Maya Forstater's appeal skeleton

[Mollyollydolly]

Saw this on twitter and thought it deserved a thread to itself.

As Jason Braler (employment lawyer) says on twitter "It's more a thesis than a traditional skeleton, but it certainly drives home the points from every conceivable angle.
It may also be the only ever EAT skeleton to have 4 references to Orwell"

hiyamaya.files.wordpress.com/2021/04/forstater-eat-claimant-skeleton-argument-plus-low-res-pages-1-50.pdf

Safeguarding against those evil trans girls who you all say are just gay boys, until they are allowed to transition, in which case they are all imminently about to rape all the other girls?

Safeguarding against predatory males. Some of whom claim to be TW. They may be. Or they may be pretending. But it's their maleness that puts them in the 'be aware of' category. Not their trans status.

As you know.

I thought it was about the freedom to state what you believe to be true. my bad.

Christ - really? You really thought that? Did you read ANYTHING about the case?
It's about whether the SPECIFIC BELIEF THAT THERE ARE TWO SEXES can be protected in law.

I assume if she wins, that people who work with her will be able to refer to her as "the transphobe" if they genuinely believe her to be one.

No. That’s an abusive insult, not just a belief. It would be slanderous.

That EHRC submission is a corker, and the more so because I’m amazed to see it come from them. Am off to re-read it, I can’t believe my eyes

The EJ adopted the wrong approach when determining whether the Claimant’s belief (which it was accepted she held) fell within the scope of s.10

The effect of this was that the EJ lost sight of his task

It is submitted that had the EJ approached the issue correctly he would have been bound to conclude that, however unpalatable he found the Claimant’s belief, the Claimant’s belief was a protected belief

Pow!

@CardinalLolzy

Just a reminder that MN have asked us to report vile or goady posts rather than respond.

Absolutely.

Everything I read about her case was nothing compared to how good the arguments have been.

If Maya lost this case, then the government will have to amend the GRA and the EA in order to protect free speech and to override the judgement.

Shizuku

There is no law about being rude to people so if they want to rude they can whether or not they genuinely believe it. What can’t happen is for MF to receive unfair or less favourable treatment because of her belief.

p.s. are the Trans people who agree they are still their birth sex transphobic? (Note - taking a TW to court for transphobia was thrown out by the judge when it was tried).

Honestly this whole thread is confusing to me and all I see is criticisms , but no real solutions offered .

This thread is about Maya's case, which is summarised by Maya here:
mforstater.medium.com/what-is-at-stake-18a8da1af6b7

I'd start with that and ignore attempts to derail here. We are now mostly discussing live tweeting reporting of the case (appeal) as it happens, which will continue tomorrow.

I did wonder if Ann Sinnott is responsible for the outbreak of rationality at the EHRC.

I presume the government are watching this? Or have watchers on it?

I think Ann Sinnotts crowdfunder has had a big effect on the EHRC. Their statement today was a biggie, a sea change hopefully.

@ChazsBrilliantAttitude

I did wonder if Ann Sinnott is responsible for the outbreak of rationality at the EHRC.

That was my first thought too.

White and Mulready "JK Rowling later tweeted that Forstater had been forced out of her job for “stating that sex is real”. We don’t agree."

They don't agree that sex is real? I know the article is just emotional bollocks but I'm surprised they're that deluded.

@CardinalLolzy

Yes sorry I was just commenting on a comment on here about the wording of the case .

Apologies I was no trying to derail . Trying to understand the terms .

@JackieLavertysWeirdVoice

I presume the government are watching this? Or have watchers on it?

I think rather a lot of people are watching this.

@ChazsBrilliantAttitude

Shizuku

There is no law about being rude to people so if they want to rude they can whether or not they genuinely believe it. What can’t happen is for MF to receive unfair or less favourable treatment because of her belief.

p.s. are the Trans people who agree they are still their birth sex transphobic? (Note - taking a TW to court for transphobia was thrown out by the judge when it was tried).

"What can’t happen is for MF to receive unfair or less favourable treatment because of her belief."

So a company with Jewish staff members couldn't decline to renew the contract of an employee who had far-right beliefs?

"are the Trans people who agree they are still their birth sex transphobic?"

Some are, some aren't.

#IStandWithMaya no longer 'trending' on Twitter.

#EHRC is.

The hearing today covered 'whether the belief was protected' and gave some examples of 'manifestation that might not be allowed even if it was' (although not with Maya's belief).

They gave an example that if an atheist made constant comments to a religous individual about 'seeing fairy unicorns' then that might be harrasment.

It is not controversial (meaning the other side have not claimed) that Maya would, as a general rule, use preferred pronouns. However, she might not if the discussion they were having made it important she drew a distiction between biological male and female (eg about single sex spaces). The Independent article was extremely misleading on this point.

I would presume that if anyone referred to anyone else in the workplace in a consistently derogatory way, then that would be harassment, regardless of whether it was the manifestation of a genuinely held, worthy of respect in a democratic society, belief or not.

are the Trans people who agree they are still their birth sex transphobic?"

Some are, some aren't.

😂

For anyone who’s not clear on what is being determined here, I do recommend that you read the EHRC submission here:

hiyamaya.files.wordpress.com/2021/04/forstater-submissions-ehrc-final-amended.pdf

Which explains, among other things, the difference between having a belief and manifesting that belief. Employers cannot mine into your head and determine what you believe and how valid they think it is, and that is a good thing for everyone, regardless of which “side” they’re on here.

@ArabellaScott

#IStandWithMaya no longer 'trending' on Twitter.

#EHRC is.

Oh lol 😂

Shizuku
If you followed the case you will see that there is a distinction between holding a belief and manifesting a belief. So you couldn’t necessarily refuse to renew the contract of a far right member of staff who didn’t do anything to inappropriately manifest those beliefs i.e. solely for holding the belief.

There are different types of workplace including those where people work with children and/or vulnerable adults where denying the sex of colleagues by using incorrect sex-based pronouns would be a failure of Duty of Care.

All adults have a responsibility to Safeguard children.

'Could the EHRC be the first captured public body to be liberated?'

X post with lots of people