Amy Hamm - Canadian Nurse being disciplined for being GC

No questions from college or panel for KS!

Oh. The college doesn't have any qs for KS. Neither does the panel.

KS explaining that in the UK since 2018 evidence has come to light that there are significant problems in telling men they can id as women and go into rape crisis centres, prisons etc. Re the treatment of children reports have said it's no longer considered appropriate to automatically confirm in their GI.

KS's beliefs are now protected in law in the UK as a philosophical belief and there has been an opening up of space around all this.

[Canada feels a long way behind]

Five minutes for the college to discuss before they q KS. Looks like MS rather than BF (and if there were a SUPER CAPITAL font I'd use it for BF).

I hope Amy is ok tonight. She must be exhausted

I remember his interjections of 'Judge', in that very matter-of-fact way.
No airs and graces, or use of a 'telephone voice'.

He didn't miss a single thing.

Martin Reuby was excellent.

@Ameanstreakamilewide Yes, I remember his almost casual-sounding questions that cut right through to the matter.

so she is viewable on the panel online.
although she has heard my views upon a few occasions she has always remained professional.
i've known for years she was part of the crnbc disciplinary committee and was known to be a fair and level headed person.
she was wise enough to not share her personal views with me, but she will be firm on the professional side and the use of her rn status.

EJ Goodman and her panel really are the gold standard for these tribunals.

Martin Reuby was excellent.

If a poster on here genuinely knows one of the panel members on this committee I'm fairly sure that it isn't wise to discuss it.

Are they GC at all @fallfallfall or have they drank the koolaid?

MS - the college objects to any of the 10 volumes of popular articles going in as evidence. None of them is admissible. The news reports are hearsay. Factual evidence needs to be proferred by a witness or adopted by an expert. Opinion evidence inadmissible unless offered by a testifying expert. Tweets inadmissible as writers have not testified.

MS: The Q is, are AH's statements discriminatory towards transgender people. Nothing to do with if other people were making same kind of statements.

[KS has the kind of look that she might give a v annoying student who hasn't read the texts or handed in their essay and is coming up with a rubbish set of excuses as to why they didn't.]

LB: The college is going after AH for her off-duty comments in the public square. It's entirely relevant to the debate, contextualising AH's comments within the environment in which she was engaging.

Chair says the panel will take 30 minutes - 30 minutes?! - to consider this objection. Over tea and cake followed by a nice brisk walk?

What this panel or the wider pool for crnbc panelists?

I counted at least 3 times. 🙄

just logging in for the first time. one of my close friends in on the panel for the crnbc. interesting.

God I wish these lawyers could be slightly more succinct.

He keeps saying the same thing over and over again.

KS: Offence is not harm. That is fundamental to a liberal society.

LB reads the JKR tweet...not hate to speak the truth. Followed by the comments that this is transphobic. What are the problems here.

KS: It's unfair. When you get rid of sex based language you can't talk c sex based attraction. Heterosexual males are now lesbians, say activists. There are now supposed to be lesbians with penises [BF started fiddling with her hair right about now]. But lesbians aren't attracted to penises.

KS: terf is now applied indiscriminately to anyone who has the 'wrong' ideas about GI.

KS: transphobia has been defined by tras and lobby groups in a v biased way - it now includes failure to accept someone's GI. It's extremely wide and the minute I open my mouth I am transphobic. It makes people afraid and shuts them up.

KS: there is a conflict of rights claims rather than conflict of rights. In ethics we need to work out what rights are. Human rights are meant to be basic, necessary for humans to flourish. GI claims are often couched in terms of human rights. I don't agree.

It's a human right to be free from violence and discrimination. Some say so allow them into women's spaces so they are free from male violence. But that puts women at risk cos anyone can come in. Why hasn't the same amount of effort and resource been put into third spaces?

Listening to KS and AH is listening to a summary of problems with trans 101. No debate. TRAs pushing the boundaries. Used to be a small number of vulnerable people and now much greater numbers. The problem of self ID meaning that any man can come into sss. Changing sex is a fiction. Sports. Harm to children. Destransitioners. Trans-iding males in prisons, refuges. etc. etc.

If nothing else, the panel (and anyone following) are getting a grounding into the arguments, a kind of greatest hits of women's concerns.

KS stating the blinding obvious. How are we meant to know the difference between a male predator and a TW. Lots of men might pretend to be a women to predate and that's not alarmist, you just need to look at the sex assault statistics.

LB: Dr Bauer says 60% trans people avoiding washrooms. Concern over safety was much smaller than the pathogen disgust driving people not wanting trans people in eg washrooms.

KS: It's clearly not the only source of concern. Would be v interested to see who was asked the question, how was asked, sample size and when it was carried out.

Just found the Pathogen Disgust study they are referencing www.cambridge.org/core/journals/politics-and-the-life-sciences/article/abs/disgust-and-disgustdriven-moral-concerns-predict-support-for-restrictions-on-transgender-bathroom-access/A0426B653A8E31E0C8012F0DB31B1E79

KS: Detransitioners. They may reach a state of maturity and think that facts about the world were withheld from them or didn't want to see it. It's not unusual to change your mind as you get older.

KS: Fanatical tras find detrans v difficult cos they don't fit into the theory, they are a counter narrative to all the dogma. Detrans are v vulnerable.

She's brilliant, isn't she? Just lays it all out so clearly.