Victoria McCloud comment re Forstater

'McCLoud erroneously compares gender critical beliefs to racism, but racist belifes are not protected as they aren't worthy of respect in a democratic society.'

Yes, that was very clear and the whole point of the WORIADS part of Maya's case.

What is true is that the beliefs that include 'gender identity' have never been tested in court to see if they meet the Grainger criteria.

RethinkingLife · Today 14:11

Yes, or at least ones who've contributed to the notorious Equal Treatment Bench Book.

Well, after reading your link to the Legal Feminist, at least it has had some improvements and perhaps we can hope for more?

Well, that's a bag o' shite, @RethinkingLife 😡

That jumped out at me too! This is the 'thinking' process of High Court judges these days?

Flimpychunk · Today 08:24

This m** I believe also contributed to the Equal Treatment Bench Book.

Unequal, more like.

McCloud constantly makes very long, anti gender critical, pro trans ideology posts on Linkedin and has done for years. I don't know of any other judge who behaves in this way. Usually judges are very careful not to express overly political opinions. If I were a gender critical claimant coming in front of McCloud, I would not expect to get a fair hearing.

Looking at the post, some odd things pop out. McCloud heavily implies that 'belief' is not an 'actual' protected characteristic, but of course it is one of the 9. No protected characteristic trumps another (unless the statute says), which means that a woman with gender critical beliefs is just as protected in law as a person undergoing reassignment.

McCLoud erroneously compares gender critical beliefs to racism, but racist belifes are not protected as they aren't worthy of respect in a democratic society. Gender criticism is not like racism.

It's not the case that gender crits see 'gender identity' as a belief. The ideology is the belief that gender identity trumps sex, that one can change one's sex, that a man who says he is a woman literally is a woman, etc. That IS a belief system.

donquixotedelamancha · Yesterday 23:37

She's right on the law but is expressing it in a very partial way. Of course being a feminist doesn't confer any right to treat any protected group badly but there has never been a case of that (to my knowledge).

If I remember, Maya's appeal ruling stated that she (and everyone else) can hold and express views, which disagree with trans ideology, but one must not bully, or harass someone, on account of them being trans. That sounds entirely reasonable to me.

Quite.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." Upton Sinclair.

'the second woman Master and the first trans person'

So, not the usual sort of woman then.

Views are undoubtedly influenced by that fact -- how could they not be?

You do all realise the significance of the 'she/her' that McCloud wishes us to use? Take a look at McCloud's photo.

From twitter:

twitter.com/SVPhillimore/status/1749690643591434485

Sarah Phillimore
@SVPhillimore

This is extremely worrying. This is the same judge who contacted me via LinkedIn, clearly identified in his professional capacity, and then blocked me as ‘disgusting’ when I made some reasonable comment about the tension between the rights of women and trans identifying men. I made a complaint via judicial standards which of course went no where.

This man I believe also contributed to the Equal Treatment Bench Book.

The time for silence about this is over. Those who promote entirely unlawful bigotry agaisnt women must be held to account.

The views are so strongly through the biased lens with limited ability to engage with the views they are rejecting means that they don't understand them and are not responding to them as they are. This is the fundamental issue: engaging with them and understanding them would require letting go of the core beliefs about gender. This belief system and impartiality are not compatible.

Any judgements made on this basis would be likely to end on appeal rather like the first judgement in Maya's case: where the judge's personal bias was evidenced, and meant his findings were overturned.

Considering we're also now seeing court judgements directly mentioning harassment as well as prejudice in framing other views as 'transphobic' it might even mean a future response to a biased judgement went further than the one in Maya's case.

Is Mccliud male or female?

Because people aren’t always given positions based on merit.

McCloud will now presumably not be able to hear cases where these are factors. So if the goal was advancing gender woo then it's a fail.

How on earth is someone who expresses themselves so badly a high court judge?

Mmn. It's that 'compatability of a belief system with a job that requires impartiality and capacity to see non believers as equally human', and 'conflict of interest' thing again isn't it?

Video is out of date. They've had blue hair from the ears downwards for a couple of years.
Just like all those other female judges and lawyers. Oh hang on.

Let’s hope that the majority of high level judges, when faced with a very reasonable woman saying she believes sex exists and is important in some circumstances will continue to find in their favour,

Given those women are able to define their arguments and make points that are impossible to disprove and they are being ostracized by those who, like McCloud, argue without proof that “gender identity” is a biological fact and would place it above sex, even where that would detrimental to women, any logical judge would have to draw the same conclusion.

Had McCloud stuck to gender reassignment (even though there might have a problem with that, as even that is poorly defined) there might have been a leg to stand on, but as the argument is based on the ideological position that “gender identity” has a biological basis, McCloud is looking as legless as a drunk man after a five day bender.

Edited for pronouns having watched the video.

Bigots gonna bigot and this person is just misrepresenting reality and the law to oppress women.

To be fair, it must be infuriating to have spent all that time influencing the judiciary's Bench Book and despite judges receiving "secret trans training" that the public aren't allowed to know the details of and then .... all these cases with judges acting independently and applying the law!

Almost as if the judiciary are impartial and not Stonewalled like so many other institutions. 😄

'Employers are used to dealing with Gender Critics who have religious beliefs that gay people are sinful'

What nonsense. Deliberately misunderstanding what criticising gender is actually about is not a good look for a judge.