Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to think Maya scored a victory for common sense today?

999 replies

DancesWithTortoises · 10/06/2021 11:29

twitter.com/MForstater/status/1402922169559044096?s=20

news.sky.com/story/maya-forstater-woman-who-lost-job-over-transgender-views-wins-appeal-against-employment-tribunal-12329249

The law just cannot be allowed to tell people what to think.

Hurrah for Maya!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
Pumperthepumper · 11/06/2021 09:23

@Blibbyblobby

As much as I support the ruling I have two things I feel still need resolvng: - a better definition of Gender Reassignment and its conflation with gender identity - a removal of trans as an all or nothing umbrella term ie you must support all or none

I agree.

I think the general direction of travel was progressive until it got diverted and distorted by this ideology/orthodoxy. I don't want to go back to some dark age where trans identities were a secret shame. I want to move forward, carry on hearing, respecting and acknowledging the multiplicity of gender non-conforming voices and through that reduce gender/sex stereotyping for all of us.

I hope this ruling is the first step in being able to have a proper public respectful conversation and debate about these things.

I personally - and this is very definitely a belief not a proven fact - believe that many trans identities, especially in the young, are a rational reaction to the sexism still running deeply through our society and culture, and if we focussed less on what exterior is supposed to go with what interior and more on demolishing sexist constructs in the first place, many trans identities would evaporate because the need for them has gone.

That does not mean those identities are not real in this culture! It just means that in a different culture they may not be needed.

That may - probably will - still leave a group of people left with a body-focussed (rather than culturally triggered) dysphoria, and we can support those people with something that's appropriate for them, which may indeed be more like "transsexual" transition.

I consider the Trans Orthodoxy/Stonewall approach to be akin to trying to fix a leak by repainting the ceiling instead of repairing the roof.

I absolutely agree with this, very well put.
WarriorN · 11/06/2021 09:30

@Gingernaut

They discussed this on the Today programme from about 0835 onwards.

Followed up by girls' education in Africa.

Yes. Good juxtaposition

Ereshkigalangcleg · 11/06/2021 09:36

She could have just backed down quietly (as I am sure many women have) but she took on this fight for every woman.

As others have pointed out this won't get her her job back either and being a recognised name for brining a tribunal against an employer doesn't usually make you very employable. Employers tend to avoid recruiting known litigants, they fudge the recruitment process and give another reason for preferring an alternative candidate.

Maya has been so brave, no amount of odd posts take that away from her.

This.

Rejoiningperson · 11/06/2021 09:44

It is a relief. Well done Maya. As it is akin to being fired for saying that the Earth is round. It is dangerous to ignore facts for any reason, it’s not overboard to say that if we silence people for truth society will break down.

Lots of strange ‘picking fights’ in this thread though, not on the topic of truth, and completely unnecessary. I don’t understand the ‘war’ analogies with trans women vs women - it so doesn’t need to be like that! There are people out there who still hold horrible discriminatory views against trans or homophobes - who in all this focus on telling women that they are ‘people who menstruate’ and not women - are being ignored and not dealt with. The focus is all wrong imho.

And also this, it’s not my as a woman’s job to come up with solutions to fix men who feel like women’s wishes. It’s men’s job.
This is a male problem to sort out. So no, there is no middle ground. Any move to a middle ground requires women to cede their rights and spaces.

Pumperthepumper · 11/06/2021 09:47

@Rejoiningperson

It is a relief. Well done Maya. As it is akin to being fired for saying that the Earth is round. It is dangerous to ignore facts for any reason, it’s not overboard to say that if we silence people for truth society will break down.

Lots of strange ‘picking fights’ in this thread though, not on the topic of truth, and completely unnecessary. I don’t understand the ‘war’ analogies with trans women vs women - it so doesn’t need to be like that! There are people out there who still hold horrible discriminatory views against trans or homophobes - who in all this focus on telling women that they are ‘people who menstruate’ and not women - are being ignored and not dealt with. The focus is all wrong imho.

And also this, it’s not my as a woman’s job to come up with solutions to fix men who feel like women’s wishes. It’s men’s job.
This is a male problem to sort out. So no, there is no middle ground. Any move to a middle ground requires women to cede their rights and spaces.

