Bristol Council goes for broke

@WeeBisom succinct and eloquent. I've been thinking about Maya's judgement all day and musing on the 'belief' element.

No-one knows and anyone who appears as though they even have half a clue will change their mind by the weekend anyway.

I’ve read Maya’s judgment today, and this declaration by the council violates the equality act. You can’t get people to “affirm” that trans women are women, just like you can’t get people in a council to affirm that Jesus Christ is our lord and savour.

As for the part which says gender critical views can be held but not expressed, this is incorrect. The judgment held that gender critical beliefs themselves (such as a belief that trans women are not women and are male) is not inherently offensive or bigoted and may be expressed so long as it is not done in a harassing fashion. (To give an example , there was a case where an evangelical Christian was permitted to say that she thought gay sex was a sin so long as her discussion was respectful and it didn’t turn into a targetted harassment of saying to a particular gay person they were a sinner).

this means that gender critical beliefs are protected and may be expressed. A person may freely say they don’t believe a trans woman is a woman, because that in essence is the very core of gender critical belief. This whole “you can believe it but not express it” point is specious bullshit… the entire point of having free beliefs is the ability to express them.

I think there is going to be much wailing and gnashing of teeth when the full implications of this are realised. We are no longer forced to go along with the idea that a man is a woman because he believes it is so, and we have the full right to politely express that we don’t believe trans women are women. We are just going to have to learn to live together !

Bloody hell Bristol. Some great good sense from the Tory councillor there and two others made very good points but the rest were just insane and the Chair was determinedly interrupting all of the non-GC speakers. This cannot be legal. And where's their Equalities Impact Assessment? 🤦‍♀️

They should be more worried about lack of services for all these homes they gave permission to build. Also lack of public toilets. Public transport.

I truly believe BCC wake in the morning have huge brain farts and come up with a totally bollocks motion that will piss us off. Total plonkers.

So Trans rights are human rights but gender critical people don't have freedom of speech. OK then.

What does this mean?

Peter Daly actually addresses and stresses the right to manifest as well as hold in his commentary on the Maya Forstater win today here: www.doyleclayton.co.uk/resources/news/forstater-v-cgd-europe-ors-maya-forstater-succeeds-employment-tribunal/

In it he says “Importantly – and contrary to much commentary and speculation – this judgment establishes that the legal protection goes further than protecting the mere holding of gender critical beliefs: acts of manifesting the belief through lawful speech and action are protected. The mistaken assertion made by some that gender critical people were protected so long as they never gave voice to their belief – in effect, compelling gender critical people to remain mute – was always mistaken and is now shown to be so."
“This is therefore a judgment with broad and biting real-world implications. Employers and service providers need to understand these implications."

The piece also links to examples of this mistaken assertion - using Professor Alex Sharpe, Keele University, and Robin Moira White & Nicola Newbegin: “A Practical Guide to Transgender Law”, as examples.

Bristol. Second only to Brighton as the most ideologically captured cities in the UK.

Maybe there's something in the water. Or the ley lines.

the Green Party influence writ large. Almost certainly illegal and completely mad

These paragraphs were raised (from the Judgement) in the thread about the Maya's case:

"286.1 At pages 921 and 1034, where Ms Fortstater asserted that “other
people are not compelled to accept it [the proposition that a
transwoman is a woman] as relating to any material reality” and that
“ a man’s internal feeling that he is a woman has no basis in material
reality”. The Tribunal considered it to be clear that individuals might
be offended by these statements. They are, however,
straightforward statements of Ms Forstater’s (protected) gender
critical belief. The Tribunal considered that to characterise these as
manifestations of the belief to which objection could reasonably be
taken would be to hold that the belief itself was not worthy of
protection, when the Employment Appeal Tribunal has decided that
this is not the case.

286.2 At pages 915 and 932, where Ms Forstater drew a comparison
between transwomen and Rachel Dolezal. The Tribunal did not
consider it necessary or appropriate to embark on any analysis of
Rachel Dolezal’s situation. We found, however, that the point that
Ms Forstater was making – that there is an analogy to be drawn
between someone who is white identifying as black and someone
who is (according to gender critical belief) male identifying as a
woman – did little more than assert her gender critical belief."

Emphasis mine.

Seems to me the Judge is saying here that if you can't manifest your belief in some basic sense, then the belief isn't protected.

Quite.
You can promise the moon on a stick (but if you don't have sticks, or moons..)

Almost all the public toilets in Bristol have been shut in recent years. I would think a good starting point would be to have some toilets open, then start worrying about where the sanitary bins go.

Jesus, they've absolutely lost the plot.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-62042735

What the fuck is non binary healthcare when it's at home?

They're a shambles

Is this a direct quote? Because if so, this bit is wrong (there may be others!)
That it recognises that beliefs such as that of ‘gender critical’ can be protected, however this does not provide the right to express those beliefs
They are protected and can be expressed, I think that the advice (presumably from the Maya Forstater decision) was that they shouldn't be expressedhatefully

Bristol has completely lost it.

From the OP post:

"That it recognises that beliefs such as that of ‘gender critical’ can
be protected, however this does not provide the right to express those
beliefs and will not allow this as a lever for hate speech and bullying in the
school estate."

WTAF?

Wow! I'm allowed to hold gender critical beliefs but not express them.