Maya Forstater court case

[Bardonnay]

Sorry to link to the DM but they've covered Maya Forstater's upcoming court case here:
https://mol.im/a/7683207.

Maya's account of events is here and her post links to updates about the case: https://medium.com/@MForstater/i-lost-my-job-for-speaking-up-about-womens-rights-2af2186ae84

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine
Then why was Maya sacked? If Transwomen ARE Women, and a senior QC tells us that the correct procedure for women who are upset is to move away, surely Maya's employer had a duty to treat offended TW as women and tell them to move away from Maya? The employer's behaviour is transphobic.

One of the biggest lessons I've learned in my life is that whatever label you put on yourself, you will eventually have to have the "No, not like that" conversation.

This! A million times this!

Daily Mail link.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7690513/Fired-tax-expert-says-persons-sex-not-conflated-idea-gender-identity.html

In the Times today:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trans-women-aren-t-women-central-london-employment-tribunal-told-twsk0jd2h?shareToken=02664b4eaa70ee13ff001e9731de5314

I can’t remember whether I read it here or in Twitter, but someone made the comparison to adopted people which, as an adoptee, I thought was quite good. No matter how disassociated you are with your biological parents (and given that most of us don’t know them, we are pretty disassociated!), your adoptive parents, while being your parents, will never be your biological parents. 99% of the time that doesn’t make the slightest bit of difference, but it does when looking at genetics and health risk factors, because, you know- biology. None of us would ever try to pretend otherwise. Same should apply to TW- being disassociated from your biological sex does not negate your biological sex.

Am in awe of Maya for being brave enough to take this one.

I’m looking forwards to the Times opening the comments as I can see from the icon that people are busy submitting them.

Great tweet by Julia Hartley-Brewer too: "People need to sit up and pay attention to this stuff and stop the madness."
1.3k retweets!
twitter.com/JuliaHB1/status/1195349264618205185

Thanks for the newspaper links, will read now.

Hope the Daily Mail had some fun with this, following the defence's comment.

Excellent analogy Wicked

People on Twitter under Julia Hartley Brewer’s tweet are clearly not koolaid drinkers. There are clearly some people new to the issue WTFing.

The ridiculous thing is that 100% of gender activists grew up with the ability to distinguish men from women. We all do this, automatically. Yet she is having to somehow convince the court that she has "believed" this since childhood.
It beggars belief.

Maya is so perfect for this. Cool, calm and articulate. She comes across as warm and kind and oh so rational. No axe to grind, no hidden agenda. Just describing a normal, logical, commonplace reaction to the absurdity that saying humans can't change sex is so taboo it gets you fired.

Yet she is, according to TRAs, a nasty, bigoted terf who hates trans people. (I wonder if she will be sharing any threats or hate mail with the tribunal).

I'm in awe of the woman. And very grateful.

Desperately clutching at straws. Shame. Amusing all the same and I have to say I am in awe of Maya playing them at their own game.

Lamahaha

Precisely. If men and women were indistinguishable, transitioning would be pointless.

Well, apparently there are loads of journalists there, so hopefully the left-wing press will report it too

www.theguardian.com/law/2019/nov/15/researcher-defends-tweets-on-trans-rights-at-employment-tribunal

Mealy mouthed and framed as a case about trans rights, rather than about the freedom to speak the plain truth. The editorship of the Guardian is wedded to its stupid position and making a mug out of its readership.

The ridiculous thing is that 100% of gender activists grew up with the ability to distinguish men from women.
They still have it, if the "I'm a trans lesbian but transwomen aren't my bag sexually" brigade is anything to go by.

Thanks for all the newspaper links. I originally read the Guardian one, but came on here for the full story.

From the Times article:

An email from a manager at the think tank said: “You stated that a man’s internal feeling that he is a woman has no basis in material reality. A lot of people would find that offensive.”

This person clearly doesn't believe in gender identity ideology, is just going along with the idea that it's unspeakable and "offensive" to speak the truth.

The Guardian still seem to be conflating
sticking up for women’s rights and boundaries and sticking up for same sex attraction and sports competitions and spaces and opportunities ....with... (no definition supplied, so no way of refuting the accusation) ‘transphobia’.

What kind of a political agenda (that isn’t nakedly misogynistic) would want to shut women up like that? What are they trying to defend/resist/stop from
happening?

And also, it’s a complete insult to the undoubted hostility and abuse that gender non conforming people do suffer, to expand the definition of ‘transphobia’ so widely that it becomes absolutely meaningless like this. This case is so important I am so pleased it’s all finally being looked at in court.

Who would have thought the safest space for debate we have left is now the courtroom?

The thing is though, any average Joe who isn't that familiar with this issue and read that Guardian subheadline and first paragraph:

Maya Forstater says she does not think it is possible for someone to change their sex

A researcher who lost her job at a charity after tweeting that transgender women cannot change their biological sex has said at an employment tribunal that she “does not harbour any ill-feeling” towards trans people.

Would surely just think 'she got fired for saying people can't change their biological sex, that's batshit!' It's so very obviously ridiculous that even The Guardian have trouble spinning it into 'transphobia'.

This person clearly doesn't believe in gender identity ideology, is just going along with the idea that it's unspeakable and "offensive" to speak the truth.

None of these people actually believe it.

I know, but due to their cognitive dissonance they generally take refuge in repeating the pomo nonsense like a mantra.

This person doesn't. No woke ally would have acknowledged even in private that they are men. It makes no sense as a statement unless you believe MTF trans are men.

It's simply that the truth is unspeakable for this person.

It's so very obviously ridiculous that even The Guardian have trouble spinning it into 'transphobia'.

Which is probably why they tried a bit too hard and produced the original (swiftly corrected) first paragraph, which was inaccurate and probably defamatory.

I don’t think it would be correct to say the people who effectively told her her views weren’t welcome on their payroll somehow overstepped or misunderstood the agenda. The agenda IS about not wanting to accept the truth of biological fact, because from that acceptance would stem certain practical boundaries, including those that would encroach on other people’s rights, that this agenda does not wish to have to observe. That’s what a clash of rights like this is.

Which is probably why they tried a bit too hard and produced the original (swiftly corrected) first paragraph, which was inaccurate and probably defamatory.

Oh really, what did it say?!