I wasn’t asking for a solution though. I was asking what level of compromise you personally would be happy with.
Ereshkigalangcleg · 11/06/2021 09:48

And also this, it’s not my as a woman’s job to come up with solutions to fix men who feel like women’s wishes. It’s men’s job.
This is a male problem to sort out. So no, there is no middle ground. Any move to a middle ground requires women to cede their rights and spaces.

Quite.

peachescariad · 11/06/2021 09:50

Have always upheld that TWATW. Biology is real. It matters. And you can't change sex. Medical facts mean that no hormones or cosmetic surgery or voice training alter that basic fact.
A mammoth success for Maya, however it's diabolical that she had to be put in this position in the first place.
Sex Matters. Solidarity sisters.

BlueLipstickRocks · 11/06/2021 09:51

So no, there is no middle ground. Any move to a middle ground requires women to cede their rights and spaces.

Trans rights already exist for transsexuals. Are you requiring me to cede my rights?

Solutions need to be found and I entirely support the view that no intact male bodied person may use a woman's space but I cannot see how a solution to supporting womens rights is simply to remove transsexual rights.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 11/06/2021 09:54

but I cannot see how a solution to supporting womens rights is simply to remove transsexual rights.

Which rights? The pp didn't mention removing anyone's rights?

Erikrie · 11/06/2021 09:58

Solutions need to be found and I entirely support the view that no intact male bodied person may use a woman's space but I cannot see how a solution to supporting womens rights is simply to remove transsexual rights

Your rights are already protected Blue?

Rejoiningperson · 11/06/2021 09:59

@Pumperthepumper I’ve not seen any proposed solutions - why should I compromise being a woman, having single sex spaces, child safeguarding or anything else?

I don’t see why? There are reasons for all of these. Tell me how these reasons are not impacted. And I’ll listen. It’s not my job because personally I don’t really care if a man sleeps next to me in the hospital ward. However I do care if the rates of sexual harassment within hospitals go up (as they do in mixed wards). These are the evidence that men who want to sleep in womens’ wards need to look at. It’s not my job - it’s not my wish so the onus is not on me to thoroughly look into it.

GromblesOfGrimbledon · 11/06/2021 10:03

@Pumperthepumper

I've read this thread and been totally baffled by your contributions. You're determined to know what language everyone here would be personally happy with such that we can meet transpeople half way.

Several posters have already provided links to transpeople who do not like terms such as "menstruator", "person with a cervix" etc etc, as they find being reduced to their physical biology in this way demeaning. This is something they have in common with most women. It's revolting language invented to solve a non-existent problem and would only cause more harm than good, excluding swathes of the population who have poor literacy skills.

It is impossible to please everyone, all of the time. For the minuscule section of the population who make a fuss and take issue with the use of the word "woman" on women's products, that is their battle to fight, not ours to say what nonsense terminology we are happy to concede to. I am suspicious of their motives anyway.

Many posters have responded to your question and said they don't care what terminology is used as long as it doesn't replace the word "women" altogether. I'm not sure why this response isn't enough for you.

Personally, I won't accept any language other than "men" or "women", and any product that goes to great lengths to mangle the English language for a political ideology will not receive my business. We've already conceded enough ground and the damage can be seen as we try to claw back our spaces retroactively. Women are too accommodating. There is a reason why such nonsense isn't being entertained by men, and women would do well to take a leaf out of their book and stand firmer on our boundaries.

You ask what I would be personally happy with? I am currently very happy dealing with businesses who don't cave to such demands. They are weathering the storm.

The biggest fight is to prevent this language creeping ever further into the NHS. Private businesses are free to put whatever they want on their products. Women can vote with their wallets where that is concerned. We do not have to meet anyone half way.

TalkingtoLangClegintheDark · 11/06/2021 10:06

I just want to go back to this from LangClegsInSpace:

There should never have been any doubt that sex is important, and today's judgment only protects the belief that sex is important. It doesn't reaffirm that sex is already legally acknowledged as important, being as how it's one of the nine protected characteristics in the EA.

