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

I guess that the three women who complained were in the US as they were not asked to take the stand. If so this becomes interesting. Americans objecting to an international colleague having views on a British Government consultation, so the colleague loses her job. Political interference...or is that something only the Russians can be accused of.

(Giving Putin some credit,. at least he knows the difference between a man and a woman.)

It's a bit like US Guardian journalists complaining about the transphobia in an editorial written in the UK. (Which from memory dared to say that there might be a conflict of rights.)

I feel so depressed.

Although I am scared, I still think that overall Maya is likely to win. Look at the evidence that has been presented.

Also, I sat through a trial of a friend in which the judge seemed very much on the other side's side throughout, and then ruled completely in our favour. They do have to look impartial and they may even have a tendency to overcompensate when they have formed an opinion.

Do we know for certain that the 3 women who complained are definitely women? Given that the company go with self-ID I wouldn’t take things at face value...

how long is this likely to go on?

By arguing that this is a protected belief and not just an absence of actual harassment the case will make it clear that employers can't impose sanctions on people for this.

They have not bothered to argue that gender identity is a protected belief, they have simply tried to say not believing it is harassment and not a cogent belief that has any protection afforded to it. So it seems the judge is going to give the other side another chance to come back at 3pm and have another go on the belief thingy, but I suspect they have shot all their bolts now, he said the written submissions are not going to help..

I work in HR, this is gripping stuff. Must try and do some work before 3pm.

Surely though, the difference between sex and gender (or the fact that there IS a difference), and the fact that transwomen are not exactly the same as women, are enshrined in various LAWS - so I don't see how anyone can argue that saying TWAnotW, or that sex and gender are not the same, is not a permissible belief due to being offensive etc?

The Equality Act 2010, for example, clearly distinguishes between natal women and transwomen (even those with a GRC) in the sex-based exemptions, and I'm sure there must be other laws as well which do the same. If this view was so "offensive" it must never be stated, surely we wouldn't have laws built around it!

So I'm sorry if I'm being thick here (excellent live tweeting btw) but have I understood right that Maya's team have to prove biological facts as a belief and not an actual, erm, fact?

I'm genuinely feeling very fucking worried about the implications for us all if this doesn't go the way of common bloody sense. I'm sat in McDonald's drinking a coffee looking at women around me thinking "you probably have no idea of what could be up the road ".

Thiis for me is genuinely more frightening than Brexit

Do we know for certain that the 3 women who complained are definitely women? Given that the company go with self-ID I wouldn’t take things at face value...

of course. However mindful of the eyes that watch us, I decided not to question, especially as it appears that in the Washington office women are women if they say they are. Trust the Brits to be awkward.

Do we know for certain that the 3 women who complained are definitely women?

That's one of the questions that I wish Maya's counsel had asked the HR guy...how was he defining 'woman' here?

make it clear that employers can't impose sanctions on people for this.They have not bothered to argue that gender identity is a protected belief, they have simply tried to say not believing it is harassment and not a cogent belief that has any protection afforded to it

Thank you for your superbly clear analysis!

Just a reminder that the new thread is here: Forstater Case - Thread 2 for the Mumsnet Massive www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3747575-maya-forstater-case-thread-2-for-the-mumsnet-massive

Are the complainers named?

Do we know for certain that the 3 women who complained are definitely women?

I wouldn't be surprised. The Aunts are the ones responsible for discipline after all. Lydia, Helena and Elizabeth have to keep those nasty girls in check.

Oops sorry dodgy link. Here you go:

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3747575-maya-forstater-case-thread-2-for-the-mumsnet-massive

Thiis for me is genuinely more frightening than Brexit

Brexit was never a real threat due to the amount of incompetence involved in it, it's likely to drag on for a decade, life will continue as normal.

This is absolutely terrifying in comparison.

To put this in context, this recently published document is quite informative of the belief system you are seeing demonstrated. On the first page....

www.ucu.org.uk/media/10564/UCUs-position-on-Trans-inclusion/pdf/Trans_inclusion_November_2019.pdf

UCU position on trans inclusion
^UCU has a long history (from predecessor unions) of enabling members to selfidentify whether that is being black, disabled, LGBT+ or women. At recent Congress’ and further and higher education conferences, policy has been made on more options than binary genders on forms (FE conference 2017), using the acronym LGBT+ to ensure an inclusive approach to gender identities which is
different to that assigned at birth and/or their sexual identity being other than heterosexual (Congress 2017), gender-neutral toilets and facilities (Congress 2017), support campaigns to remove the requirement and practice of gender assignment at birth (Congress 2017), promotion of non heteronormative and non binary identities (FE conference 2014).^

So the bit I have highlighted is what this HR Director/Counsel and witness believes, that sex should disappear from birth certificates completely and only self ID of gender identity be legally relevant. The UCU are committed to eliminating sex on birth certificates.......

As are these academics.
futureoflegalgender.kcl.ac.uk/project/

So if you are a paying member of the UCU they are doing this in your name!

never a real threat due to the amount of incompetence involved in it

I would apply the same assessment to this shit show.

Actually I think this has remarkable similarities with Brexit: the process is the punishment (on top of any actual punishment at the end).

UCU ...support campaigns to remove the requirement and practice of gender assignment at birth (Congress 2017),

Bloody hell

In my experience women and men are equally aggressive and militant about this. I have just been writing on another thread about how a female academic is trying to oust the president of her university’s branch of the trade union for wrongthink. The president is a woman who has provided lots of help and support to this academic but it’s all being thrown back in her face because she is apparently ‘vile’ and ‘disgusting’. It would not surprise me if the people who complained were women.

Waterl00 yes, the UCU is the perfect example of this. Terrifying for those of us in academia who don’t believe in this bullshit. The union have said they want us fired.

@Waterl00 Thanks for enlightening me. I will be relinquishing my UCU membership

Yup, there are lot of women on board with this. The dangling of the non binary cul de sac seems to seduce women into some misguided stuff. I've tried and tried to figure out why they think it is a benefit to women but all I can conclude is that they can't fully see themselves as equal and have bought this false offering from men who want complete freedom to come to work (and everywhere) with their sexuality (better defined by Blanchard obviously) out and proud.

Do we know for certain that the 3 women who complained are definitely women? Given that the company go with self-ID I wouldn’t take things at face value...

We can't know can we because this company has a definition of women that is inclusive of both sexes?

I think they want to see themselves as ‘not like all the other girls’. Also a LOT of internalised or even blatant misogyny about, especially directed towards older women.