Maya lost - can it be true?

Maybe the judgement's deliberately weak to allow an appeal.

My only encounter with the courts, a dispute in the County Court, was so impeccably written that every i was dotted, and every t crossed and there was not an inch to give to allow for any appeal.

And it was written the same day.

Surely some religions believe that homosexuality is wrong? Is that not in conflict with homosexuals' dignity?

Homosexuals don't count. Just like women.

I’m not sure it’s possible to rely on male rationality, ie the courts, to help women fight this agenda.

Between their own castrations anxiety making it impossible for them to regard TW as male (and often causing the, to regard TW as people of the greatest pathos) and their dislike of the bad-mummy disobedient female, a lot of male psychic irrationality is invested in the submission of women to TWAW.

Half the problem we are fighting is, ironically, the very deep phobia in men who insist TW absolutely cannot be male. And the binary thinking that follows: if TW cannot be male, they must therefore be female.

I continue to think it’s going to come down to girls and women engaging in mass civil disobedience.

Power concedes nothing without demand.

For a philosophical belief to be protected under the Act it must:
Attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance.
AND
Be worthy of respect in a democratic society, not incompatible with human dignity and not in conflict with fundamental rights of others.

We are having gender ideology forced on us, and yet it fails on these two counts.

So scientific fact fails because the judge doesn't understand basic science, and we are left with having to believe in an insane and incoherent ideology which actually is incompatible with human dignity - at least for women. But maybe he thinks women aren't actually human?

So why is this on 'Trending'?

I thought threads from FWR didn't appear on 'Trending'

The 'human dignity' test confuses me. Surely some religions believe that homosexuality is wrong? Is that not in conflict with homosexuals' dignity?

Once Maya states her plans wrt appealing I will get out the biggest spade I can find.

Chilling is the only word for this... HOW is this not the front page of every newspaper?

I was expecting a vague sort of "sorry, technicality" loss.

I really was not prepared for this utterly scathing, legally inaccurate, virtually illiterate judgement against Maya.

This....
Gutted and absolutely shocked.... But still digging

memento ah, yes, I see, thank you.

Wow, I didn't see this coming. I simply couldn't believe that a judge could sit through all the evidence yet get it so wrong - I was absolutely convinced Maya would win.

Maya, like everyone else here I'm behind you and will help in any way I can. Thanks again for doing this for us.

Do you, or does anyone else know, if Maya had been rooting her beliefs in religion, would that be likely to alter the judgement?

No I don't think so (although I am not a lawyer)

Because of what the judge says in para 90.
This would apply whether or not the belief was rooted in religion.

"I conclude from this, and the totality of the evidence, that the Claimant is absolutist in her view of sex and it is a core component of her belief that she will refer to a person by the sex she considered appropriate even if it violates their dignity and/or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. The approach is not worthy of respect in a democratic society"

I can't see how calling someone 'unreasonably absolutist' for pointing out genetic material is different in men and women makes sense.

The world's a funny place at the moment - we've got presidents telling us lies are the facts, and judges telling us the facts are lies.

Well done James - not the judiciary's finest hour. Your colleagues must be cringeing.

Maya I’m sorry about this shitty, anti-science, disgrace of a judgement. You deserved better. I hope you can find it in you to appeal

Between us we can and will fund the appeal to this. Truth is truth.

Oh shit.

Maya I'm so sorry and we'll done for your your courage and tenacity.

Maya

Did Maya say that? That she had only recently discovered that people can't change sex?

No. She explicitly said in court in front of the judge that it was a long held belief as far back as she could remember (just like the rest of us sane people on planet earth).

He very much misrepresented her here as he has in other places. We all grow up understanding what male and female is.

@JellySlice presumably the only people who would be turned away from the shelters would be someone who rocks up and says "I'm a man but I want to come in". You wouldn't be able to challenge someone who just outwardly presents as a man because that would be humiliating for them (we must always be nice) and we have no idea what their genes might be up to because the judge asserted TWAW so they would have every right to be there.

The headline really is that somehow swathes of society have been hoodwinked into thinking that the knowledge that humans are vastly likely to be either male or female from birth to death because that is how humans continue to exist, is a belief so extreme and offensive that the very holding of it is offensive and must not be uttered.

I have no words for how unutterably silly and yet dangerous such thinking is.

memento thank you for outlining the criteria for a philosophical belief to be...taken seriously, I guess.

Do you, or does anyone else know, if Maya had been rooting her beliefs in religion, would that be likely to alter the judgement?

If I am understanding this correctly, it's a disaster.

Actually that is a bad example!

Thank you Maya. We are right behind you.

Did Maya say that? That she had only recently discovered that people can't change sex?

No. In her witness statement she said:

"I have understood and believed that there are two sexes, and that women and girls do not have penises for as long as I can remember. This was something I noticed as a child, it was explained to me by my parents and featured in books I read from an early age [...] My belief that these facts are important (“sex matters”) has become more systematic and clearly expressed in recent years, in response to realising that they have become contested (I had previously thought that the existence and importance of the sexes was a belief that was obvious and universally held, and it would not have occurred to me that this belief could be presented as somehow in conflict with protecting the human rights of transvestites and transsexuals)"

medium.com/@MForstater/claimants-witness-statement-abe3e8073b41

On a most serious note, remember these Judges are self selecting.

So let's look at Judge James Tayler. He's listed as a "Diversity and Community Relations" Judge. So, he's already self-selected and put himself forward for an area which is focused on diversity and community relations. His brief, I would think, is to promote diversity and encourage community relations in his judgments.

To accept that biological sex and men and women exist, in 2019, would not fit the diversity or community agenda of his employers.

The agenda is wrong from the outset.

And Maya, this is a terrible judgement and will support if you go to appeal.