Imagine if you were being discriminated against on the grounds of race or disability (other protected characteristics are available) but instead of being able to rely on the EA to protect you based on those characteristics, you instead had to go to court to prove your belief that race is important, or your belief that disability is important, and furthermore that your belief is worthy of respect in a democratic society.

Imagine if you had to go to appeal because the first judge said your belief - in the importance of your own legally protected characteristics - was not worthy of respect in a democratic society.

That's how bad things have got for women and girls in the UK. We can no longer rely on the pc of sex to protect our rights. We have to use a different pc - religion or belief - instead.

I'm so pleased with today's judgment but I'm also so angry this was necessary.

My hope is that now the courts have decided to protect our belief in the importance of our own protected characteristic, that we will be much more able to campaign for recognition and strengthening of the protected characteristic of sex itself, and the rights that go along with that.

It should never have come to this though. It absolutely stinks.

Absolutely.

The whole thing is an outrage and the victory is that Maya pulled it back from totalitarian woman-crushing Gilead status to still terrible but some grounds for hope status.

This is and always has been about misogyny. The misogyny that has always been widely and deeply embedded in our society, but which many of us didn’t realise the full extent of in our modern, western world until this issue woke us up to it, as notyours commented way upthread.

There are plenty of places in the world where women and girls are still openly, tangibly, legally treated like dirt. Here in the west many of us had thought that the battle for “equality” had been won; many still do think that.

But this issue, the issue of male people being able to so effortlessly roll back women’s rights - our rights to boundaries, to speak about our own needs and experiences, to gather together in public without the presence of any male people - it brought home to me that for all the equality legislation we have, for all the fact there are some women in high office these days, there is still an unspoken collective agreement that women - biologically female people - just don’t matter as much as men - biologically male people. We just don’t have the same status in society. We are still not seen as fully human - and obviously the fact that so many places do openly treat women as second class citizens feeds into our collective (unconscious) understanding of what it is to be a woman or a man.

We have just heard that nine out of ten girls experience sexual harassment or assault while at school. We know that only 1.5% of rape reports result in a conviction these days. The ubiquity of violent, degrading porn is leading to the sexual abuse of women and girls being even more normalised and prevalent. We know that society as a whole just still tolerates these outrages when the victims are female, along with a host of other continuing inequalities and disadvantages, because harm done to females doesn’t really matter.

And in this case the harm done to female people hasn’t just been tolerated, it has been actively enabled and pushed through by society - by the institutions that are meant to serve us all. By Parliament, by the police, the courts, the BBC, MSM, schools, universities, sporting bodies, local councils, big businesses, high street chains, the voluntary sector - even groups and services set up by and for women have been complicit in this, have been active in the erasure of what it is to be a woman.

Because women too learn the message early on, so early on, that we don’t matter as much as male people. It is women who carry out FGM on young girls in some parts of the world; it is women who collude to strip their fellow women and themselves of the rights they have so recently acquired here in the western world, whether that be “conservative” women campaigning against women’s reproductive rights or “progressive” women trying to dismantle women's sex-based rights.

But it is women talking to each other that has created a new landscape too. Women sharing ideas and experiences, women questioning the accepted narrative, women working tirelessly to raise awareness of the issue, to raise funds for all these legal challenges, women supporting each other in this endeavour to claim back the rights that are legally, morally ours.

It is not for nothing that “trans rights activists” have tried their best to shut down the conversation on MN, to silence the women who have been talking about this. Those who are not regulars on Feminism Chat (formerly known as FWR) may not know that there is a specific set of talk guidelines just for this topic: while the rest of MN is famed for its robust style of posting, women who post on FWR have to be very careful how they word things because that board is constantly monitored by people who object to women having the freedom to discuss their concerns, who try incessantly to reframe women talking about our rights and needs as “transphobia”.

This is the new consciousness raising. Talking to each other on MN, Twitter, FB and in RL; identifying and challenging the misogyny which has led us to this dark place; cheering on those immensely courageous individuals who, like @MayaForstater, take on the behemoth of the captured Establishment - and who can, as we saw yesterday, win!

