Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

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
Glinner · 03/03/2020 12:47

I'm so excited!

Catting · 03/03/2020 12:50

Justice should have to feel like an exciting novelty, but yes....I am also pretty damn excited by this whole thing!

Catting · 03/03/2020 12:50

*shouldnt.
Glinner started the bad grammar.....

NotAnotherNameChangePlease · 03/03/2020 12:51

I am genuinely open mouthed that Hayden requested they refuse themselves! I would pay good money to have witnessed that.

DontBuyLangClegCashmere · 03/03/2020 12:51

ItsAll
Hayden was criticising Mr K's judgement in Harry's case.
FT didn't outwardly say Mr K was transphobic but I'm guessing that was the implication.

It's all over now, Mr K to consider whether this will go to trial or not. Judgement by end of week hopefully.

BustedWench · 03/03/2020 12:52

Rumours of Judgement reserved, statement expected I imagine

Datun · 03/03/2020 12:52

Strewth - anyone reading the extent of Haydens campaigning will have their eyes instantly opened.

I hope this judge is aware.

Glinner · 03/03/2020 12:52

Hayden is basically My Cousin Vinnie at the start of the movie.

Catting · 03/03/2020 12:53

Why is there no live tweeting!? I've got severe FOMO.

Datun · 03/03/2020 12:53

DontBuyLangClegCashmere

I know you have to be circumspect, but can you say whether it was positive or not?

DontBuyLangClegCashmere · 03/03/2020 12:54

Oh, and no shelium present in court today. Grin

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 03/03/2020 12:54

Hayden was criticising Mr K's judgement in Harry's case.

I really don't understand how that works?

Burglar Y: Your honour, I see that you convicted burglar X, I disagree with convictions for burglary and therefore you should recuse yourself.

Surely there are no circumstances under which a judge would recuse themselves because the claimant disapproved of their sentencing record?

Datun · 03/03/2020 12:55

Surely there are no circumstances under which a judge would recuse themselves because the claimant disapproved of their sentencing record?

Only someone who thought that an understanding of the current law is transphobic in itself would think that.

DontBuyLangClegCashmere · 03/03/2020 12:56

Datun
I wasn't there, but it sounds as though Hayden was busy moaning about Mr K's comments during H's judgement, which I can't imagine will go down well.

Catting · 03/03/2020 12:57

We are getting to the point that just having eyes is transphobic. I can't see a women, when a man in a dress tells me to.

Thinkingabout1t · 03/03/2020 12:57

Thanks, DuLang. I don’t know how many funding platforms there are, but I’ve found several of our good causes on Crowdjustice.

I’ve found Keira Bell the young detransitioner, Victoria Edwards the Oxfordshire schools safeguarding woman, Harry Miller and Maya Forstster on Crowdjustice.

Over on Crowdfunding there’s Kate Scottow, whose appeal I eagerly await.

I’ve finally thought of bookmarking them.

Datun · 03/03/2020 12:59

I wasn't there, but it sounds as though Hayden was busy moaning about Mr K's comments during H's judgement, which I can't imagine will go down well.

Indeed.
I wonder if Mr K is going to be the go to person with these issues, now. As someone who has genned up on it all.

KettlePolly · 03/03/2020 12:59

I'm a bit pessimistic tbh. I don't think you can predict what a judge will do based on past form. Requesting that he recuse himself was a bold move though. Can't imagine that will have gone down well.

Incidentally Glinner I had a dream the other night about having some sort of earnest debate over dinner with you and Julie Bindel and Judge Rinder off the telly kept butting in and disagreeing. Even my dreams have got middle-aged Grin it was, from what I can remember a very nice dinner though.

Glinner · 03/03/2020 13:01

Judge Rinder! His program invited me then disinvited me and then in the discussion summed up 2018 by saying "All in all, a good year for women!"

Thinkingabout1t · 03/03/2020 13:01

Glinner, it’s an honour to be on Hayden’s hate-list. An honour shared by many good people, it’s true. But still evidence that you have done something worthwhile.

