EHRC response to special investigation.

[ArthurbellaScott]

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/letter-members-sub-committee-accreditation-0

Measured and robust response to recent allegations and impending review.

That's a very good statement. Reading between the lines it basically says stonewall et al are having a hissy fit because they no longer have a special arrangement with the ehrc now that there biased chair (former stonewall trustee) has been replaced with an impartial chair who is doing her job for everyone instead of rubber stamping stonewall demands

Yes, @Hoardasurass. Stonewall are complaining that the EHRC are no longer doing their bidding now that they no longer have an ex-chair of Stonewall as Chair of the EHRC.

Baroness Falkner makes it quite clear that her role requires her to be impartial, not just capitulate to those who shout the loudest.

We have a statutory duty to protect and promote equality and human rights for everyone. That includes considering, carefully and impartially and on the basis of evidence, how the rights of one person, or group, might be affected by the rights of another. We do not allow our decisions and actions to be swayed by the loudest voices in any debate. On issues related to the rights of trans people, we listen to and engage with stakeholders with a wide range of differing and opposing views, clarifying the definition of ‘sex’ in the Equality Act, including to explain our decision-making and encourage open dialogue so that we can continue to promote human rights for everyone

Where people’s rights may need to be balanced with one another, it is our responsibility to provide advice on how best to do so. This is not straightforward and, in some cases, we do this in difficult, technical areas of law that can attract strong views and disagreement. We provide our advice impartially, even when matters might be contentious. We will continue to listen to and consider the views of all groups, as we have done regularly throughout.

I certainly got that vibe.

'We note that the third-party submissions do not record that the last Chairman of EHRC was a former Chair of Stonewall,'

Ouch.

I meant to put this note/news item in, too. Just a brief overview of the accreditation system and history.

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/review-our-accreditation-national-human-rights-institution

Grown ups shuffling back into the room? I don't mean the Baroness, who is a stalwart. What I'm hoping is that she knows she can count on support from other key people.

I don’t have a link but I wanted to share that Kishwer Falkner won the Spectator’s Peer of the Year award. I don’t know what it relates to but it must be nice after these constant attacks.

Thank you for sharing that.

It is noticeable how much to be allowed to talk at all, even minimally, about 52% of the population, endless stroking and mentioning has to happen of the less than 1% this political movement claims to represent.

Really much of that could boil down to 'other people having rights too is not transphobic'.

That's very comprehensive. It's exhausting seeing how these unrepresentative, anti women, shouty groups take up so much time and energy as they attempt to steamroll their niche demands through society.
And scary how powerful they've become.
Thank heavens for women like Baroness Falkner.

Many TRAs are 100% committed to erasing sex as a meaningful characteristic. I do think that some of them genuinely think that the only reason some people argue for sex based rights is to ensure trans people are denied rights. I think that some just don't give a shit about women's rights, and others are out and out mysogynists.

I don't think that any of them will ever give up trying to bring down individuals and organisations who support sex based rights.

They have been treated far too sympathetically in the past in relation to indefensible and bat shit crazy claims, which has left them with misconceptions about their arguments having legitimacy.

Even when, fingers crossed, this latest attack comes to nothing, they will keep on. If sanity prevails and we do end up with general discourse in society confidently acknowledging conflicts between sex based rights and trans rights, such repeated complaints will be considered vexatious.

Also tg someone was motivated enough to save her

Reminds me of McCarthyism - get rid of the women who challenge

I do think that some of them genuinely think that the only reason some people argue for sex based rights is to ensure trans people are denied rights.

It seems a natural extension of the misogynist and rather infantile belief core in this movement that women as a species exist only in how they are directly relevant and useful to men. No perception of them as having inner lives, thoughts or interests or relevancy of their own; no need for resources or inclusion or access of their own because that's of no relevancy or use to a man.

Ergo, any time one of the buggers is being uncooperative? Well everything they think, say or do is about men, so obviously they're only intending to annoy and upset/deprive men.

You can replace women and men with the words mummy and baby and the psychology doesn't change much.

And yes, kindness, tolerance, reasonability? Have all been read as weakness. There is no reciprocation and often fury at the suggestion that it is necessary. Baby wants. Mummy gives. Or else.

Quite. This time and energy that responsible adults are having to spend on stopping these people riding rough shod over the entire female population is scandalous.

Regrettably, the third-party submissions include a number of inaccuracies about the actions that the Commission has taken, and about individual actions taken by myself and my fellow Commissioners. Neither I, nor any other Commissioner, nor the Commission itself view trans people or their rights in a negative way.

'Until now, you utter bullies'.

It's so good to read something on this topic which sounds like it was written by an adult in the room. Baroness Falkner clearly isn't taking any shit.

