Possibly good things happening at EHRC.

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

Reading this Vice piece ( www.vice.com/en/article/bvnymd/ehrc-staff-quitting-transphobia ) critically it seems as if the EHRC is beginning to realise what it's job actually is, and is beginning to implement changes to achieve this.

Staff described board members changing their work – making the documents “transphobic and seriously inaccurate”

I assume this means the words woman / women / female are being used instead of vagina haver.

One ex-employee said: “I was seeing our upcoming publications and guidance pushing for trans rights being changed – or completely scrapped and shelved permanently – meanwhile the Board was building links to anti-trans groups. It was awful.

Translates as EHRC are making sure their advice and campaigns aligns with the actual law, and that they are consulting with people representing all protected characteristics and reflecting a range of opinion.

Staff are being pushed to not be so ‘woke’, and forced to be more impartial

Impartiality is a good thing surely?

The EHRC was established in 2007 by the then Labour government to monitor human rights in England, Wales and Scotland, and to enforce equality laws based on protected characteristics, such as sexuality, gender reassignment, race and religion.

Translated as these are the most important characteristics and we should really ignore the others?

They added: “For me, there was suddenly this new kind of emphasis on the need to be ‘evidence based’. But that doesn’t mean we weren’t collecting evidence before – we’ve always had people employed as researchers, and we have staff with lived experience too.

Surely evidence based rather than anecdote based is a good thing?

All in all it sounds as if the EHRC is escaping its former policy capture and beginning to try and do its job properly?

www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/greens-msp-called-resign-now-26127166?fbclid=IwAR1SOviQSMXlpMCNE3guB47_zFlMG7dze4ZDVSZpxdvJwkj-qpsobM8HuZM

'The EHRC addressed the conspiracy claims in a statement: "We are aware that allegations have been published about the integrity of our Commissioners, with unsubstantiated and incorrect statements that rely on information taken out of context.

"We are an independent, statutory body. Our Board is appointed through the standard public appointment process. We are committed to upholding the rights of all people in Britain.

"Our work is informed by evidence and we engage with a large number of expert stakeholders to gather views on complex issues."On trans rights issues, we operate an open door policy and will listen to and engage with stakeholders with a wide range of differing and opposing views.

"We have long-standing relationships with trans-led organisations and LGBT bodies, as well as religious groups, women’s rights organisations and campaign groups. This is important to ensure that we are protecting and promoting the rights of everyone in this emotive and complex area. "We take the same, balanced and meticulous approach in our work on trans rights as we do in every other area, and to suggest otherwise is wrong.'

Funny when they piled off the list of protected characteristics they didn't include 'sex'.

Also this: lesbianandgaynews.com/2022/02/ehrc-skewers-the-uk-governments-conversion-therapy-proposals-by-bev-jackson-from-lgb-alliance/?fbclid=IwAR2T1kmQQr5Z6ardyk469Zp83ycDMgrQl-E0DiQ4fHpJZwQ_6YOcAy87ebs

The EHRC finally doing their job and representing the interests of women along with the other protected groups Whatever next.

Doesn't it just suck when you have to dismantle your male supremacy and acknowledge females too? And it was so nicely fixed in culture too, and being slid so nicely into law. All by the right people with the right lived experience. Trampling all over many others on their happy way.

They added: “For me, there was suddenly this new kind of emphasis on the need to be ‘evidence based’. But that doesn’t mean we weren’t collecting evidence before – we’ve always had people employed as researchers, and we have staff with lived experience too.

Shock horror: staff anecdotes don't carry the same weight in informing policy as evidence collected by researchers.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4472426-What-does-case-law-say-about-single-sex-services-Sex-Matters-Briefing-Documents

This is pertinent. Have just started a new thread on this but spotted yours op so have linked. Think I'll leave it up for now because Sex Matters is a great organisation and the publicity is good

Thinking more about the Vice article it reads like "new management" have found out the case for GRA reform was evidence free and are now seeking to correct things before it becomes public knowledge that the EHRC had become the wild west under "old management".

I would be interested to know what staff have been disciplined for. In any public sector organisation there are robust policies and procedures for managing performance and conduct.

I also note the whistleblowers claiming the EHRC is now anti LGBT when the article only references scrutiny of documents relating to trans issues. I think that reveals more about the agenda of the whistleblowers than the EHRC.

