Maya lost - can it be true?

[OhHolyJesus]

I'm not saying it is true - Twitter isn't known for being wedded to truth...anyone able to shed light? I thought the verdict wasn't due for a while...

twitter.com/boysvswomen/status/1207379435684585474

it could legitimise misgendering etc. in the workplace

Why is 'misgendering' such an issue for TRAs?

That it could set a precedent for not treating a transitioned person at work in the way the GRA intended or in line with the EHRC guidance

No, because her tweets were outside work and in a personal capacity.

Oh Lang. I’m not.

I've seen you do this again and again in FWR Fieldofgreycorn. You fly a flag suggesting that a gender critical person has been "transphobic" or committed some other species of thoughtcrime and then you lower the flag step by step according to how much posters here prove you're spreading misinformation. Sometimes you back down completely but often enough you try to leave a little of your original slur remaining just to plant the seed of doubt.

Whenever I see your username the word that immediately comes to mind is "disingenuous".

Fieldofgreycorn I don’t get your point. There is nothing in the judgment about any harassment. The mere knowledge that someone has contrary views can’t be harassment can it? If I am gay and I know my colleague is a strict Christian, it’s only a problem if they treat me less favourably. Why should it be any different for trans people?

All people have the right to be free of harassment and discrimination on the basis of who they are.
Nobody has the right to demand that all people must agree with them about something as nebulous and ridiculous as gender identity.

In a way the judgment was all about harassment.

EA definition of harassment is unwanted conduct related to a PC that violates someone's dignity or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for them.

Despite Maya's evidence and the complete lack of evidence to the contrary, Tayler reckoned Maya was likely to 'misgender' colleagues because of her belief in reality and that this would constitute harassment.

At the same time Tayler failed to consider whether genderist ideology is likely to lead to harassment of women and girls, and of course it is. Every time an organisation fails to use an appropriate single sex exception women and/or girls are placed in an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. That's what the single sex exceptions are for - to prevent harassment.

The single sex exceptions fly in the face of genderist ideology. They say 'tw are not w for these purposes'. That's why the tras want rid of them.

Interesting confirmation from Maya about what she actually said.

mobile.twitter.com/MForstater/status/1209914779973931010

The difference between maya and her detractors is stark.

Every time an organisation fails to use an appropriate single sex exception women and/or girls are placed in an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.

To say nothing of the academics who have already been placed in an intimidating and hostile environment because to do their jobs they need to be able to talk about sex, the meaning of words and the law.

nauticant you’re being disingenuous. This isn’t about Maya harassing anyone. That wasn’t what the tribunal was about.

It was purely an attempt to ascertain if gender critical beliefs were protected as a philosophical belief in terms of protected characteristics.

Please stop saying I’ve accused Maya of harassing anyone.

No, because her tweets were outside work and in a personal capacity.

bd67th yes because once GC beliefs were accepted as a protected belief in this tribunal it could set a precedent for anyone citing such beliefs as a basis for their actions in future employment situations.

It would set a case law precedent for analysing the law at future tribunals. Particularly should someone (not Maya) refuse to acknowledge someone’s legal sex or gender presentation.

This isn’t about Maya harassing anyone. That wasn’t what the tribunal was about.

You ought to read the judgement. Parts of it specifically discuss harassment.

More importantly, there have been many many many tweets stating that Maya was harassing a colleague. Deliberate misinformation of course but part of a big effort to get that untrue narrative out there.

Why is 'misgendering' such an issue for TRAs?

Can’t speak for ‘TRAs’. But it does seem like misgendering causes a disproportionate amount of upset. Been gathering my thoughts on this. Combinations of the following..

1. Some people genuinely feel they are or should be a different sex. Misgendering evokes extreme dysphoria which is painful and upsetting.

1. Some people may pin all their future hopes and dreams on being accepted as the target sex. Misgendering destroys that.

1. Specifically some may have hopes of being loved and finding relationships and acceptance as their transitioned sex. Misgendering faces them with a different reality.

1. In some cases there are similarities between gender identity issues and personality disorders. Not surprising as it’s connected with core identity/ personality. When a personality disordered person or addict is faced with having to change it can feel like a total annihilation of self. Misgendering may evoke similar feelings of annihilation, confronting them again with a different reality to that which they are trying to construct or have constructed over many years.

1. Not sure about this one but have to include it as possibility - AGP. If a person is bonded to themselves as a female image, misgendering can threaten the credibility of that. A bit like a heterosexual man finding out his wife is really a man, that could make him upset and angry. If the authenticity of the AGP female self is threatened that could cause similar reaction. Also possibly parallel to a narcissistic injury.

Why is 'misgendering' such an issue for TRAs?

Because we're not allowed to say that the Emperor has no clothes on.

