Maya vs Vegan

[NettleTea]

So Veganism is considered a belief strong enough to prevent one being dismissed, but a belief in actual biological sex is not

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50981359

Yes, noticed that...will be interesting to hear the two cases are 'supposed' to differ. I'm confident Maya's case will be brought back to a higher court.

I agree in practice.

In law they are very different cases. Veganism is not anything to do with the EA for starters.

Also trying to argue that biological facts are a philosophical belief was a bizarre defence with a high likelihood of failing. Why did the lawyers not advise a freedom of speech defence? Much more straightforward.

Actually half of what I said is bollocks they Dec use EA to argue for veganism.

Still stand by the other half though.

Dec=did.

Having heard him speak about not using motorised transport a as not to hurt bugs I assumed this means that even flies have more protection in life than women!

I'm actually more concerned by animal rights and animal welfare than feminism. Women , or at least many women, can speak up for themselves- tortured and abused factory farmed and laboratory animals can't. One of the reasons I am opposed to all forms of assisted conception is the torture and slaughter of female animals which will have been involved for no justifiable good.

This prat makes me despair. He does nothing to help the cause.

And yet sweat shops exist... rape crisis centres are losing funding...

I think I'll continue to support the rights of both women and animals... without having to downplay the issues of either!

Oh shit!!! Wrong thread entirely!

Lumene

It wasn't a defense. I am the claimant not a defendant.

You can only bring employment claims using the laws that we have and there is no absolute right to freedom of speech at work. So this was an employment discrimination claim.

Ah ok thank you for that explanation makes sense.

twitter.com/MForstater/status/1213120511766650880

Maya has a really good explanation of this on her twitter.

As soon as I heard this today I thought of Maya's case and the injustice.

If this can somehow add even more weight to Maya's case then hopefully the courts will see sense at the next stage.

I'm actually more concerned by animal rights and animal welfare than feminism

I'd say they are intimately connected, and of equal importance.
The suppression of women and the subjugation and control of women's bodies and sexuality stems from the same domineering attitude to wards the earth and all of it creatures.

For me feminism is earth and body centred. By that I mean what makes us women is our body; its close connection to natural rhythms and cycles; its potential fertility; the 'abundance' of motherhood and so on......

Disdain for women is, in my mind, is connected to disdain for the earth and all of the creatures on it. Fellow feeling, for me, extends to animals too....and sisterhood extends to the females of other species, and their young. The maternal instincts are just the same.

I find these decisions completely arbitrary. A recent case found that vegetarianism didn't meet the criteria. On what basis can you make these distinctions. Gender just declare, a belief you have to meet some not particularly clear criteria.

The panel had to decide whether vegetarianism was "capable of satisfying the requirement and definition of being a philosophical belief" - a claim they ruled was "not well founded".

Suhayla Bewley, who represented Mr Conisbee at the preliminary hearing, said his belief was "genuinely held and not a mere opinion or viewpoint" and "a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour" given that more than 20 per cent of the world's population is vegetarian.

She added: "No one can sensibly argue that vegetarianism is incompatible with human dignity and conflict with other fundamental rights."

Dismissing the case, Judge Robin Postle said in his ruling that Mr Conisbee's belief thatanimals shouldn't be killed for foodwas "an admirable sentiment" but protection under the act required more than "an opinion based on some real, or perceived, logic."

He said it was "a lifestyle choice" which could not be described as "a substantial aspect of human life and behaviour".

I'm confident Maya's case will be brought back to a higher court.

I’m quite confident as well, that the result will be different to what you want if it is.

For me feminism is earth and body centred. By that I mean what makes us women is our body; its close connection to natural rhythms and cycles; its potential fertility; the 'abundance' of motherhood and so on......

Disdain for women is, in my mind, is connected to disdain for the earth and all of the creatures on it. Fellow feeling, for me, extends to animals too....and sisterhood extends to the females of other species, and their young. The maternal instincts are just the same.

That’s really beautiful. I agree.

Thank you for coming on the thread @MForstater and good luck with taking it forward

In this case the employer agreed with the claimant that veganism was a protected belief - so although the judge still had to make the finding, s/he will have been assisted by the fact that the parties agreed on it.

Did you know there was already a thread about this? www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3785067-veganism-is-a-philosophical-belief-protected-in-law-but-not-sex-is-real

'Women , or at least many women, can speak up for themselves- tortured and abused factory farmed and laboratory animals can't. '

This comment really bothers me. Globally, historically, women and girls have not had a voice. Still now are not granted rights as full people in some countries. In practice, in most countries.

Women's rights to bodily autonomy are being rolled back in many places, in lots we never got them in the first place.

Caring about animals is great. Obviously. But, female mammals of human species are not so much of interest. This comes up a lot.

Why?

My granny said that if human babies came out with fur on, people might care more. I think she had a point, tbh.