Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

In court tomorrow

598 replies

BitterAndOnlySlightlyTwisted · 02/03/2020 17:06

Hayden versus Associated Newspapers.

The Judge? Go on guess. Mr Justice Julian Knowles.

Remember him? I couldn’t be happier.

This is according to contacts at the NZ fruit farm

OP posts:
Thread gallery
46
Sexnotgender · 03/03/2020 09:35

That NZ farmers thread is amazing.

I’ve got loads of work to do but will try and keep an eye here when I have time.

Datun · 03/03/2020 09:41

No Datun, definitely not. Glinner racked up £28k (or so) in legal fees,

You're absolutely right.

Brain fog from reading about subsequent revelations on SH on another website.

Mossyrock · 03/03/2020 09:43

Sunlight.

And placemarking Smile

R0wantrees · 03/03/2020 09:49

No idea, but I imagine the Mail will have some shit hot legal eagles on this - trans issues are a hot topic in the news and newspapers won’t want their right to report the truth curtailed, especially in regards to trans criminals.

May 2018 James Kirkup (for the Spectator) reported an important & telling series of interviews with newspaper editors by the Home Affairs Committee led by Stephen Doughty MP.

'Why are some MPs trying to shut down the transgender debate?'
(extract)
"Even if you don’t know who Stephen Doughty MP is, if you’re vaguely familiar with the history of New Labour, you’ll know his story: Oxford, a job for a senior Labour politician and a brief spell working in charities. Then selection for a safe seat in his early 30s, thanks to a combination of talent and friends in the right places.

Now 38 and having resigned from Jeremy Corbyn’s front bench over, well, Jeremy Corbyn, Doughty sits on the Home Affairs Committee, which, among other things, is inquiring into hate crime, and its causes. To that end, the committee last week took evidence from a bunch of newspaper editors about the way their papers covered groups including British Muslims and transgender people. Doughty was very interested in the latter group, talking quite extensively about what he described as “a concerted effort by certain publications at the moment to promote some extremely unpleasant transgender hate material.” (continues)

Doughty, meanwhile, describes as “extreme” and “hate material” an article which observes that some people lobbying for changes in the name of transgender people are advocating things that might not be in the best interests of children. I have never met Doughty but have generally heard good things about him from colleagues: bright, committed, thoughtful and so on. So I must assume that he was having an off day when the committee met last week. It happens to us all, after all.

Surely a bright, thoughtful chap like him didn’t mean to imply that it was his job as Member of Parliament to tell newspapers what they can and cannot write? Surely he had no intention of acting as if it is in any way appropriate for a politician to decide what is and is not acceptable for journalists to say, and how they say it? And I can only hope that it was by a simple accident that he singled out by name a female journalist and suggested that her employers stop her saying the things that she thinks – because Doughty happens not to like her saying those things?

As I say, I must assume that he meant none of these things, that he had no such moronic and bullying intent when he spoke and acted as he did. I assume that Doughty is an honourable politician determined to do his job in a democracy and ensure that matters of public policy are debated fully and honestly, whether or not some people find such debate offensive. Because, as I am sure Doughty knows, there is no right not be offended and if we ever let hurt feelings stop us discussing matters of public interest on the basis of the facts, everyone loses." (continues)
blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/05/why-are-some-mps-trying-to-shut-down-the-transgender-debate/

thread
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3233421-Home-Affairs-Committee-Hate-crime-enquiry-Newspaper-editors-interviewed

accessorizequeen · 03/03/2020 09:55

@bettyfilous Any decent UG law degree is "qualifying" which means it is accepted by the Law Society & the Bar Council. Generally it has to include the core elements of law eg Property, Contract, Crimjnal etc. Qualifying does not mean you become a lawyer after completing a UG degree - you have to do an additional PG course and Barristers also need two years of pupillage to practice.

DuLANGMondeFOREVER · 03/03/2020 09:57

The Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday, of course, have very deep pockets. No doubt a substantial, if not eye-popping budget is allocated precisely for defending against litigation.

Glinner is just one chap, with a family to think of, albeit a chap who is better off than the average family man in Britain. Tapping out when his fees got to almost £30,000 grand is fair enough.

I doubt Hayden’s price for settling out of court was higher than the legal fees that the two Mails anticipate paying. I suppose they must think Hayden is too good at attracting attention to waste with a non-disclosure agreement. I mean, it’s not everyday that the American president’s favourite son tweets about a UK criminal case so lowly it went on to be heard by a district judge at magistrates...