Dr Stock published an article about this today:
https://unherd.com/2023/12/stonewall-doesnt-understand-human-rights/

and the Children of transitioners/ transpeople group wrote about transparents even trying to remove the human rights of their own children:
https://childrenoftransitioners.org/2023/04/10/paperwork/

Trans lobby groups- bullying, lies and contempt for other people's rights. Colour me surprised.

Cracking piece!

“If they really cared about the upholding of the Paris Principles and the knock-on effects for the rights of LGBT people, one assumes they might also have had something critical to say about the fact that GANHRI has awarded coveted A-list status to such homosexual havens as Qatar (where gay sex is illegal, and potentially a capital offence); Indonesia (where gay sex is illegal under Sharia law in one province, and frowned upon everywhere else); and Egypt (where gay sex is de facto criminalised under morality laws).”.

Well, duh.

Doc Stock's article is very good.

This, after all, is the organisation that became accustomed to seeing Home Secretaries speak at its award ceremonies; ministers and committee chairs mindlessly parroting its campaign objectives; and government departments vying for top spot in its Workplace awards scheme. In that light, then, we should read Stonewall’s complaint to GANHRI not so much as motivated by a genuine concern for liberal neutrality in human rights organisations, but more like the vengeful retribution of a jilted lover, trying to cause problems for an ex’s new relationship by complaining vociferously to the ex’s mum.

Damn, that's good 😁

It is also clear from FOI requests that the relationship between Stonewall and the EHRC both during and after Isaac’s tenure was extremely chummy, with Stonewall assuming they could review EHRC documents before publication and instructing its office-holders to officially adopt their policy on self-ID.

The arrogance is breathtaking!

It does give me hope that their influence is truly a thing of the past.

@Datun ' It does give me hope that their influence is truly a thing of the past.'
Don't bet on it- the Labour party are Stonewall WEI members , unless they've left very recently.

Thank you @Chariothorses for this from the Children of Transitioners:

https://childrenoftransitioners.org/2023/04/10/paperwork/

The way these children / young people are used by parents for their own validation is incredibly distressing to see and it's good to hear their voices.

Thanks for the link to this submission. And agree its really good, but part of me thinks it is so obvious, why does it have to be written? Is it that the Stonewall's "complaint" was accepted as valid.

Shouldn't that be the first step. checking the credibility of the complaint? Otherwise, (not that I would suggest this is the case here - ho hum), organisations can get those they are opposed to endlessly tied up in these procedures.

This seems to have been going on since 2022, and I think the letter must have been sent at the time Kishwer Falkner was still under investigation in the UK because of the same group of malicious male misogynists. The pressure must have been horrible.

I feel really angry about this. For all I know Kishwer Falkner isn't perfect but it is disgraceful that someone should have to put up with all of this.

As has been said so many times, we are talking about a tiny % of the population who already get a lot a support and more than equality, positive discrimition (which is actually illegal in this country).

And not forgetting women's equal rights, there are so many other equality issues that need to be investigated. But this group of spoilt teenagers having their trantrums are trampling over every thing.

It just makes me want to -- (words I cant post).

I am just sick to death of them and their mean spirited vile actions.

In the meantime as mentioned up thread, there is an article about Kishwer Falkner award in the Spectator but behind a paywall. In the meantime here is a tweet from the woman herself about it. (Is it time to send another round of cards of appreciation not just for the award but surviving through this shite storm?)
https://twitter.com/EHRCChair/status/1730249158332756001

This is the Telegraph's version of story, heavily implacting staff for not accepting their role was to be neutral, not to try and advance a cause they supported by abusing their positions within the organisation.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/12/02/ehrc-staff-opposed-changes-gender-critical-chief/

Can also be read at https://archive.ph/z27qv

It is making very clear that to this lobby, objectivity and equality with others, even equality of consideration for others, is transphobic.

The only accepted position is total bias regardless of duties, ethics and any other consideration. This tantrum is that the organisation was moved back towards equality and objectivity and away from this total and unethical bias. Achieved via political capture, without democratic mandate.

Behold the batshit, world. There it is.

So the report says there were staff who'd joined EHRC to press specific agendas, some of whom have since left, and anyone who remains and is not on board with genuine equality and objectivity needs to be 'dealt with'.

Bring it.

Good that SEEN is also now in place.

This tantrum is that the organisation was moved back towards equality and objectivity and away from this total and unethical bias. Achieved via political capture, without democratic mandate.

The capture of the EHRC under David Isaac was discussed on here in 2019.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3541908-Regulatory-capture

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3613391-The-Equalities-and-Human-Rights-Commission-one-of-the-roots-of-regulatory-capture

Those threads introduced me to the concept of regulatory capture, OldCrone, I hadn't heard of it before. Suddenly things started to make sense then, and now I am surrounded by it at my work (civil service).