Government announces preferred candidate for EHRC chair

I did get a response to may complaint (I posted on the relevant thread) saying my comments had been noted and passed onto the committee.

Will try and find time to listen to today's session later today.

How disappointing that you have had no acknowledgement of your complaint, although not surprising 😐

I made a complaint to her about her conduct last time, not heard anything back.

Mary Ann Stephenson has a pre-appointment hearing with the WEC today at 2.20 pm. Hopefully Sarah Owen will manage to be a bit more professional this time. She might even be properly briefed on the SC judgement 🙃

It’s probably a good time for your friend to go to the press about that. stories might not have made it in the past but they are needed now to explain the real impact of “be kind” isn’t actually very kind…

Most reasonable people understand why segregation is needed in this situation. And that services can be offered to all - it’s not women first and trans people get nothing… it’s about meeting needs which are different

SionnachRuadh · Yesterday 23:06

While the EHRC is meant to function as an independent body, its chair is appointed by the Minister for Women and Equalities – a politicised arrangement that fundamentally undermines the Commission’s supposed impartiality.

I don't think they understand the word impartiality. They mean someone who agrees with them, who will do their bidding and possibly carry out a bullying and harassment campaign, based on lies.

... Mims Davies, the shadow women and equalities minister, condemned the appointment. She said: “Replacing an esteemed and well-respected chair, who stood up and fought for women’s rights, with a left-wing ideologue who has demanded new taxes and open borders shows how out of touch this Labour government really is.”

Bridget Phillipson, the women and equalities minister, said Stephenson was “exceptionally suited to leading the EHRC and ensuring it continues to uphold the equalities framework in this country”.

Pride in Labour said that the appointment “raises serious doubt about her ability and commitment to protect the rights of trans people”.
In a statement, the group added: “At a time when the Labour government is actively distancing itself from trans liberation and pandering to transphobic narratives, appointments like this one cannot be viewed in isolation. They are part of a political strategy to redefine ‘equality’ in narrow, exclusionary terms.” ...

You'll need to read that whole article to work out what Mims Davies is referring too!

See https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/keir-starmers-pick-to-lead-ehrc-defended-gender-critical-feminists-28h62qgtq

Can be read in full at https://archive.is/yTEFt

which by some strange witchcraft has a URL that finishes TEFt - so very nearly TERF!

On the other hand if anyone has the time and patience and under cover skills, you could voluneer to be a Trustee for the Feminist Library and mole like gradually reverse the transing of the project with its unique collection of papers and memoirs from the 1970s era of Women's Liberation.

https://feministlibrary.co.uk/news/we-are-looking-for-new-trustees/

They're the ones doing the enforcing, as I understand it

I dont think either of the federations have the powers to enforce anything. But are meant to co-ordinate their members which are each independent so that as a "federation" they can say their members have agreed procedures and practices.

eg for years Refuge wasn't allowed to be member because it was based on the rabidly anti woman, anti feminist, anti lesbian prejudices of its founder Erin Pizzey. Which may explain why the MSM always writes as though Refuge is the Women's Aid "leader" rather than a corporate conglomerate that scrapped into being a member.

But there is a huge problem with bullying in the voluntary and charity sector and not as far as I am aware any helpline for employees. What happened to Roz Adams is not a unique experience, we just heard about because of the issue the bullying was about.

It is just as likely to be committee members who often thinking being on the board is a bit like the Victorian era when the worthy and the good would generously give of their time, and would look down on those doing the work. So just as likely to be trustees coming in fully captured. And not helped by funders making it quite clear a group that is trans inclusive is more likely to get funding.

Its probably something that the WRC should do, but I dont think they would ever take on anything as complex as that.

Ironically at Solace Women's aid the workers went on strike, and got some demands met, but the TU that supported them is totally TWAW.

While the EHRC is meant to function as an independent body, its chair is appointed by the Minister for Women and Equalities – a politicised arrangement that fundamentally undermines the Commission’s supposed impartiality.

Thereby demonstrating that these muppets don't know how a basic part of government works.

Who the fuck do you expect to appoint the Chair of the EHRC? A stakeholders' forum convened by Stonewall?

The Chair is appointed by ministers. The pre-appointment scrutiny hearing with the select committee is so the committee members can ask questions about the preferred candidate's ability to hold the government to account. So if Lisa Nandy appoints a new Chair of the BBC, the culture committee will want to know that this is a person who can act independently and not just a Nandy stooge.

This is very basic stuff, and I can only assume Pride In Labour are throwing a hissy fit because they haven't got a candidate who they can rely on to follow their ideological line.

https://www.prideinlabour.org.uk/post/labour-s-endorsement-of-ehrc-chair-raises-serious-concerns

but also the diktats that my friend the Rape Crisis local trustee tells me about - promise a women-only service or even hint at separation and you'll be disciplined/deprived of funding.

Well if that is going clearly needs to be called out.

I wonder if either or both Women's Aid and Rape Crisis Federations have a confidential support line for workers or volunteers.

This is the existing practice of Rape Crisis services that are part of the Federation.

As said so often the impression given by a few (mainly scotland) of operating a trans inclusive service, is actually a bit insulting to all the women who are daily working directly with women traumatised by male violence, as part of services that are severely under funded.

Much better, as Women's Aid have also pointed out, to focus on funders who try whether through ideological belief (ie have been transed) or more likely just standard misogeny who are daily cutting funding to grass roots women's services on the grounds that it is cheaper not to provide single sex services.

Which for instance has led to women fleeing domestic violence being told they are lucky to get a room in a mixes sexed hostel, that will not have any staff supervision.

It's in The Times now (share token link): https://www.thetimes.com/article/e684e285-28ad-4981-b4e1-56315dec4858?shareToken=b97e0b904334f142ff7e3a48e8bbef91

Yet more of that in objectionable reasonableness!

I heard that Coventry Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre does see transwomen, but they are given their own appointment schedule and their own waiting room in recognition that a lot of female rape survivors do not want men, no matter how they identify, anywhere near them.

I just got to the heading "The Human Cost of “Moderation"" LOL

And the irony of this statement!
"This systematic trajectory — pressure campaigns, strategic appointments, normalising previously fringe positions — now reaches its next phase with today’s nomination: installing leadership maintaining respectability whilst continuing discrimination against our rights".

Isn't this exactly what trans activists have done over 20 years - if it was good for the goose then why not the gander?

Bit of lunchtime reading. I lost track of the non sequiturs.
Facts, logic, kindness or fairness don't seem to matter much do they?

"When “reasonable” becomes weaponised, the damage cuts deeper than obvious hatred ever could…" "Her 2017 signature on the Guardian letter condemning violence against Maria MacLachlan wasn’t about protecting free speech ... systematically targeting vulnerable communities like ours.... The letter’s framing reveals sophisticated narrative manipulation: position any challenge to gender-critical ideology as “violence” whilst the actual violence — suicides, attacks, systematic exclusion destroying our lives — becomes invisible. This is modern propaganda through careful narrative management that makes discrimination against trans people seem reasonable, even necessary"

In this world, death threats, threats of violence, intimidation, harassment are considered "a challenge"? Whereas trying to debate whether "sex is real and matters" or why "a man cannot be a lesbian" is considered an act of "violence"?

I do hope the Guardian and the BBC publish lots of this incoherent stuff.

Maybe "weaponising reasonableness" might be the next Birdy Rose T Shirt?!

Presumably baroness falkner has a seat in the lords and will continue to use her skills in scrutinising legislation and advocating for a sensible approach to human rights and equality.