I can't really think of other reasons. I don't understand why lying to people suffering from dysphoria and pretending that they have actually changed sex is seen as a good thing.

Oh wait, I can think of one reason why misgendering could be bad - when transwomen get misgendered they can get really angry. And we know that it's women's jobs to stop getting angry, isn't it...

Oh awks, I included something as a joke that someone has given as a serious suggestion...

Yes but not by me nauticant. Anyway that’s enough for now I’m not going to get into an unpleasant discussion.

I don’t know what you’re on about Dick I was answering OldCrone’s question.

Oh I see. Nicely set up.

"Field* The hearing was meant to be about whether Maya's beliefs were capable of being protected under the Equality Act 2010.

But (arguably because the fifth Grainger principle demands an assessment, in effect, of whether or not the beliefs are acceptable in a democratic society) the judge did consider the effect of Maya's beliefs on her workplace. His (in my opinion unsustainable) conclusion was that Maya's beliefs could amount to harassment in the workplace.

My view is that he went way too far and beyond what Grainger requires in that he conflated the beliefs with the expression of them. The former is protected by the Equality Act, the latter is not.

The judge justified his conclusion that Maya's beliefs are incompatible with democracy by examining her expression of those beliefs. In doing so he massively overstated what she had done and would do in respect of that expression (as demonstrated by her thread debunking the findings).

But possibly the more significant error was that he shouldn't really have been considering the expression of the beliefs at all.

If the judge had limited himself to the question of whether the belief itself is protected, rather than the expression of it, it's hard to imagine he could have reached the same conclusion.

Yes, gender identity issues are related to personality disorders: specifically, gender identity confusion is one of the listed symptoms of Borderline Personality Disorder.

As we see every damn day on Twitter.

Psychiatrists with years of experience don’t like to treat BPD patients because of the extreme drama, splitting, projection, and suicide threats. Families of BPD patients describe their lives as “walking on eggshells.”

Now an entire demos is walking on eggshells.

Oh Maya

Apologies field I didn't see your post before I posted (it takes me ages to type when I have to be extra careful in how I word things!) and thought you were giving reasons why we shouldn't misgender people, rather than trying to figure out the mindfuck that is genderism!

1. Some people genuinely feel they are or should be a different sex. Misgendering evokes extreme dysphoria which is painful and upsetting.

So misgendering reminds them of reality which can't be changed no matter how much they want it to.

2. Some people may pin all their future hopes and dreams on being accepted as the target sex. Misgendering destroys that.

So misgendering reminds them of reality which can't be changed no matter how much they want it to.

3. Specifically some may have hopes of being loved and finding relationships and acceptance as their transitioned sex. Misgendering faces them with a different reality.

So misgendering reminds them of reality which can't be changed no matter how much they want it to.

4. In some cases there are similarities between gender identity issues and personality disorders. Not surprising as it’s connected with core identity/ personality. When a personality disordered person or addict is faced with having to change it can feel like a total annihilation of self. Misgendering may evoke similar feelings of annihilation, confronting them again with a different reality to that which they are trying to construct or have constructed over many years.

So misgendering reminds them of reality which can't be changed no matter how much they want it to.

5. Not sure about this one but have to include it as possibility - AGP. If a person is bonded to themselves as a female image, misgendering can threaten the credibility of that. A bit like a heterosexual man finding out his wife is really a man, that could make him upset and angry. If the authenticity of the AGP female self is threatened that could cause similar reaction. Also possibly parallel to a narcissistic injury.

So misgendering reminds them of reality which can't be changed no matter how much they want it to.

When I started this post, I thought I would be writing a different comment after each point, but it soon became apparent that the same comment was appropriate for all of them.

I would dispute what you've said in point 4 though. It seems that 'gender identity' couldn't be further from 'core identity/personality'. My core identity and personality are not threatened by anything that other people say about me. 'Gender identity' in all 5 of your points is all about how other people react to and behave towards the transgender person. In other words, it's all about being accepted/seen/treated as the person they want to be. It's not about who they are inside.

That it could set a precedent for not treating a transitioned person at work in the way the GRA intended or in line with the EHRC guidance. I.e. it could legitimise misgendering etc. in the workplace.

Field, the misgendering examples you gave are just variations of 'my feelings are more important than facts'.

And god forbid if we fail to validate an AGP's 'female self' in the workplace
From a woman's point of view, that sounds like employer-sanctioned sexual harassment.

OldCrone that just goes to show why attempting to ‘change sex’ is so futile and bound to fail and why post-transition suicide stats are so much higher; you cannot change reality, you can only learn to accept and deal with it.

"It would set a case law precedent for …"

No, it would (and could) not. Employment tribunals are not courts of precedent.