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

Not a peep about the distress males inserting themselves into women's spaces causes women. Not a single, fucking peep.

So our beliefs are protected so long as they aren't the kind of beliefs anyone might object to.

Useful law then

It seemed to hone in on the idea that Maya thinking sex and biology are material reality was a newly discovered belief.

Yes this really jarred. She claimed she's had the belief her whole life pretty much and this wasn't credibly disputed afaicr?

If Maya's beliefs are 'absolutist' then I'm an absolutist, too.

If Maya is reading, I'm so sorry this was not a saner outcome. Solidarity from across the pond.

When do poor literacy skills become typos? Is when the middle classes possess them?

Batshit fucking lunacy. And illiterate to boot. Fucking hell Maya - we are with you. This needs to be challenged asap.

Who would have thought the day would come when a belief in biological sex would be denounced by a judge for being ‘absolutist?’

Why, then, is it okay for a fundamentalist Christian to believe homosexuality is wrong and that non believers will go to hell? How come they get to stand on a soap box and preach their views?

But it's not okay for a woman to believe that if you have a penis you are in fact a man?

Does this mean that if a rape complainant, who says she was raped by someone who identified as trans, misgenders her alleged attacker while giving evidence in court, she will end up in prison for contempt while he walks free?

And I suddenly feel more afraid than I have in ages.

On a very brief scan of the judgement, gobsmacking.

An adherence to material facts is "an absolutist position" and a "belief."

So my belief that earwigs do not have human rights is absolutist extremism.

It was not a good legal defence unfortunately, the argument was just not legally very sound. I am not surprised it failed for this reason.

What the actual FUCK?

I'm speechless.

I'm an absolutist too.

And possibly a character from a slave uprising against the Romans but ssssh

Slight is in the ruling. They can't even spell right, let alone recognise that a person born with a penis is a fucking male.

And that we should be able to say that.

As above, given that the press-hook of Lib Dem madness has died away, as Janice Turner predicted, at least this is another insane hook that gives permission to expose the madness yet again.

So sorry for you Maya and women everywhere.
Can't believe the judiciary has swallowed the assigned at birth bullshit

Maya, if you are reading, you must be feeling so shocked by this. You were brave to fight this and this outcome is unbelievable. It doesn’t feel like justice at all. Stay strong, very sorry to hear this result

An adherence to material facts is "an absolutist position" and a "belief."

Yup. This is one of the most chilling things about it. The judge seems to believe that Maya is a nutcase for believing that there are only two sexes. According to the judge, scientific understanding has moved on. It really is the most extraordinary mishmash of illogical thinking, inability to grasp scientific fact and misogyny, all bound up in one semi-literate document.

Who authored the opinion? Pp cites “Tayler” but I thought Mr Justice Knowles heard the case? Can anyone clarify?

I want to DIG. Maya, please don't give up!

I've had a read-through too. It really seems the tribunal didn't listen, at all, to the scientific basis for her belief set out in her witness statement, which covered DSDs at length. It just seemed to be handwaved away as 'chromosomes are complex, therefore we can't really know anything about anything, so men can do whatever they like'.

Describing it as an 'absolutist' belief is ridiculous. I can't imagine someone defending a belief in gravity would be subjected to the same standard of 'cogency'.

Gutted on Maya's behalf.

Slight is in the ruling? Seriously?

It was not a good legal defence unfortunately, the argument was just not legally very sound. I am not surprised it failed for this reason.

Lumene - could you expand on that?

A woman transitioning can't claim a male title.

I bet there was zero discussion about 'human dignity' when that male-biased special provision was requested.

I may be mixing up judges in Maya’s and Harry’s cases, sorry.