Mary Ann Stephenson confirmed chair of EHRC

It's a bit like the Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention, which has issued a "red flag" warning for the UK folling the SC ruling. Incurious people might think the Lemkin Institute is something that's an accepted authority, and maybe has something to do with Raphael Lemkin, instead of a website that was started by two activists with a laptop a couple of years ago.

I yield to no woman in my contempt for what Amnesty has become, but at least it's got a history, it's done lots of good in the past, and that gives it some inherited credibility. It's not two zealots with a Wordpress blog.

It’s also only been around about 5 minutes 😂

Very interesting post @SionnachRuadh

I was wondering where Stonewall goes from here. I had hoped that they might start fighting for the rights of same sex couples in countries that don't have the rights they do in the UK, but apparently sadly not.

If would be nice not to have our time misdirected by men setting the agenda.

For instance does anyone think we should show support for MAS, or as some of us have tried to do, get the WEC censored for their behaviour, and personal vendettas.

On one level we need to be careful we aren't helping to spread info about groups there are just two men and their egos.

But of course the real worry is that the media, both main stream and social, often then quote groups like this as evidence of some massive movement.

But do not for instance, taking into account the number of members and contributions, anything from FWR on MN.

I wonder if any one has actually tallied up the number of women's groups / activists compated to TRA ones.

But as usual in a patriarcal society men (even though they claim to be women) get and are given more attention and respect than women.

'escaping UK'?
Where are living, Soviet Russia?

The word unhinged has just sprung to mind, can't think why.

the erosion of rights and state capture of regulatory bodies cannot be normalised.

All the irony meters in the world just exploded.

I've just had a look at the news section of the Stonewall site. In recent weeks:

• They're plugging their rebrand new strategic approach
• They're plugging a scheme called "Proud Employers", which sounds like "not Diversity Champions honest guv"
• They're plugging a conversion therapy storyline on Corrie, which I'm sure they consulted on
• They're issuing various responses to the EHRC draft guidance and other developments downstream of the SC ruling, which are remarkably moderate in tone compared to what they would have said a year ago

As far as I can see, they haven't said a word about this appointment.

It looks like the new guy in charge has realised - though he won't openly say so - that the previous regime overplayed their hand and lost a lot of goodwill, and wants to get back to the traditional Stonewall approach of striking a positive tone and making friends.

Which means they're still doing TRA stuff, but quietly moving away from the openly mad element.

Typical 🙄 a couple of blokes stating how women should think and feel. Got an overblown sense of their own importance. The usual echo chamber. Interesting that again it is a middle class thing - media, lawyers, doctors …..

It’s weird.

If she had been a known trans supporter, does anyone really think they would have objected to her? I bet it’s only wrong to have an opinion on the subject if it clashes with the opinions of the protestors.

Its highly unlikely that anyone would not have a discoverable opinion on the subject one way or the other.

hopefully Stonewall is starting to realise it has lost a lot of support over their actions. Like some politicians they didn’t realise how much push back they would actually receive from the general public.

"Mutual support & information for UK Trans, Non-Binary & Intersex people, parents of trans kids & families, escaping UK"

38 followers

The Underground Railroad this is not.

Trans Exile Network?
#sad times

I can never get over the screaming hyperbole. It gives me the sense that a lot of these people are utterly self-obsessed with no sense of perspective.

Having seen all of the documents (and people) behind the current “single” sex accommodation policies in the NHS, the painting of Maya and SM as shady characters pulling the government’s strings is very, very classic DARVO.

Anyway, I can see TACC getting a bit of traction because the website looks relatively professional - no loud colours - and if you're not reading too closely, it doesn't look mad on its face. The person who's inclined to be trans-friendly might mistake it for something with substance.

They have a particular hate boner for Sex Matters. These seem to be the guys who are putting in all the FOI requests asking for details of any official interactions with SM. It never occurred to me that Maya was the sinister mastermind telling the government what to do, but what do I know.

MBM have picked up on a point that might seem just a procedural detail, but is actually quite important.

With these pre-appointment hearings, IME the committee invariably publishes a formal report. Sometimes the report is even published the next day. It will include documentation provided by the government (the role description, the candidate's CV) and note the committee's take on the candidate's evidence. Usually it just says "we were impressed by the candidate's experience and are happy to endorse her"; sometimes it might raise concerns about the candidate, about the running of the recruitment campaign or about some issues the committee has with the body in question.

No report has been published, and it doesn't look like there's going to be one. The letter is all we've got. I assume this is because the report would have required committee members to go on record as endorsing or not endorsing the candidate, and they weren't unanimous; more importantly, it would have required the committee to show their workings and spell out exactly what their objections were, by reference to the candidates evidence.

They haven't done that. And, as MBM point out, they've produced instead this very allusive letter that dances around the issues that were very obvious in the hearing. I assume it took a lot of diplomacy to get the letter together, not just because the members weren't unanimous but because they needed Lord Alton's signature, and Lord Alton believes in God and has a strong aversion to lying.

I think it's extremely likely that Bridget Phillipson not only read the letter but also watched the hearing, and was not impressed.

🤣

..."the TRA space is filled with these tiny vanity projects pretending to be a movement. And they won't unite because they all have obscure personal beefs with each other."

For which we should be devoutly thankful. Such obscure fragmented opposition is unlikely to influence public opinion as they would hope to.

What's it say?

"Actual size."

It's all kicking off. How can the EHRC possibly survive this?!

Trans Exile Network
‪@transexilenetwork.co.uk‬
🔔 STATEMENT Trans Exile Network joins
@tacc.org.uk
in withdrawing recognition of EHRC as a human right's body. A parliamentary committee recommended against appointing Dr. Stephenson as chair of the EHRC. We condemn this appointment.

This looks interesting, I haven't had chance to study.
It's a review of the committee's behaviour by Murray Blackburn Mackenzie.

https://murrayblackburnmackenzie.org/2025/08/02/appointment-of-new-ehrc-chair-revisited/

Process
For each of the preceding chairs, David Isaac and Baroness Kishwer Falkner, the joint Committees published a formal report, with supporting papers, including the candidate’s full CV. These are available here and here.

The Committees have so far failed to do this for Dr Stephenson. It is not clear why. A formal report would need to state if the Committee members are unanimous or there are minority dissenting views, for example. Comment from one member suggests that the letter does not represent a unanimous position, although it does not explain this. A report has in the past also meant all the information provided to the Committee on the candidate’s CV was made available.

I think it's a feature of the decline of Stonewall - there's no umbrella group that's built up heft and credibility, so the TRA space is filled with these tiny vanity projects pretending to be a movement. And they won't unite because they all have obscure personal beefs with each other.

It reminds me of something that used to be said about the Alliance for Workers Liberty - as soon as the AWL's membership crept above 100, Sean Matgamna would have a purge, because 100 was the biggest number he could control.

"We no longer recognise the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) as either independent or credible in its statutory role."

How absurd, they really are rebels without a clue. 🙄

You are discounting their 120 followers.

However, I expect it won’t be long before they take restraining orders out on those 120 for following them [I’ll be here all werk]

So they're a Trans Advocacy and Complaint Collective of just two men claiming to be women 😆😆

Worth knowing.