A special review

More everything means the opposite of everything news:

Britain’s human-rights watchdog could be downgraded and blocked from United Nations rights bodies over its recommended definition of sex. The Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is set to undergo a “special review” by the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (Ganhri). This process could mean the removal of the EHRC’s accreditation as an “A status” National Human Rights Institution, meaning it would not be able to sit on the UN Human Rights Council.

The review comes after 30 LGBTQ+ and human-rights organisations expressed concern to Ganhri about the EHRC.

Let me guess. It’s because they know men are not women, isn’t it.

The EHRC’s role is to provide guidance and enforce legislation to protect against discrimination. Ganhri’s accreditation of watchdogs such as the EHRC allows countries access to the UN Human Rights Council and other UN bodies.

In a statement, EHRC chairwoman Baroness Falkner said: “We take seriously our 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.”

Well, sorry, but that’s not allowed. The “rights” of men who claim to be women are inherently and eternally more important than any rights women might claim to have.

In April this year, the EHRC advised the government that changing the legal definition of sex in the Equality Act to “biological sex” would make offering single-sex services more straightforward and provide clarity in a “polarised and contentious” area.

Well, if sex under the Equality Act is not “biological sex” then there is no way women can have rights under the Equality Act. They can just be defined out.

The advice was criticised by some campaigners at the time. UN independent expert Victor Madrigal-Borloz wrote in May that the EHRC’s advice around changing the legal definition of sex “was to offer the government a formula through which it could carry out discriminatory distinctions currently unlawful under UK law”.

Mr Madrigal-Borloz added that he was “of the opinion that this action of the EHRC is wholly unbecoming of an institution created to ‘stand up for those in need of protection and hold governments to account for their human-rights obligations’”.

Which just demonstrates exactly how indifferent to the rights of women he is.

LGBTQ+ charity Stonewall is one of the organisations that lodged the complaint with Ganhri against the EHRC.

Other countries whose human-rights watchdogs have been stripped of “A status” by Ganhri include Madagascar, Hungary, Nicaragua and Afghanistan.

So knowing that men are not women is comparable to Taliban rule in Afghanistan. Interesting.

2 Responses to “A special review”