Hoc Women and Equalities Select Committee want more time for EHRC consultation

I'm now imagining the British Isles sorting hat..... 😆

And as for those assigned Scottish at birth…….make way!

It has not worked due to British women being stroppy cows, and reality being an even bigger one.

It must also be acknowledged that some of us were correctly assigned observed Northern at birth and it seems to be contagious. (I think I remember BACP’s pronouncement correctly.) Is it possible this is likewise true for reality?

Over a decade ago TRAs set out to capture everything with the word 'women' in it to ensure that nothing for women or about women would be allowed to advocate for women, or to represent womanhood as sex based.

The idea was that this capture would, rather like stuffing Native Americans on reservations and sending their children to American boarding schools, stamp out the culture and replace it with the desired one. Anyone not captured was pushed out or not employed so these places were wholly RightThink.

It has not worked due to British women being stroppy cows, and reality being an even bigger one.

But it's why we have the edifying sight of a WEC looking ridiculous at having a nervous breakdown at the thought of actually advocating for women.

When did it become unthinkable that we should have a WEC that seeks to advocate for women? Across the board, from fixing Family Courts, CMS, socially, childcare, in healthcare etc.

As Phantom says, it’s been 20+ years.

I’d be genuinely pleased to be reminded of substantial improvements for women that I’m overlooking in my current grump.

Both MPs competing to chair women and equalities committee say trans women are women
https://archive.is/z9aZr

We had a whole thread about it at the time, and how it was unbalanced. And I think, whether as a result of the FWR thread, the Telegraph or one the the main stream newspapers reported it.

In fact it might be quite educational for all of us to read back through threads about the WEC.

Even if only to read about the time Kemi Badenoch gave evidence and made them all look like total fools.

It doesn't seem to matter which party is in power, it always ends up with a WEC with people who dont care about women.

https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/328/women-and-equalities-committee/membership/

It’s not just the current government. This has been going on for 20+ years.

Who's on the committee?

Not sue if it's been linked to before, but I just read Sex Matters' typically forensic take-down of the lazy arguments used in the HoC debate by Bryant and others.

https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/inaccurate-sex-data-excuses-and-bad-arguments/?mc_cid=f812fbed59

A couple of excerpts:

Note that Excuse 1 (don’t worry, we are already acting on the Sullivan Review and fixing bad sex data) and Excuse 5 (we can’t fix bad data because doing so would interfere with trans rights) are contradictory.

It is worth noting that John Edwards, the Information Commissioner (that is, the regulator with the responsibility for securing compliance with the data-protection laws), is personally committed to the transactivist position that transgender people should be allowed to self-identify as the opposite sex. He has publicly declared that his daughter is a boy. He quotes his child as saying that the accurate recording of sex data “makes me feel afraid and invalidated”, and has cited this as a reason sex shouldn’t be recorded accurately.

Yep.

Yes, I think you’re right. So I guess the answer is to make it as uncomfortable as possible for him to trample women’s rights…..

When women have been concerned about the possibility of sexual assault, I seem to remember the reply was that she can complain to the police and her assaulted will be dealt with.

it wasn’t a good answer then, and it isn’t now, but interesting nevertheless

Starmer is just trying to avoid the subject and has taken the route of least resistance rather than having a masterplan against women. I think this is effectively backfiring at this point as it's making for some v difficult scenarios that Starmer is finding harder and harder to dodge with every new legal clarification that women are indeed not men.

The women’s and equality commission is stuffed full of trans-supporters because Starmer has allowed it to be. He has also allowed the data bill to go through. He may now realise that he can’t say ‘some women have penises’ but he either doesn’t understand, or chooses not to understand the implications.

Starmer was clear before the election that he is not on our side, he still isn’t

There are an awful lot of people who are incapable of considering anyone else but themselves.

True, but that's not what got me sucking my teeth. It was the way it didn't occur to him that a woman would have exactly the same problem only more so (being half his size).

Indeed, and you can apply much the same argument to those poor unfortunate individuals who cannot go the the prison of their choice.

Well if that happens? they need to lodge a complaint against the officers involved, they have the 'right' to do so, so let them exercise the right's they do have, instead of stealing women's rights.

Strip searching needs to be be by consent of the person and the searcher wrt sex.

Default is biological sex.

If a transwoman wants to be searched by a 'woman' they can wait until a transwoman police officer is available, even if that means they have to stay in custody until one is brought in from another area. Problem solved.

English law (UK law) works on the principle of reasonableness and average person.

This where picking at 'biological sex' falls down. What is does the average person reasonably understand by biological sex? You could in theory call this the 'Trump Level Language' barrier - Trump talks at the literacy level of an 9 year old and it's understood by even those with lower literacy levels.

This is interesting when you consider it's the Word Salad Crew trying to seize control of the law really fall down. They don't fit this reasonableness test. They fail it completely.

I discussed this with TW friend and TWF was enraged about TW being searched by male police officers, because they can't be trusted not to sexually assault the suspect.

🤔

Is there a record of this committee raising these concerns re; female police officers and women?

I think these policies have been in the news since July 2024.

"It also asks “whether the code of practice will clarify rights of trans people, for example around strip-searching by police officers?”

What about the women police officers right not to be forced to search males?

I would like to think that the UK’s equalities watchdog sends them a copy of the SC's judgement and says here it's all very clearly written, you don't need clarification you just need to read it, or get a 6 year old to read it to you.