Because when you get right down to it, we have got justice and right on our side. We are not asking for anything other than our human rights to be respected and upheld. We are taking on an ideology that proceeds from the (often unconscious) belief that women (biologically female people) are less human than men (biologically male people). The more we drill down on this, the more it becomes apparent and the more it’s going to become apparent.

This attack on women’s rights is misogyny in action and what we are doing is exposing that misogyny, challenging it and trying to uproot it. I am proud to be part of that movement, in however small a way. And I am in awe of women like @MForstater (who I had the great pleasure of meeting, briefly, a couple of years ago!) for putting themselves on the line like this, at great personal cost, and pulling off substantial, meaningful victories that will benefit all women and girls - and benefit our society as a whole, if we really do wish it to be a genuine democracy.

GromblesOfGrimbledon · 11/06/2021 10:07

@BlueLipstickRocks

So no, there is no middle ground. Any move to a middle ground requires women to cede their rights and spaces.

Trans rights already exist for transsexuals. Are you requiring me to cede my rights?

Solutions need to be found and I entirely support the view that no intact male bodied person may use a woman's space but I cannot see how a solution to supporting womens rights is simply to remove transsexual rights.

Your rights are enshrined in law and GC women are not fighting to remove them.

They are fighting to maintain their own rights from the current daily erosion.

The agenda is coming from transwomen. Men are not fighting to access women's spaces, men who identify as women are fighting to access women's spaces.

Their cause would be better focussed on fighting for separate spaces.

lifeturnsonadime · 11/06/2021 10:08

@BlueLipstickRocks

So no, there is no middle ground. Any move to a middle ground requires women to cede their rights and spaces.

Trans rights already exist for transsexuals. Are you requiring me to cede my rights?

Solutions need to be found and I entirely support the view that no intact male bodied person may use a woman's space but I cannot see how a solution to supporting womens rights is simply to remove transsexual rights.

Blue being a transexual (with a GRC) is already a protected characteristic under the Eq A.

There presumably needs to be a distinction between those who come within that protected characteristic and those who identify as trans which, as we know, includes a wide range of people including cross dressers and non binary.

It is important to remember that a person at work does not need to be bullied for a protected characteristic in order to enjoy a level of protection from harassment in the workplace due to their gender presentation. If they feel they are being harassed and bullied for any reason then the employer has a duty to deal with the grievance and act accordingly. The employer does not have to give them the right to use single sex spaces.

I don't think that this ruling will result in the removal of rights of transexuals, I do think that Stonewall has caused issues for transexuals over time by misstating the legal position to employers.

I do really understand your worries though.

Pumperthepumper · 11/06/2021 10:10

@Rejoiningperson and @GromblesOfGrimbledon

Apologies for replying to you both at the same time but I’ve got to go out and it saves a bit of time.

I’m not asking for solutions. I’m not asking for you to solve the issue.

I’m asking what you personally would be happy with. For some people that means ‘women and.....’ used on say, sanitary products. For others, absolutely nothing other than ‘women’ only will do. And to me, that seems fairly unlikely. You are sharing a planet with trans people so to pretend they are also not consumers of whatever product seems pretty unlikely, so will you personally forever be unhappy at any mention of ‘women and....’?

To reiterate, I’m not talking about prisons, toilets or any other sex-segregated safe space. I absolutely agree they should be separated by biology.

GromblesOfGrimbledon · 11/06/2021 10:10

@lifeturnsonadime

There presumably needs to be a distinction between those who come within that protected characteristic and those who identify as trans which, as we know, includes a wide range of people including cross dressers and non binary.

This is precisely correct. Transwomen should fight for this with the most urgency. There should be a robust route towards identifying as trans. So many transwomen are being screwed over by the push for self-ID, as much as women are.

This is the route of all our current problems. The definition of "trans".

GromblesOfGrimbledon · 11/06/2021 10:15

@Pumperthepumper

I won't accept anything other than the words "women" and "female" or neither. It wouldn't be difficult to have neither of these words on a packet of sanitary pads.

This doesn't equate to me being "miserable forever". Any product that contorts itself around terms like "menstruator" and "people with a cervix" will not receive my business.

I work with people with poor English literacy skills and advocate for the Campaign for Simple English.