R0wantrees · 03/03/2020 13:02

Stephanie R. Hayden essay posted on Stephanie Hayden's blog 'JudicialCat' Discussing Politics, Housing, Law, and Current affairs
(includes live link to author's Twitter account flyinglawyer73)

Saturday, 18 August 2018
'Gender Recognition Certificates: Why the Feminists and the Trans Rights Activists Have got it Wrong'

(extract)
"All of the evidence is submitted to a panel comprising of legal and medical professionals who then determine the outcome of the application. If successful, the panel awards a “GRC”. From the date of the “GRC” the holder, for all purposes, is of the gender specified on the certificate[11]. The “GRC” also has the effect of changing legal sex. A holder of a female “GRC” becomes a woman with the holder of a male “GRC” becoming a man[12]. There are some exemptions to this concerning parental status, inheritance of peerages, and gender-specific criminal offences[13]. The “GRA” is prospective[14], in other words the change of gender (and thus legal sex) has no retrospective effect. (continues)

It was this case that directly led to the enactment of the “GRA”; however, prior to enactment the House of Lords was called upon to determine the case of Bellinger v Bellinger[21]. What was a woman for the purposes of marriage was again the focus of the question to be determined by their Lordships. Considering Corbett[22]their Lordships arrived at the same answer as Ormrod J over 30 years earlier; namely, that it was a person’s biological gender as determined at birth that mattered. In the context of the contemporary debate about “GRA” reform the comments of Lord Nicholls are well worth considering[23].

“The distinction between male and female exists throughout the animal world. It corresponds to the different roles played in the reproductive process. A male produces sperm which fertilise the female's eggs. In this country, as elsewhere, classification of a person as male or female has long conferred a legal status. It confers a legal status, in that legal as well as practical consequences follow from the recognition of a person as male or female. The legal consequences affect many areas of life, from marriage and family law to gender-specific crime and competitive sport. It is not surprising, therefore, that society through its laws decides what objective biological criteria should be applied when categorising a person as male or female. Individuals cannot choose for themselves whether they wish to be known or treated as male or female. Self-definition is not acceptable. That would make nonsense of the underlying biological basis of the distinction.” (continues)

When one considers the legal effect of being granted a “GRC” and considers the comments of Lord Nicholls (albeit prior to the enactment of the “GRA”), it can be argued that those consequences are far more than being permitted to obtain a new birth certificate. The legal status of whether one is considered male or female by society is profound. If law is accepted as normative, and a reflection of the values of society as a whole, then it must follow that the legal status conferred on the citizen must be objective in nature and not based solely on one’s own subjective identity. Consider at birth that one’s parents do not have any subjective say on the gender and legal sex assigned to a new born child. That is objectively assessed by a medical practitioner and endorsed on behalf of the state by the registrar when a birth is registered. It can therefore be argued that the transgender person should not expect to be able to subjectively determine their legal sex. " (continues)

About the Author

Stephanie is a male to female transgender person holding a Gender Recognition Certificate. She is a Bachelor of Laws and has been in legal professional practice since 2008. Stephanie practices in employment law and regularly appears in the Employment Tribunal. In 2012 she was granted a special right of audience in the High Court to represent a defendant in the case of Hardy v Jones & Others. Stephanie has appeared on BBC News in her previous legal gender to discuss the Royal Bank of Scotland computer crash of 2012 and regularly makes contributions on radio. She has written for both the London Evening Standard and the Daily Star."

judicialcat.blogspot.com/2018/08/gender-recognition-certificates-why.html

In court tomorrow
In court tomorrow
bd67thSaysReinstateLangCleg · 03/03/2020 13:03

This thread's at the top of "Trending" right now. Nice one. 👍

DuLANGMondeFOREVER · 03/03/2020 13:05

This is the legal position, as the NHS sees it, anyway:

Section 22 of the GRA states that it is an offence for a person who has acquired protected information in an official capacity to disclose the information to any other person. “Protected information” is defined in Section 22(2) as information relating to a person who has applied for a gender recognition certificate under the Act, and which concerns that application (or a subsequent application by them), or their gender prior to being granted a full GRC.

^In simplified terms, Section 22 is a privacy measure. It prevents officials who discover in the course of their work that a person holds or has applied for a GRC from disclosing this (thus identifying that the person has a trans history), or the person’s previous gender. A breach of the Act is a criminal offence that can carry a fine of up to £5000&.

source

But there is nothing to stop you banging on about your trans status it yourself.
If you do post about it on online, and a journalist reads it, I’m pretty certain that any normal thinking person would conclude you had forfeited your rights to privacy on the topic.

Whether anyone has ever been charged/ fined for breaching the act I have no idea. I’m presuming it’s never been properly tested in court?

Applying for a GRC is ‘a statutory declaration for judicial proceedings’ whether that is what Hayden is referring to in Hayden’s claim against the Mail we do not yet know. Hayden certainly applies for more judicial proceedings than the average British adult.
If the journalists have obtained proof of fraud, I’m sure it will come up in court.

This is the application form/declaration for single people:

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/852944/t467-eng.pdf

macaroniandpizza · 03/03/2020 13:08

🎉🎉🎉

DuLANGMondeFOREVER · 03/03/2020 13:11

Just reposting the screenshot of the relevant bit of Hayden’s claim, to get it on the same page as the linked info regarding GRCs.

In court tomorrow