R0wantrees · 03/03/2020 09:58

2018 Nick Duffy for Pink News reporting of the Home Affairs Committee on 'Hate Crime'

British newspaper bosses hit back at claims they are ‘fuelling anti-transgender moral panic’
(extract)
"UK newspaper editors have defended themselves from criticism after a surge in negative coverage of transgender issues led to accusations of inciting “moral panic.”"

Representatives of The Sun, The Times, the Daily Mirror, the Daily Express, the Daily Telegraph and Metro all appeared before Parliament’s Home Affairs Committee’s hate crime inquiry on Tuesday to answer concerns that the media has fuelled hostile sentiment towards minority groups. (continues)

"Speaking about a piece that describes trans people as “demented,” Express editor Gary Jones said: “It is a comment piece. I suppose he is entitled to give his opinion within that. I would argue that newspapers have come a long way in the last 10, 20, 30 years on transgender.”

He added that “newspapers and editors, like myself, are very much aware that you need to get every single word right.”

Ian MacGregor of the Telegraph also denied his newspaper was waging a campaign against transgender rights.

He said: “We take the coverage of these issues so seriously. That is why, as members of IPSO and abiding by the code of conduct, we are very careful about the wording we use.

“We treat these issues with great sensitivity. One other piece of guidance that we watch very carefully is from IPSO to all its members on researching and reporting stories involving transgender individuals, which asks, and guides every reporter on a step-by-step approach, about whether mention of their sexuality is relevant, whether it is suitable to use certain ‘dead names’ and that kind of thing.”

He added: “Clearly, these are very sensitive issues and very important issues.

“It is important that our columnists and writers are entitled to their opinion in this world. Sometimes that can be upsetting. I would not be encouraging anyone to upset anyone, but the issues are quite sensitive. I think we reserve the right to upset if we have to, because these issues are important to discuss.”

Paul Clarkson, Managing Editor of The Sun, also hit back at allegations his newspaper had contributed to anti-trans coverage, saying: “I would actually say that The Sun is one of the most prominent media organisations to shed a light on transgender issues.

“We have an excellent relationship with a number of transgender lobby groups that we have been engaging with over a number of years.”

The boss added that he “completely refutes” criticism of the headline “Tran and wife” to refer to a transgender person getting married, claiming that “every word, headline and image was passed by transgender groups pre-publication.”

The couple involved in the story, Hannah Winterbourne and Jake Graf, have said they were “very disappointed when [the coverage] was let down by such an offensive and garish headline and front page.”

But Clarkson insisted: “With this story, we got their full blessing beforehand. There was no issue with ‘Tran and wife’ because you have three words to tell a story. It is not a front page story just to say, ‘Man marries woman.’

“The issue that some people within the community had was with the strapline along the top that explained that there was man that used to be women, marrying a woman who used to be a man.
“If anybody actually read the piece, everyone in the transgender lobby groups who we have spoken to were gushing with praise.”
continues....(continues)

www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/04/26/british-newspapers-anti-transgender-moral-panic/

Thinkingabout1t · 03/03/2020 10:02

I’ve just looked up Kate Scottow’s crowdfunding page, but they’ve reached their goal. That’s good news, but does anyone keep details of who is still crowdfunding this sort of case? There are several different crowdfunding platforms and it would be handy to have one place where you could check who needs a hand right now.
Thanks.

DuLANGMondeFOREVER · 03/03/2020 10:19

I think Kate will be starting a new crowdfunder soon, as her appeal in a higher court has now been granted, due to the discovery of additional evidence (perhaps it will be Hayden’s tweets? That they were missing last time seems to be a ridiculous oversight. Context is necessary!)

I think that the Keira Bell et al fundraiser for the judicial review is still open. And perhaps the oxford one on safeguarding policies in schools?

boatyardblues · 03/03/2020 10:23

Is anyone from here planning to tweet from court?

boatyardblues · 03/03/2020 10:24

I don’t mean to out you. If there is someone tweeting, can we have a link here?

EwwSprouts · 03/03/2020 10:32

I think case is 2pm start.

Redshoeblueshoe · 03/03/2020 10:43

The link on the first page of this thread says it starts at 10.30

BustedWench · 03/03/2020 10:43

My retrial hasn't been granted as of yet, but we have decided to focus on a rehearing as new evidence has been discovered, opposed to just case stated.

