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

Both DH and DS could be described as speccie wonks. Perhaps suitably printed Tshirts for Christmas. DH is often invited to sit on panels. I now know why.

@MForstater thanks for letting me know that social media is flagging the link. It's probably because it's a site that allows you to anonymously host bits of html (which I'm guessing some people will use for nefarious purposes). I was just saving it before it got removed but it's probably best hosted on someone else's website (e.g. Glinner, Jane Clare Jones etc.)

So is this continuing today then? I thought they had heard all they witnesses now

Does anyone have a share token

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trans-people-scared-to-back-dissent-maya-forstater-employment-tribunal-told-nk9c6zccx

I think it's closing arguments today?

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trans-people-scared-to-back-dissent-maya-forstater-employment-tribunal-told-nk9c6zccx?shareToken=d98eba88507897a7579134ea3a784fe8

Thank you. Interesting that neither the Times or the Telegraphy reported the afternoon session. I assume that it is something to do with editorial deadlines. (Or perhaps that the afternoon testimony was just too for their average reader.)

Are they not allowing comments?

I think speccie was referring to the spectator. I interpreted it as a reference to James Kirkrup.

I've only ever heard it used as the childish playground insult "speccy four eyes". Is the Spectator generally known as the 'Speccy' for short? It does seem odd that someone who themselves wears glasses should use it as the former, but then nothing else they said resembled Earth logic so...

Good luck Maya, I hope common sense prevails and your life can get back to normal soon.

So it really does just come down clothing/grooming/stereotypes then?

The rules only apply if you are a signed up member of the cult. simply being gender non-conforming in all/any/many ways simply does not cut it. You have to have announced it via a giff on your tweet, or something......

Are they not allowing comments?

There will be legal restrictions while the case is still being heard, I'd have thought.

The rules only apply if you are a signed up member of the cult. simply being gender non-conforming in all/any/many ways simply does not cut it. You have to have announced it via a giff on your tweet, or something...…

Even then, good luck trying it if you're a member of the gendered shitwork and/or sex classes. Society requires the unpaid caring labour of older women in particular to function, so don't think you get out of it that easily.

Has any mainstream media reported HR dude’s assertion that Rachel D is actually black according to HR policies? That’s quite an interesting omission

KingsofLydia and jackappleby will be live tweeting the case on twitter today.

twitter.com/Kings_of_Lydia/status/1196726925965905921

That's not the best article by the usual Times standard. I hope someone does a comprehensive article covering the whole thing. At the moment the employers are getting away with hiding their absurd world view from most of the public.

I agree, that is pretty crappy journalism. I hope that when the case concludes there is a more thorough examination of the details. But they might wait until the decision is announced.

The Times article does seem a bit poor in comparison with some of their other journalism. However I note the casual mention at the end of the piece of a certain.. digging hole .... that is ongoing for Maya.

I thought it was ok as an opening piece - clearly stating Harrison's support was good.

Russell - “ claimant’s beliefs in biological sex do not achieve cogency”

Haahahahaha

Oh heck. That barrister! Being paid to say shite like that! What an embarrassing day. Does she think the stork brings babies, is that cogency! Hahahaha

This is so funny.

It doesn't matter if Clair intended it as a reference to the Spectator, nor that Clair wears glasses. What matters is that I felt offended and therefore there must be legal consequences.

Likened “claimants belief in biological sex to various teachings in Islam”

Oh wow, and that's the closing argument???

Russell - “ claimant’s beliefs in biological sex do not achieve cogency”

Latest tweet = weird defence.

'Speccy' refers to wearing glasses. Not the Spectator.