Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Any lawyers seen the video of RMW "explaining" GC beliefs?

216 replies

MuffinWoman · 14/02/2023 09:15

I don't think I can say what was said here due to copyright but in my opinion it is an intensely biased explanation of GC beliefs. Why get someone so opposed to GC beliefs to explain what they are in such a partisan way?

In essence, it presents GC as an extreme belief that is challenging for employers to accommodate (it says that if an employer finds out they have an employee with GC beliefs the first thing they should do is not panic!!!) and says that people with GC beliefs think trans people are "wrong" and should not be supported.

It is on one of the leading legal subscription websites - not sure if I can say which but it's not Lexis!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
Shelefttheweb · 14/02/2023 21:31

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Diamondsmile · 14/02/2023 21:16

TheBiologyStupid · 14/02/2023 20:22

Is pointing out RMW's absence from this thread tempting fate?

@TheBiologyStupid @FOJN this is what I mean about goading.

LoobiJee · 14/02/2023 20:51

I’m not aware of a 2005 “achievement” on prevention of teen knife crime, so I’d be interested to know what Whittle achieved to make a difference to teen knife crime.

LoobiJee · 14/02/2023 20:48

DarkDayforMN · 14/02/2023 13:18

I think Whittle’s more strategic and has better impulse control than most TRAs (especially the male ones!)

Strategic enough to see that shamelessly milking and exploiting this child’s death to push the narrative, in the vile manner that some are doing, is going to backfire if the facts that ultimately emerge don’t support the narrative.

Show quote history

What does Whittle mean by grieving for “the world we thought we’d achieved in 2005”? Was Whittle involved in a successful 2005 campaign to prevent teenagers carrying knives? There has been a shocking number of “peer on peer” knife attacks with teenage/young victims in recent years, including a 12 year old girl victim just 15 months ago at a Christmas lights event. We certainly should grieve for the loss of a world where teenagers don’t carry knives.

TheBiologyStupid · 14/02/2023 20:22

Is pointing out RMW's absence from this thread tempting fate?

Signalbox · 14/02/2023 19:46

DarkDayforMN · 14/02/2023 19:04

How does a gay person "flaunt their existence in a harassing way?”

Benefit of the doubt: they mean PDA? But that would be equally wrong for a heterosexual person to do “in a harassing way.”

The more I think, the less I can see any doubt to give them the benefit of. How can it not be homophobic?

I wonder if RMW means stuff like forcing people to wear rainbow badges or making them feel uncomfortable when they say they don't want to join in on LGB events.

nilsmousehammer · 14/02/2023 19:35

I suspect you'd find a similar belief that women flaunt their womanness by saying no to men. And referring to their biology. And stating the facts of their biological reality and saying further no that this does not ever apply to a biological male.

nilsmousehammer · 14/02/2023 19:34

How does a gay person "flaunt their existence in a harassing way"?

By coming out of the closet as a homosexual. Being open. Saying so. Being Out and Proud.

Because their existence states a belief in biology and reality that some find distressing to encounter.

DarkDayforMN · 14/02/2023 19:04

How does a gay person "flaunt their existence in a harassing way?”

Benefit of the doubt: they mean PDA? But that would be equally wrong for a heterosexual person to do “in a harassing way.”

The more I think, the less I can see any doubt to give them the benefit of. How can it not be homophobic?

TheBiologyStupid · 14/02/2023 18:55

WTF?! RMW says (according to the transcript):

[I]t would be wrong to have the religious person proselitizing to gay people in the workplace and saying, "you shouldn't live that lifestyle". We would recognise that would be wrong. But equally it would be wrong for gay people, perhaps, to flaunt their existence in a harassing way in front of that religious person. So there blatantly is a balance.

How does a gay person "flaunt their existence in a harassing way"? And does a transwoman using the women's toilets in front of gender-critical employees amount to the same thing? If only RMW could materialise to tell us!

Waitwhat23 · 14/02/2023 18:21

SqueakyDinosaur · 14/02/2023 16:36

I've just noticed that the review, which I read when it first came out without registering, is by the wonderful Naomi Cunningham.

Show quote history

Wasn't that the book which RMW was heavily referencing on multiple threads on this board at the time until it was pointed out that various court cases around the publication date had made numerous statements made in the book utterly obsolete?

Hepwo · 14/02/2023 18:10

White absolutely hates women that don't agree with gender identity ideas.

They have set themselves up for disappointment (they being White and others with the same obsessively pedantic view of themselves as the sex they are not).

The world was never just going to go along with this farce.

But they won't will they? Instead, they will use this misguided child as a stick to beat people with, like the bizzare religious zealots they are.

Diamondsmile · 14/02/2023 18:08

FOJN · 14/02/2023 15:54

I am also concerned by some of the language used on MN threads where RMW is also posting where at times it feels like deliberate goading or vitriolic which is unpleasant to read.

Why is it you don't see RMW turning up here to lecture us as goading?

Do you think it was goady for RMW to post on a support thread for Sarah who is taking Brighton Rape Crisis when RMW is part of BRC legal team. That was probably the most vile manifestation of misogyny I've ever seen on MN.

@FOJN you clearly did not read all of my post with your selective posting.

I also said “I am not saying RMW hasn’t responded in kind and I was appalled RMW posted on IamSarah’s thread, it was completely unprofessional and inappropriate.”

