So, Laura Kuenssberg's introduction to her interview with Mary-Ann Stephenson is just hideous. Let me count the ways. 🧵 First, she frames the issue as a conflict between transgender rights and women's rights. Where is the evidence for that broad framing of conflict? Where is the evidence that women as a group see there as being a clash? None is given and women remain supportive of trans rights. Second, she then completely misstates what the Supreme Court decided. She says it decided the question of who should be able to access single sex spaces. That's just flat out mis or disnformation. Here's what Lord Hodge said.
Third, she said the EHRC's draft Guidance "angered trans campaigners" when restating what she falsely claimed the Supreme Court decided. No mention of the fact it was withdrawn, is disavowed as law by Government lawyers, will soon be adjudicated on by the High Court, or angered many cis women too. Fourth, neither Kuenssberg (or Mary-Ann Stephenson) even contemplate that trans people might have rights too, to live in their right gender. All they can say is that they should merely not be left without any spaces at all - ie they should become a third sex. Asked directly by Kuenssberg whether a trans woman is a woman Mary-Ann Stephenson can't bring herself to say yes. My role is enforcing the Equality Act, she says, and under that Act, no. This is legally inaccurate - her role is far broader (see below) - and powerful evidence of her bigotry.
Mary-Ann Stephenson assumes - either from ignorance or malice - that trans people have no legal rights as trans. That is deeply troubling from someone holding her role - although hardly surprising given her history. Awful - and hopelessly out of her depth (just as two Select Committees concluded).