As soon as I get the legal go ahead I will be able to be a bit more open Grin

Lordfrontpaw · 03/03/2020 10:48

Cool. Any digging going on?

Carowiththegoodhair · 03/03/2020 10:58

Court listing is at 10:30.

My understanding is that it’s a preliminary hearing about the meaning of a statement.

BustedWench · 03/03/2020 10:59

Not at the moment, but may be later! Will keep MN up to date

Mossyrock · 03/03/2020 11:08

You must be following this closely Caro and Busted. I hope that the sunlight proves illuminating to those not fully up to speed Flowers

R0wantrees · 03/03/2020 11:18

My memory of Hayden gaining a recognised presence on social media was at the time of the brief (& disasterous) formation of 'Transsexual Voices Matter'. Stephanie Hayden provided, what was believed by some, an informed legal narrative within & on behalf of the group.

16-Aug-18 MN FWR thread discussing the group's formation: 'Transexual voices - twitter thread'

"1.We are a group of transsexual women from all walks of life who were diagnosed with the rare acute forms of gender dysphoria and treated in accordance with the modern medical science. We've completed medically our gender transitions, successfully integrated in the society & do our best to maintain meaningful personal, social and professional relationships as women.
We value our privacy and the hard earned social and professional respect and strive to remain the valuable members of the society contributing to it in many ways.
Our medical condition, social recognition & human rights are protected by a number of pieces of legislation which are hard won results of the decades of deprivation, ridicule, abuse & our struggle for the basic human rights: to be allowed to be & treated as equal human beings. (continues)
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3337288-Transexual-voices-twitter-thread

17TH AUGUST 2018 MIRANDA YARDLEY (who is transsexual) described issues with this group:
'Transsexual Voices Matter'

(extract)
So, the @TSVoices (Transsexual Voices Matter) Twitter and Facebook came and went and is back again. There’s plenty I could say about the group’s initial statement. The claim to be diagnosed with ‘rare acute forms of gender dysphoria’ is just silly because whatever gender dysphoria is, the justification for treatment is that the condition supposedly is chronic, and anyway what we know about male transsexualism points again to this being a chronic condition. There’s a lot of whining about how the identity of ‘transsexual’ is being swept aside by ‘transgender’, which is a fair argument and one I’ve used myself, but as usual it’s what the statement manages NOT to say that gives the game away, and add to that the continual claim to ‘woman’ throughout the statement lets us all see exactly what this is:

It remains to be seen whether this group stand for anything different. They could have specifically identified and condemned the use of ‘TERF’ and the attack on female homosexuality; if they’re that concerned about respecting female culture, spaces and the lives of women, I’d look for an explicit distancing from the use of ‘lesbian’, ‘mother’ and ‘woman’. Unfortunately many of ‘the good trans’ still can’t bring themselves to this more evolved point.

Remember TSRainCrew? Tried to sell themselves as the ‘good trans’ and made similar arguments about cultural distinction. Yet in reality their spokespeople ended up being just as big dicks as the gendersists they criticised.

If they’re going to be different, they actually have to be different. Else this is just another attempt to claim a higher spot on the validity hierarchy.

– my comment earlier (16 August) on the resulting @TSVoices Mumsnet thread

Of course there are many other things their self-serving statement omitted, like how for example homosexual and gender non-conforming minors are being instrumentalised by transgender activists in order to validate their own claim to identity, but I digress. What is properly amazing is how quickly this group reverted to classic male transgender activist behaviour. NO SURPRISES THERE." (continues)
mirandayardley.com/en/transsexual-voices-matter/

** screenshot from Yardley's article

In this context, Stephanie Hayden promoted an essay (see screenshot)

"Gender Recognition Certificates: Why the Feminists and the Trans Rights Activists Have got it Wrong
Gender Recognition Certificates
Why the Feminists and the Trans Rights Activists Have got it Wrong
An Essay by Stephanie R Hayden"
(extract)
"Once granted a “GRC” the holder, if their birth was registered in the United Kingdom, is entitled to a new birth certificate recording the new name and sex[16]. The holder of a “GRC” is entitled to keep the fact that they were of a previous gender confidential. Indeed it is a criminal offence for anyone, in an official capacity having knowledge of the fact, to disclose that a “GRC” holder was previously of the opposite gender to their acquired gender[17]. This is interpreted to include not asking anyone if they hold a “GRC”. (continues)