Rightsraptor · 14/02/2023 17:57

I remember, @nepeta, watching Owen Jones interview Munroe Bergdorf and OJ asked that interviewee what gender critical beliefs were. Cue a whole shedload of manure.

Signalbox · 14/02/2023 17:43

"A barrister should know better than to skirt this close to prejudicing an ongoing investigation with culture war speculation unmoored from law"

twitter.com/michaelpforan/status/1625484927964676097

Any lawyers seen the video of RMW "explaining" GC beliefs?
nepeta · 14/02/2023 17:42

Are those whose own beliefs are diametrically opposed to the beliefs of some other group usually assigned the role to interpret the latter? Marxists explaining ultra-conservative beliefs or vice versa? That seems to guarantee a biased explanation.

RMW's beliefs seem to be diametrically opposed to those of gender critical feminism.

ShireWifeofNigelFarage · 14/02/2023 17:36

Signalbox · 14/02/2023 15:45

Crikey haven't police requested that people stop speculating online about the details surrounding this young person's death? Threads have been deleted on here for doing as much. You'd think that this individual, being a lawyer, would know better.

Show quote history

Glamour magazine have published a particularly egregious by Charlie Craggs…

ShireWifeofNigelFarage · 14/02/2023 17:31

MuffinWoman · 14/02/2023 15:06

My concern is not so much what RMW is saying but that a company like PLC have promoted and allowed RMW to broadcast RMW's views as fact. As I said earlier, imagine saying "if you find out one of your employees is a Muslim/black the first thing to do is not panic". Totally offensive and there would be a massive outcry. I'm shocked that this well respected company is promoting this inaccurate and offensive content as the law.

RMW is currently being criticised for a lack of intersectional thinking over on the Transgender UK subreddit, so if you wanted to make a complaint you could point out that Robin’s statements are offensive to both GC feminists and other BBQ trans people!

Any lawyers seen the video of RMW "explaining" GC beliefs?
Any lawyers seen the video of RMW "explaining" GC beliefs?
Any lawyers seen the video of RMW "explaining" GC beliefs?
Any lawyers seen the video of RMW "explaining" GC beliefs?
SqueakyDinosaur · 14/02/2023 16:36

SinnerBoy · 14/02/2023 12:11

TheBiologyStupid · Today 11:53

^Whenever RMW's expertise on this area of law comes up, for some reason this book review always comes to mind: www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2021/09/02/a-practical-guide/^

That review essentially says, politely but firmly: "What a lot of ignorant and factually incorrect rubbish."

I've just noticed that the review, which I read when it first came out without registering, is by the wonderful Naomi Cunningham.

SinnerBoy · 14/02/2023 16:29

PriOn1 · Today 16:11

There was also a response in Scottish Legal, published here:

Thank you for linking to that clarification.

Abccde · 14/02/2023 16:22

DarkDayforMN · 14/02/2023 13:18

I think Whittle’s more strategic and has better impulse control than most TRAs (especially the male ones!)

Strategic enough to see that shamelessly milking and exploiting this child’s death to push the narrative, in the vile manner that some are doing, is going to backfire if the facts that ultimately emerge don’t support the narrative.

Show quote history

I wonder why?

Could it be his sex?

DerekFaker · 14/02/2023 16:20

BenCoopersSupportWren · 14/02/2023 15:27

You may not like it but RMW does have a point, albeit one they have also contributed to, which is that people with gender dysphoria are being disproportionately impacted by the current trans vs GC debate.

It's almost as if TRAs letting fetishists under the trans umbrella has backfired on the original people they purported to support...🤔

See also: pressuring the WHO to drop gender dysphoria as a mental illness.

PriOn1 · 14/02/2023 16:11

SinnerBoy · 14/02/2023 11:43

MichaelFabricantWig · Today 09:55

scottish legal news posted this absolute shocker yesterday
twitter.com/scottishlegal/status/1625119211570835459?s=46&t=qP5uW9jJG-yn84CwSYof7w

The author wrote this shocking falsehood:

What this means is that a “safe space” service provider, such as Rape Crisis Scotland, could refuse to offer its services to trans women, if they believed, and could establish, that this was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, such as protecting cis women. (They don’t apply this exception because they don’t believe trans women service users pose any threat to cis women service users. Their services are in fact expressly trans inclusive).

My bold, this is not true, they accept transw, because they've been bullied into it, by means of the threat of having their funding stopped. The author surely knows that this is the case.

Almost all the visible responses on Twitter, including one from an advocate from the Faculty of Advocates, stated that this essay was very poor and was wrong on many points of the law.

There was also a response in Scottish Legal, published here:

www.scottishlegal.com/articles/michael-foran-getting-the-equality-act-right

Robin White is as mysogynistic, biased and blinkered as it’s possible to be. Misrepresentation of the laws that should protect women can come as no surprise to regular posters.

nilsmousehammer · 14/02/2023 16:00

Yet more 'please don't upset the person kicking you in the shins by asking them to stop it because the negative attention isn't nice for them'.

FOJN · 14/02/2023 15:54

I am also concerned by some of the language used on MN threads where RMW is also posting where at times it feels like deliberate goading or vitriolic which is unpleasant to read.

Why is it you don't see RMW turning up here to lecture us as goading?

Do you think it was goady for RMW to post on a support thread for Sarah who is taking Brighton Rape Crisis when RMW is part of BRC legal team. That was probably the most vile manifestation of misogyny I've ever seen on MN.

Swipe left for the next trending thread