Trans people can continue to exist without forcing the world to mangle the English language.

Pumperthepumper · 11/06/2021 10:17

[quote GromblesOfGrimbledon]@Pumperthepumper

I won't accept anything other than the words "women" and "female" or neither. It wouldn't be difficult to have neither of these words on a packet of sanitary pads.

This doesn't equate to me being "miserable forever". Any product that contorts itself around terms like "menstruator" and "people with a cervix" will not receive my business.

I work with people with poor English literacy skills and advocate for the Campaign for Simple English.

Trans people can continue to exist without forcing the world to mangle the English language. [/quote]
Ok. Thanks for your answer.

GladAllOver · 11/06/2021 10:20

Sex being real is not a belief. It's simply a FACT.

jellybeansforbreakfast · 11/06/2021 10:22

@BlueLipstickRocks

So no, there is no middle ground. Any move to a middle ground requires women to cede their rights and spaces.

Trans rights already exist for transsexuals. Are you requiring me to cede my rights?

Solutions need to be found and I entirely support the view that no intact male bodied person may use a woman's space but I cannot see how a solution to supporting womens rights is simply to remove transsexual rights.

This is one of the consequences of all that TRA agitation, isn't it?

I suspect many people like you, Blue, will suddenly start noticing a change. It will piss you off and you will ask that question and women will reply "Oh dear, now you know what we have been shouting about for years!"

All your post has done is reverse the argument we have been having for quite a while. The shoe is being placed on the other foot, as they say.

Now - how do you suggest we fix it?

Can we, at last, start to actually have that conversation?

jellybeansforbreakfast · 11/06/2021 10:23

@GladAllOver

Sex being real is not a belief. It's simply a FACT.
That's what REALLY galls about this isn't it?

Maya got a court to say OK, you can believe that!

And we all go "No shit Sherlock!"

Ereshkigalangcleg · 11/06/2021 10:26

Ok. Thanks for your answer.

Perhaps, now we've got that out of the way the thread could get back to the topic of Maya Forstater's court ruling and what it means?

Ereshkigalangcleg · 11/06/2021 10:29

But this issue, the issue of male people being able to so effortlessly roll back women’s rights - our rights to boundaries, to speak about our own needs and experiences, to gather together in public without the presence of any male people - it brought home to me that for all the equality legislation we have, for all the fact there are some women in high office these days, there is still an unspoken collective agreement that women - biologically female people - just don’t matter as much as men - biologically male people. We just don’t have the same status in society. We are still not seen as fully human - and obviously the fact that so many places do openly treat women as second class citizens feeds into our collective (unconscious) understanding of what it is to be a woman or a man.

We have just heard that nine out of ten girls experience sexual harassment or assault while at school. We know that only 1.5% of rape reports result in a conviction these days. The ubiquity of violent, degrading porn is leading to the sexual abuse of women and girls being even more normalised and prevalent. We know that society as a whole just still tolerates these outrages when the victims are female, along with a host of other continuing inequalities and disadvantages, because harm done to females doesn’t really matter.

And in this case the harm done to female people hasn’t just been tolerated, it has been actively enabled and pushed through by society - by the institutions that are meant to serve us all. By Parliament, by the police, the courts, the BBC, MSM, schools, universities, sporting bodies, local councils, big businesses, high street chains, the voluntary sector - even groups and services set up by and for women have been complicit in this, have been active in the erasure of what it is to be a woman.

Because women too learn the message early on, so early on, that we don’t matter as much as male people. It is women who carry out FGM on young girls in some parts of the world; it is women who collude to strip their fellow women and themselves of the rights they have so recently acquired here in the western world, whether that be “conservative” women campaigning against women’s reproductive rights or “progressive” women trying to dismantle women's sex-based rights.

Yes, sadly it is. I sometimes cut them more slack, as they are just finding the best navigating a misogynistic society, so it's easier just to go along with what men want. Sometimes not though.

GromblesOfGrimbledon · 11/06/2021 10:31

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Ok. Thanks for your answer.

Perhaps, now we've got that out of the way the thread could get back to the topic of Maya Forstater's court ruling and what it means?

Oh did I get the mystery answer correct?

Yas!