

July 1 2026 - 10:18am

China is trying to catch up with America on artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Zhipu AI — one of China’s six “AI tiger” LLMs — has released a new model that can rival leading US systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos, in cybersecurity tasks such as pinpointing security bugs. While this marks a milestone in China’s drive to catch up with Western AI capabilities, strong performance on a single benchmark does not mean it has taken the lead. Chinese models still lag behind their Western counterparts in broader capabilities, such as autonomous operation. Skepticism is therefore warranted before resorting to hysterical conclusions, but complacency about the geopolitical implications of China’s AI advances would be an even greater mistake.

On the infrastructure side, Chinese AI is still constrained by access to advanced chips, with American labs way ahead in computing capacity as well as investment. Analysis from earlier this year suggests that Chinese models are likely to be at least a few months behind those in the US. But they are still continuing to make progress, or that the geopolitical importance of AI will be decided only by whose LLM has ventured deeper into the technological frontier. The practical applications of AI, countries’ to capture foreign markets, and the application of AI into the real economy will matter just as much.

Here, China may hold an advantage. As with its dominance across many critical supply chains, Beijing may not need to produce the most advanced AI systems — only those that are affordable and widely deployable. In doing so, it could consolidate global influence by supplying functional, low-cost AI at scale.

Beijing seems to be pursuing exactly that path, developing an AI “open-source” strategy that offers affordable, widely available AI models for companies and individuals to use and modify as they wish. The production of the DeepSeek AI model, which matched the performance of Silicon Valley tools such as ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost for users, created goodwill among Chinese models with developers.

The four most popular models on OpenRouter, an AI hardware platform for developers, are now all Chinese. The goal for China is not only to win the frontier-model race, but to make its systems the default layer of AI adoption across industries and global markets. For most economies, the choice is increasingly between an affordable tool they can deploy now and a more robust one that may be out of reach.

And while the countries adopting Chinese models may be exposed to political pressure and cyber threats from Beijing, safer and more capable alternatives matter little if they are unaffordable. American AI companies are already under pressure to monetize products whose operating costs are rising. If Chinese open-source models become the cheap default for startups, universities, governments and businesses across the developing world, then America’s AI lead will be eroded from below.

Perhaps more concerning for America in the long run is how AI can give Chinese manufacturing even more strength, through the ongoing integration of AI as a general-purpose technology. China’s new Five-Year Plan mentioned AI more than 50 times and includes an “AI+” action plan aimed at spreading AI across the economy.

Beijing has been pioneering automation of its critical infrastructure for years, with promising recent results in increasing warplane production capacity. In that regard, China’s open-model strategy and manufacturing dominance will reinforce each other. Cheap, adaptable models accelerate deployment across the real economy while those deployments generate real-world data and use cases that can feed back into further model improvement.

The United States should not dismiss the importance of its lead in the AI race. That lead worries Beijing, not least because a more automated Chinese economy would also become more vulnerable to AI-generated cyber threats. But nor should Washington assume that China cannot catch up with American capabilities over time.

This AI competition represents part of a broader struggle over tech supply chains and geopolitical influence. Decisions over whether to adopt US or Chinese models could produce a more fragmented global reality, with different regions relying on different cloud providers, chips and security structures. The result will likely be a global economy which is divided into competing spheres, rather than one which produces a single winner.


Miquel Vila is a political and geopolitical risk consultant focusing on industrial strategy, critical infrastructure and global supply chains.

miquelvilam