"Ultimately transgender persons should see the need for society to evolve as to understanding and acceptance (in many ways it already has); however, refusing to work with society to achieve a balance of rights, respecting everyone, is not the way forward. The feminist arguments lack credibility; however, the key for trans rights activists is to retain credibility. Not everyone who identifies under the transgender umbrella should be eligible to obtain a “GRC”. The provisions of the “GRA” are for changing sex in the eyes of the law and society. This should not be possible by filling in a form as if one is seeking revocation of a parking ticket. Such an idea trivialises the concept of a “GRC” and the profound consequences that being granted one has on an individual citizen.

Western liberal democracies have evolved to accept transgender persons as well as many others. The aim of the transgender person must be to demonstrate that the class is not a threat to society. This is done by balancing everyone’s rights and accepting that society, through its laws, must have some role in the regulation of who is classed as a man and as a woman. Transphobia is abhorrent; however, transgender persons can win the argument with informed discussion, public education, respect, and a tolerance of those who do not agree with the concept.

The feminists and the trans rights activists have both got it wrong. It is in the interests of society as a whole that the tone of the debate rapidly improves, that feminists stop stating as fact misconceptions in the law, and that trans rights activists realise that legal gender recognition is not just a case of obtaining a new birth certificate.

Stephanie R Hayden
Leeds, United Kingdom
18 August 2018"
judicialcat.blogspot.com/2018/08/gender-recognition-certificates-why.html

In court tomorrow
DuLANGMondeFOREVER · 03/03/2020 11:24

A few quick comparisons between Justice Knowle’s judgement on the Harry the Owl judicial review, and Hayden’s claim against the Daily Mail and the Mail On Sunday.

Obviously they are two different areas of the law (criminal & civil) and I am not a lawyer (and I don’t even identify as one!) But it seems to me that what Hayden is claiming is at odds with Justice Knowle’s sensible opinions.
Harry the Owl judgement is marked in green and Hayden’s claim in red.
I have multiple screenshots so will have to add them over several posts

  1. The headline doesn’t say Kate was arrested FOR calling Hayden a man, only that she had done so before she was arrested
  2. Justice Knowles accepts that currently, the words man and woman are difficult. He, asserts that he will be using them to refer to biological sex, so clearly he doesn’t think doing so is defamatory
  3. Hayden asserts that the journalist is assisting Kate, and harassing Hayden ...
In court tomorrow
In court tomorrow
In court tomorrow
Datun · 03/03/2020 11:31

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Datun · 03/03/2020 11:33

Re-writing my post because of inadvertent correct sexing.

Hayden asserts that the journalist is assisting Kate, and harassing Hayden ...

Don't newspapers take sides all the bloody time, though?

And Hayden is saying Beckford realised Hayden would be targeted and it's because they are trans?

Is it not because they think Hayden is a serial litigant who bullies people who object to their behaviour?

Or is the sacred caste objection? Again.

DuLANGMondeFOREVER · 03/03/2020 11:34
  1. Hayden asserts that the journalist tagging Kate and Glinner into the tweet about the story, but not Hayden, is a failure
5 & 6, but Justice Knowles says tweeting generally isn’t harassment, and tweets are aimed at your own twitter followers, who are likely sympathetic It would presumably then follow, that Justice Knowles would be likely to consider the journalist not tagging Hayden as an attempt to protect Hayden from an abusive pile on. That Hayden was not tagged for Hayden’s own good.
In court tomorrow
In court tomorrow
In court tomorrow
R0wantrees · 03/03/2020 11:48

Is it not because they think Hayden is a serial litigant who bullies people who object to their behaviour?

Or is the sacred caste objection? Again.

LangCleg wrote Thu 21-Feb-19

"How did the scandal of TV entertainers grooming and exploiting children get so bad before anything was done?

How did the scandal of Catholic priests grooming and exploiting children get so bad before anything was done?

How did the scandal of on-street gangs grooming and exploiting children get so bad before anything was done?

Because if you create a sacred caste of any group and silence anyone asking questions about individuals on behalf of the sacred caste, abusers will see, infiltrate, and groom and exploit children. That''s how."

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3512177-Julia-Long-asking-Munro-Bergdorf-about-child-exploitation?pg=12

EwwSprouts · 03/03/2020 11:49

Stand corrected, was going by something on Twitter.