Maya Forstater Case - Thread 2 for the Mumsnet Massive

[Bardonnay]

Thread 2!

no idea where that a came from

I’m not particularly up on my ET stuff, why will it take so long to get a judgment?

Live tweeting is back courtesy of @legalfeminist here:

twitter.com/legalfeminist/status/1196808310999191556

Also being tweeted here: twitter.com/Kings_of_Lydia
Thank goes out again to both of these people.

just waiting here for the rain of weasels which will signify the start of the end times

Was just about to post this on or her thread but saw it was pretty much full. Re that discusssion about employment rights, there was a case in America where a breastfeeding woman was dismissed and then lost her case for discrimination partly on the grounds that 'men can lactate too'

www.google.com/amp/s/slate.com/human-interest/2015/02/angela-ames-sex-discrimination-case-breast-feeding-mom-loses-because-men-can-lactate-too.amp

but what are they postponing until 3oclock for exactly?

Lunch

Is there something in the water? Is it plastics? Common sense seems to be in remarkably short supply these days.

Thanks to all who've publicised this here and on Twitter. This needs sunlight.

Some great points being made now by Maya's counsel!

Lydia Lambfruit

@KingsofLydia

·

9m

AP points out that a number of the people used to bolster the respondents argument have publically called women “TERFs” and “c” and that to fran MF as the one motivated by hatred is absurd.

AP refs Stonewall editing out concerns of sexual assault survivors who pointed out that TW offend at the same rates as any other male. #MayaFo

Csl for R responds. Three more points to make. First is logical fallacy point. All gerbils are animals. Animals eat humans. Therefore gerbils eat humans. That is why her claim is fallacious

genuinely

how does that refute the idea that sex is immutable?

or is it to do with the threat from males being the same regardless of their gender presentation?

Russell coming back to defend her mischaracterizations. She slips in a completely erroneous reference to Prince Andrew, (??) presumably to try to get people on side. Transparent populism. No idea what he had to do with it.

Seriously???!!!

I'm getting the impression that the thinktank barrister just wants to get it all over with and go home for a stiff gin.

Wishful thinking probably, but ….

Placemarking

following ...

I echo a PP who said this is far more frightening than Brexit (I do also agree with the next poster countering that). I am so bloody scared for my DD's future (making me want to scream and cry at the same time) who is already vulnerable enough.

FGS a child could take apart the gerbil business as a ridiculous parallel.

Legal Feminist
@legalfeminist
·
6m
(This was just a preliminary hearing looking at whether the beliefs constitute protected philosophical beliefs at all, not the substantive issues)

So we should hear about this point quite quickly? I presume the judge means he will announce his judgement in next few days?

It sounds like Maya's barrister is killing the closing arguments.

Jane is funny

Dr. Jane Clare Jones
‏

@janeclarejones
4h4 hours ago
MoreDr. Jane Clare Jones Retweeted Legal Feminist
Okay. So a lawyer is literally standing up in court and arguing that believing humans are sexually dimorphic does not meet the level of coherence required to be a protected belief.

EVERYONE HAS LOST THEIR FUCKING MINDS.Dr. Jane Clare Jones added,
Legal Feminist

@legalfeminist
She argues that MF's belief in biological sex do not reach a minimum level of coherence to satisfy Article 9 (freedom of belief). Many beliefs fit this category - eg an architect who refused to sign up to architect association, anti-vaccination, someone who wanted to marry an
Show this thread
25 replies248 retweets631 likes
Reply 25 Retweet 248 Like 631

Every one has lost their fucking minds
How true

And yes, this is terrifying. How the hell can anyone think that if women are forcibly and legally suppressed like this for the benefit of males this will lead to harmony and acceptance?

It's going to lead to seething rage, resentment, that will become more and more widespread as more women wake up to the realities and suffer the inevitable consequences. And are forbidden to talk about it. And if it's forced underground because of legal bans to mention that rage, it will just get much, much worse. As usual with TRA politics it's a massive own goal. They couldn't have stuffed up their own best interests harder if they'd tried.

Ok so as far as I can tell we will hear whether Maya's opinions on gender count as a protected belief in the next few days.

And then we'll wait until January for a lefty think-tank and their "progressive" cheerleaders to argue that since Maya was only on a flimsy contract she doesn't deserve the normal protections afforded to employees and so can be fired for wrongthink. Lovely. Still going strong on the right side of history I see.

Just want to say that the CGD is absolutely not "lefty". It's a neoliberal think tank and Larry Summers is or was chair of its board

My bad. I was fooled by witness C's "Marxian value theory".