Maya Forstater Case - Thread 2 for the Mumsnet Massive

[Bardonnay]

Thread 2!

"Always good to see women-hating men blowing cover - it's NEVER about trans rights, only about rowing back on women's rights. Protecting sex as a characteristic does not clash with protections for trans people. See you plain and clear mate. LGBT community doesn't want you."

Saw this on that Twitter thread.

Thank you Maya

KatieAlcock Could you PM a link to your crowdfunder please

And Sue Evan's beach also needs lots more seashells piled up on it.

Ok. So, I've rethought my ideas for the MN forum settings.....
A simple 'swipe' action to hide a post from your view.

@MNHQ to move threads about this debate to the relevant topic, already being done, but maybe a 'promise' to do it will help?
And on top of that, there is the ability to hide topics.

If they want NO DEBATE then it's their duty to remove the debate from thier sphere, not the other way around.

With a hide-post setting, combined with hide topic and mods keeping the debate in the relevant topic, there is no need for those who want NO DEBATE to accidentally happen across those of us who do want a debate, is there?

If they go looking for things to be offended by, then they can't complain when they find it.

Why should people be allowed to avoid debate? Why make it easy for people to live in an echo chamber? That is what has caused the problem in the first place: TRAs telling people not to listen to anyone else.

Quite.
Information is already over-filtered. It's already all too easy to avoid any type of subject you want to.

Ugh, I just can't get over that James bloke.

No, James, you are not a feminist - you are a bearded man, who likes chucking around abusive terms for women on Twitter. That's not feminism - and men do not get to define feminism - or re-define it to include males.

And the Equality already allows exemptions to exclude people on the basis of their birth sex - you are campaigning for the removal of those exemptions - you are campaigning for male rapists to be housed in women's prisons, and you are campaigning for this guy:
www.eveningexpress.co.uk/fp/news/local/court/devious-aberdeen-sex-offender-replaced-toilets-sign-with-unisex-sticker-trick-women/

Well done you

Biology, not society, determines everyone's birth sex. It's been doing it for millions of years and hasn't suddenly stopped for our species. Numpty.

No, James, you are not a feminist - you are a bearded man, who likes chucking around abusive terms for women on Twitter. That's not feminism - and men do not get to define feminism - or re-define it to include males.

Men like this really love claiming to be feminists. It gives them a mild boundary violation thrill. It's a power play.

Men like this really love claiming to be feminists. It gives them a mild boundary violation thrill. It's a power play.

They must think all their Christmases have come at once. That they can campaign for men, any man, to access women and girls, on the basis of feminism.

Fortunately more and more people are seeing it for the nonsense it is. And, crucially, more people are understanding that it is forming the basis of potential law change.

It's not just some 'weirdo on the Internet'.

James is a Lib Dem candidate for Halifax. I have my own version of him in South Wales, Sam Bennett – a woke gay man who has told me that TWAW. They think they're progressive and are completely blind to their misogyny.

At a time when we desperately need a strong third party they're making female voters run screaming from the Lib Dems.

God he is an insufferable bellend.

I'll say one thing in defence of lefty men and some Lib Dems: a lot of men - and women - in politics don't know what the fuck this is about. They think it's some new thing that they don't quite understand.
Terf = a woman who is against men 'identifying' into women's spaces, sports, lesbianism, etc.
It's that simple.
If you actually believe that humans can change sex, crack on with your crusade, but don't be surprised if people start questioning your intelligence and judgment.

Maya's full witness statement.

medium.com/@MForstater/claimants-witness-statement-abe3e8073b41

God he is an insufferable bellend.

Hell yes. 🤣

Fortunately, it doesn't look like he has much chance of getting in....

Exactly Errol you beat me to it pointing out gis obvious mistake that society has fa to do with determining sex.

In MFs case its also obvious that we've all grown up knowing there are men, and women, that sex exists as two categories, how can this be framed as a young belief.

*gis . Eeeurgh!

TBH I'm a bit boggled that understanding biological reality is having to be defended as a 'belief'.

TBH I'm a bit boggled that understanding biological reality is having to be defended as a 'belief'

It's because the Equality Act doesn't give protection against discrimination against people repeating scientific facts. I guess no one thought we'd need it!

But there is provision for protecting beliefs - and beliefs can be based on scientific fact, they don't need to be based on faith.

So it's about using the tools we have.

If Maya wins this, it'll effectively protect us all against discrimination at work.

I wonder if it would mean we could take action against all those who've tried to get women sacked for our belief in biological facts, does anyone know?

eg TRAs who dox women to our employers

I've been thinking, again.

Why do women lie about facts? Handmaiden-ing?? The safety of being 'In With' the gang in power.....ie men.

But men, why do they need to lie? Is it because for them to say "of course men will lie to gain access to vulnerable women/children" is to take themselves one step closer to acknowledging that men are, as a sex class, dangerous to women??

Would they ever admit that when it might put their own chances of access to potential sexual encounters at risk?

Would men purposely allow women to be oppressed so as to keep their chances of a shag up?? Are they that low? I often wonder if they actually are

I'm willing to accept that some of these people aren't deliberately lying, they're just not very rational and/or scientifically literate.

I wonder if it would mean we could take action against all those who've tried to get women sacked for our belief in biological facts, does anyone know?

Yes, thats what I asked further upthread.

We know so many have already been axed, but could have recourse to constructive/wrongful dismissal.

Thanks for the helpful explanation, but I'm not understanding something, isn't the EA based on sexual equality, not a belief of bio sex basis of class equality?