Enormous amounts of drama which boils down to horror that female human rights are being given equal consideration instead of all policy revolving around TQ+ wishes.

Oh my!

"Evidenced-based" work and being "impartial", whatever horrors will Vice uncover next!

The previous chair of the EHRC, in place from 2016 to 2020 had, prior to that, chaired Stonewall for ten years. We've focussed a lot on Stonewall's lobbying, but I think the role of the EHRC and the nature of the advice they may have been giving - or not giving - organisations about the EA2010 and single-sex spaces and protections during this period could do with more scrutiny too.

I really hope this is true that their Board are actually leading. They should have been doing that all along. They should be directing the agenda for the organisation. Not the staff.
So much of this capture comes from leaders and middle leaders who are just terrified of any personal criticism. They will actively go along with any old nonsense that is forcefully suggested to them.

Has anyone seen this letter on twitter?

A few academics have put together what must be an open letter and they are calling for signatures....

twitter.com/ThorneNat/status/1489613571839430663?t=sKW-Zl1AlgEELnWeFiYXJw&s=19

They're actually complaining that staff are being "forced to be more impartial".
Saying the quiet part out loud again.

The lgb alliance and fair play for women are known to be founded on hate for trans people, apparently.

Hope they have proof for that but my goodness!!! How can anyone with a tiny scrap of critical thinking skills read this letter and not want EVIDENCE of the claims.

You know, even if I was completely trans inclusive in my feminism, believed tw really were w, believed that trans women belonged in women's prisons and sports and other safe spaces, I would still be hugely worried about how easy it would be for MEN to say they were trans women and get all those rights and access to places they should not have.

Even if I agreed that transgender children KNEW they were transgender and would suffer horribly without gender affirming care and medical treatment, I would still worry about what is emerging about detransitioners ; about the findings of the keira bell case ; about social contagion and online grooming.

Why can't these two worries go hand in hand?

I must be completely dim, because I don’t understand the emphasis on the meetings with FPFW being “private”. Should they have taken place in the foyer, or am I missing something here?

@NothingTraLaLa

I must be completely dim, because I don’t understand the emphasis on the meetings with FPFW being “private”. Should they have taken place in the foyer, or am I missing something here?

Presumably they should have been supervised by an an approved TRA?

[quote rabbitwoman]Has anyone seen this letter on twitter?

A few academics have put together what must be an open letter and they are calling for signatures....

twitter.com/ThorneNat/status/1489613571839430663?t=sKW-Zl1AlgEELnWeFiYXJw&s=19[/quote]
What is it?

I seem to have been blocked, despite having never heard of or interacted with this person.

For the blocked.....

Well this is very convenient.

news.vice.com/securedrop/

Does rather undermine the authority of "reported in Vice News" as mentioned in the open letter to the EHRC.

[quote rabbitwoman]Has anyone seen this letter on twitter?

A few academics have put together what must be an open letter and they are calling for signatures....

twitter.com/ThorneNat/status/1489613571839430663?t=sKW-Zl1AlgEELnWeFiYXJw&s=19[/quote]
Group resisting evidence-based policy repeatedly claiming that groups are "known to be" or "known for" transphobia - how surprising!
It's fiiiiiine to assert things without evidence if those things are passively "known"!

.. can you imagine if every time ACTUAL (not imaginary) anti-woman sentiments have been ‘expressed’ in this debate, we all fired off letters to whoever to complain? It would be a full time job for each of us just signing them.

They're talking to women's groups who centre women! Call the police!

This is less the quiet part loud than losing the plot and shrieking it from the rooftops.

@NothingTraLaLa

I must be completely dim, because I don’t understand the emphasis on the meetings with FPFW being “private”. Should they have taken place in the foyer, or am I missing something here?

Ah, they didn't probably have a man present. As we know, women gathering and talking without a man to make sure they don't go to far is clear Fascism.

Staff are being pushed to not be so ‘woke’, and forced to be more impartial

Heaven forfend that the body set up to monitor the Human Rights of all the protected characteristics should be and remain impartial.

This is further proof, if any were needed, of the aims of TRAs and Gender Ideology ideologues and how far their capture of institutions has, up to this point, extended.