Article on Maria Maclachlan Court case

[ReluctantCamper]

Any one see this?

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/12/radical-feminist-warned-refer-transgender-defendant-assault/

The asked that preferred pronouns be used

Ms MacLachlan replied: "I'm used to thinking of this person who is a male as male."

that would be the judge asked that preferred pronouns be used

I assume she was sworn in to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Referring to her assailant as 'she' would involve telling a lie. Is that what the Court wants? The dissemination of lies during testimony?

I was wondering how that was progressing. Thanks for posting. Fingers crossed for Maria.

Thanks for sharing.

Here for Maria

I did! I wonder if she'd get in trouble for using "they" instead.

I felt that the wording was a bit problematic with the "The row was the latest in an ongoing battle between Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists (TERFs), who believe that transwomen should not be given the same rights as those born female, and transgender activists." bit vs "Ms MacLachlan, who describes herself as a "gender critical feminist," part - it makes it sound as though TERF is a legitimate descriptor/not a slur.

I see they're using TERFs as a neutral description. Someone should tell them it's offensive.

Also: good luck Maria. I hope her refusal to pander to anybody's delusion won't prejudice the case.

It sounds like the same article that was in the Mail.

I thought exactly the same about the use of language, referring to a male as 'he' unacceptable but TERF is fine. Has Tara got a GRC does anyone know?

I do hope someone involved in the trial points out that TERF is a slur.

The photos on that article are worth a look. Says it all really - a gaggle of masked supporters vs 2 smiling women with a cheery homemade poster.

Addendum: I recognise the choice of images is an editorial and may serve an agenda, but I would say turning up flanked by a masked mob is never a good look.

Editorial decision

SO if you were under oath could you lie?

i can use the personal pronoun of choice outside the court room and would avoid using it if in the court room. BUT if some asked me to say he is a she under oath I don t think I could.

It seems like such a small thing but it isn t the truth as I see it.....
Can i judge ask someone to lie under oath?

yes, I was very struck by the pictures boatyardblues, and also by the editorial decision behind them.

I think the telegraph may not understand / care about terf being a slur, but I feel fairly clear about which side the support here.

The row was the latest in an ongoing battle between Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists (TERFs), who believe that transwomen should not be given the same rights as those born female

Is there any way in which the author of this article, Victoria Ward, could be persuaded to learn the basics about her subject?

@boatyardblues There was a masked mob outside the original hearing as well. Venice Allan filmed it. Not sure where the video is now.

Agree about the language. And why is it ‘radical feminist warned’ instead of ‘assault victim warned’, or even simply ‘woman warned’? It’s painting a picture of Maria as some sort of extremist, rather than a middle aged woman taking a picture in a park.

The compromise with pronouns may be to just use the name instead or he/she, him/her. I don't want to be intentionally aggressive or unkind or impolite to anyone, and am very happy to use the chosen pronouns of anyone identifying with women in an equal social contract of respect, but where it's a power play or clearly a lie, I reserve the right not to speak it or be made to.

I was just coming on to quote the bit BrashCandicoot quoted - and say how misleading it is.

We need to emphasise this is about women's and girl's rights - to be defined as a biological category. To safety, privacy and dignity.

I love the photo of Maria's supporters too

Sorry, I'll clarify 'lie' as that may appear offensive: I meant where an individual does not appear to be acting in good faith.

I emailed them about using pejoratives and thanked them for pointing out that the judge ordered Maria to lie under oath about the sex of her assailant.

It will be interesting if they are allowed to mention the transgender advocates terrorizing the neighborhood by chanting "Burn it down" outside the meeting. Frightened neighbors called police and when they arrived the chanting stopped and the women were allowed to leave.

Is the court allowed to take into account the separate picket line incident? Will they even know about this?

I know this seems like a clear cut case of violence against an older woman to us but the way things are currently I have doubts about whether there will be a guilty verdict tomorrow.

District Judge Kenneth Grant warned Ms MacLachlan to refer to Miss Wolf as “she” while giving evidence.

"Terfs have a history of taking people's pictures and posting them in pages like GenderIdentityWatch.com, a database that makes us a target for the far-right," she told the court.

The victim is warned against applying labels the defendant doesn't like. The defendant can apply to the victim whatever labels they choose.

This really isn't right. Not right at all. I'd not thought before about how this nonsense might be permitted to frame the presentation of evidence in court. This makes me very uncomfortable indeed. I can only hope the article is not a true account of how this is actually proceeding in court.

I hope if that's the case that Maria will appeal and argue it as an unfair bias.

Did it strike you as bizarre that the perp is confessing to punching while claiming punching is self defense because their friend was in a struggle with Maria for Maria's camera.