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

Eppur si muove

I like that barbara. Very fitting.

And yet, penis

I could take loosing on a technicality but that judgement reads like the judge has been utterly captured. Its Orwellian nonsense Stonewall law wins again.

Gutted for Maya, truly.

YY. Pure ideology.

Paragraph 83
A “scientific” belief may not be based on very good science without it being so irrational that it unable to meet the relatively modest threshold of coherence. On balance, I do not consider that the Claimant’s belief fails the test of being “attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance”; even though there is significant scientific evidence that it is wrong.

The judge thinks that there is significant scientific evidence that belief in there being two sexes (which is the reason we all exist) is wrong?

Para 84
Therefore, if a person has transitioned from male to female and has a Gender Recognition Certificate that person is legally a woman.

Except in certain circumstances outlined in the EA2010, when such a person can be treated differently from a woman.

I could take loosing on a technicality but that judgement reads like the judge has been utterly captured. Its Orwellian nonsense Stonewall law wins again.

Ditto.

I was expecting the judge to duck the issue by focusing on the fixed term contract.

But they've gone full-on science denial instead (and yes, Maya put a lot of time into explaining the difference between intersex issues and identifying as trans, and why the former wasn't relevant to the latter. It seems the judge wasn't bright enough to understand that bit). Overall, I find the judgement terrifying. As someone said upthread, "how many fingers am I holding up."

WTF.

She did. It was a comprehensive, measured, clear, respectful and cogent piece of writing. I can't believe that a judge read that, then listened to Quentin and the other sub-tumblr bullshit put forward, and came down against Maya.

This is what gets me the most. What they put forward as a counter position was such illiterate, insane, double think twaddle. I find it astonishing that a Judge found it the better argument. As others have said it reminds me of Jolyon and I wonder what his investment in promoting this nonsense is?

How can it be legal for a judge to deny scientific reality like this - if there was a case about climate change, could a climate change denier judge find against the position that climate change was real because they were crap at science?

For exemptions to work there must be a belief that TW are male.

This.

Scientists need to get involved now. It should not be the case that a judge's scientific illiteracy can derail a judgement like this.

The Claimant largely ignores intersex conditions and the fact that biological opinion is increasingly moving away from a absolutist approach to there being genes the presence or absence of which determine specific attributes, to understanding that it is necessary to analyse which genes are present, which are switched on, the extent to which they are switched on and the way in which they interact with other genes"

The phrase "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" comes to mind.

The judge has vaguely grasped the idea of epigenetics and some genes being "switched on" and "interacting with other genes". Well done him! He has failed to grasp, however, that this has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with biological sex.

Judge Tayler, if you're reading this: you're a moron.

Lumene why do you think maya's argument wasn't legally sound?

Because it was a difficult case to make that this was a belief for the purposes of the Equality Act. It just doesn’t really work like that.

It was likely to lose because of this and it has. Which isn’t very helpful to the advancement of freedom of speech in this area, and has wasted time and resources that could have been used elsewhere. I feel cross that a legal team took money on the basis of this defence.

Separately to this I find the jusge’s comments on the perfectly reasonable belief that you cannot change your sex chilling and the context they outline somewhat misinformed.

The man's an idiot.
Maya, whatever you need.

Hear, hear.

Oh yes and as pps have said the primogeniture exceptions in the GRA!

'All purposes' my female arse.

The hypicrysy is astounding. As somebody pointed out the other day, males who self ID as women are still counted as males for inheritance purposes. I.e. when it suits.

Meanwhile a man was told by court that he cannot legally change his age to 20 years younger because:

'In its judgement, the court said that granting the request would cause "all kinds of legal problems" by effectively erasing 20 years of events. It pondered what would happen to qualifications obtained in that time, or a driving licence issued, or a marriage solemnised.

It also said that while changes to the law to allow a person to change their gender took place following a global debate on such issues, no widespread advocacy for the change existed, except for Mr Ratelband's lone case.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-europe-46425774

Maya, you are a legend. If you ever want to stand for politics, I'll be with you toe to toe.

I find it astonishing that a Judge found it the better argument

Me too. Maya's I was so convinced that Maya's argument would be accepted. It is so convincing and completely logical.

I really hope they appeal this. It needs several perspectives, not just one body-snatched judge!

Hypocrisy!

@Lumene - does it mean that any if us could be fired/ not have contracts renewed because of gender critical views and that be perfectly legal?

Ineedacup - there was a case where a tribunal agreed that a belief in man-made climate change met the criteria to be protected. I think most of us 'believe' in climate change, which is a lot less settled scientifically than how human sexual reproduction works. You could certainly pull out a study or an ideologically motivated scientist who would say that climate change isn't a thing. The difference seems to be only one of these beliefs has to do with penises*.

*Apart from that paper submitted by the grievance studies journal hoaxers which I think did argue that penises caused climate change

Wait what, it's incompatible with human dignity not to believe that a male person wearing a dress and saying 'I'm a woman' is literally and in every sense female?

I was definitely under the impression that it was incompatible with women's dignity to believe such utter nonsense.

I cannot believe what I've just read in that judgement. How could the judge go "But intersex...." after Maya gave such a detailed and scientifically accurate witness statement?

Maya, if you read this, you are a true hero, and if you want me to get my spade out again, you only have to give the word.

Maya, I have a spade here and ready. Please appeal this. Agree with the tweet that this is an ET judge way out of his depth and this batshit judgement needs much stronger examination.

Men.

With penises.

Who say they are women. Or are non-binary and therefore should be allowed in women's spaces.

Are currently celebrating Maya being told she cannot hold the belief that you cannot change sex. And that women's spaces should be free of penis-people.

Without being penalised for it.

Let that sit for a while with anyone who's a bit 'meh' about how they feel about this issue.

If you're celebrating this, you're basically saying female people have no agency in who gets to say they're a woman, and who gets to be in the spaces that women have carved out for women over the last 100 years.

yay you

Wait what, it's incompatible with human dignity not to believe that a male person wearing a dress and saying 'I'm a woman' is literally and in every sense female?

I was definitely under the impression that it was incompatible with women's dignity to believe such insulting crap.

I'm so confused.

Are the things I know about biological sex, the things that all humans know, not legal to know any more? How do we un-know something so fundamental to the human species?

Should I hand myself in to the police now because I really can't guarantee that I'm not going to be able to go on knowing this stuff?