EHRC survey ends on Monday - last chance

[userschmoozer]

Link to the survey is on page 2;
www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/draft-strategic-plan-consultation-document.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2SSeBiDfZNexEfI9nlsUi5dqIl7r7Gc9x4MtBPI816Ycz1JDL6ICz0ubc

Information with further links about consultation:

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-work-have-your-say

Direct link to survey:

www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/ehrcstrategicplan/

Other people's thoughts would be useful for me on this.

I'm reading through the survey and it talks about 9 priority aims. Then later in the survey it has a special question (No.13) on only one of the aims - improving access to services for 'particularly disadvantaged' groups, asking which of the following disadvantaged groups you would prioritise. Choice includes transgender people. None of the other priority aims has a special question of its own.

Am I reading it wrong or can I infer from this that the survey makers have already prioritised this particular priority aim?

Also, are transgender people really a particularly disadvantaged group so much so that they merit this categorisation and a special tick box of their own so that people can vote to prioritise them yet further above other people on the 'particularly disadvantaged' list, which includes people with disabilities?

I mean another stated priority aim is improving the built environment for people with disabilities and older people. But there is no special question for them, breaking down 'people with disabilities' into e.g visually impaired, users of wheelchairs, etc and then asking us if we'd like to select which of these types of disabilities we think it is most important to improve the built environment for, given their different needs. They're all important of course, but my point is that there's no special question for them. Only for the 'particularly disadvantaged groups' with an option to choose eg transgender as most important.

Sorry if this has been discussed before and that's the point of linking here to the survey but I haven't been around on the board much recently.

Shit I completely missed this was happening. I'll have a look tomorrow.

BlindYeo I did it a while ago but I remember thinking that it was odd to ask respondents to essentially rank groups which are already identified as "particularly disadvantaged" in the strategy document.

BlindYeo
I don't think you're reading it wrong, they do talk about sexual violence on page 6 so I don't think all is lost, even though it doesn't mention women are most at risk.

''Sexual and domestic violence is also a growing concern, particularly given the reductions in the availability of specialist support services for domestic abuse survivors in England and Wales.''
www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/draft-strategic-plan-consultation-document.pdf

Very much worth doing, even if only to fill in the free text boxes to make a point about the EHRC prioritising women and girls.

Survey is quite short so won't take you very long to complete. Can be done anonymously.

userschmoozer
Thanks for that. Didnt know about it.

Thanks all. I've done it mostly for the free comment boxes even though I do think it's a bit odd.

I thought EHRC had corrected there advise but they still say this under Gender reassignment as a protected characteristic:

“a service provider provides single-sex services. If you are accessing a service provided for men-only or women-only, the organisation providing it should treat you according to your acquired gender. In very restricted circumstances it is lawful for an organisation to provide a different service or to refuse the service to someone who is undergoing or has undergone gender reassignment”

Done.

I'd missed this too - thanks for the heads up.

Not sure this is the right thread for this but:

Equality Act 2010
@2010Equality
The
@EHRC
new "Trans Reading List" offers an extremely narrow selection of views, evidence & expertise (link: www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-research/reading-lists/trans-reading-list) equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-researc…. Over a third of the docs involve these 3 authors! Stephen Whittle of Press for Change, Professor Sally Hines & James Morton of Scottish Trans Alliance.

mobile.twitter.com/2010Equality/status/1081946367084384257

I've just spent ages dong a reply but my f*cking computer just ate it, including the answers I was saving :(

It ends tonight at midnight (Mon 7th Jan 23:59) so will do it again later

For anyone filling out survey and interested in autism/ATU issues:

twitter.com/neilmcrowther/status/1082208376262717440

For those who aren't familiar with the autism/ATU matter:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6561505/Nurse-says-seen-killers-cared-better-autistic-children-health-unit-funded-NHS.html

Done. I found the actual document, or lists of pages & sections a pain to navigate to be honest, and I'm not sure I managed to cover all of the sections with all the tooing and froing.

Some of it struck me as disingenuous too. There is nothing in the bland statements that I would actively disagree with, but am concerned about who they are referring to in their priority to protect "women" from violence.

Ditto the references to education to improve equality (or however they worded it). Which sounds OK, so long as it isn't Mermaids educating us all to be kinder human beings.

And finally "^The Disabled" urgh shame on you EHRC.

DONE! Not the full critique i would have liked to do but managed to say about the fundamental importance of a biological definition for women and girls.

Thank you for reminding me this morning useschmoozer