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

Yes, Maya Forstater has had the effect of making the EHRC do its job.

@R0wantrees

Shall we return focus to Maya Forstater's Appeal? Neither it or this thread is about Steph's feelings.

Indeed!

Better late than never.

Does anyone know much about the current EHRC personnel?

I think they've got a new chair, maybe?

That's a massive point, actually, from Naomi Cunningham QC.

It is.
Naomi Cunningham is a co-founder of Sex Matters.

"Why a new organisation?
A sustained campaign is needed to undo the damage done to institutions across society, and secure everybody’s human rights.

Sex Matters is a new organisation co-founded by Rebecca Bull, Naomi Cunningham, Maya Forstater and Emma Hilton, with support and engagement from many others.

We will engage with politicians, officials, employers and professional organisations. We will work with and amplify others in the emerging movement of small organisations working for a reality-based discussion about sex. We aim to build the campaign into new constituencies, professions and sectors, and to help people speak up and act with confidence.

Our singular aim is to reestablish that sex matters in rules, laws, policies, language and culture.

Sex matters, in life and in law. It shouldn’t take courage to say so.

Our priorities
Establish clarity regarding single sex services and spaces – The Equality Act 2010 protects single and separate sex services in both everyday situations and specialist services. It also allows employment to be restricted to a particular sex. The Equality Act does not say that gender identity can or must be substituted for sex in these situations. We will develop resources and communications to help organisations understand the Equality Act and provide clarity and security in single sex spaces, and advocate for official organisations to provide clear guidance.
Enable more people to speak up – It should not take courage to speak the truth – that sex is real, binary, immutable and important – but right now it does. We need to help more people find the courage to articulate this, not just on social media or with friends, but also in their professions and organisations.
Enable debate to happen within organisations – The move to undermine sex in law, policy and language has done great damage to our institutions. Adopting the untruth that human beings can literally change sex has damaged integrity, reasoning, common sense, fairness, accountability and protections for the vulnerable. We will work to empower organisations to adopt sound, fair and transparent policies that reflect material reality and protect everybody’s human rights.

sex-matters.org/

@Steph751

This tribunal case really isn’t about whether someone can be rude to you at work. There is already adequate legal protection around bullying and harassment and discrimination relating to gender reassignment.

As I understand it MF was never rude or aggressive to trans people - she said that out of politeness she would use preferred pronouns.

Same as JK Rowling - saying you believe in sex does not mean you spend your life trying to upset and out trans people.

I think you are right, it's on a service provider to use an excemption. In some cases it will be absolutely proportionate, especially in some DV shelters why wouldn't it be? Personally, I think this is an area where a consensus could be reached.

It is always proportionate for a single sex space or service to be exactly that. Why the hell should women have to beg, plead and be forced to justify their single sex provision and right to it, how gracious of you to think this is an area where consensus could be reached in respect of DV shelters.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

I think they've got a new chair, maybe?

Baroness Kishwer Falkner, EHRC Chair, IWD Debate

Kishwer Falkner congratulated the House of Lords on securing the appropriate language (use of mother rather than person) in the recent maternity bill.

Yes sorry, Mollyollydolly, back to Maya - I am intrigued as to what the other side will say tomorrow.

@JackieLavertysWeirdVoice

Does anyone know much about the current EHRC personnel?

The tenure of the previous chair ended in Aug. 2020 and has not yet been replaced (David Isaacs, ex of Stonewall). Baroness Kishwer Falkner will be the new chair of the EHRC, subject to the formal scrutiny process.

4 of the current commissioners were appointed in either Nov. or Dec. 2020. Jessica Butcher MBE, David Goodhart and Su-Mei Thompson have been appointed to the board for a period of four years. Former president of the Royal College of Surgeons, Lord Ribeiro, will serve for a year to help ensure that the EHRC has medical and public health expertise, strengthening its work on equalities and human rights during COVID–19.

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/who-we-are/our-commissioners-committees-and-governance

Massive attempts at derailing going on. Shall we agree to ignore?

@GreyhoundG1rl

Massive attempts at derailing going on. Shall we agree to ignore?

Agreed. Night all, see you tomorrow for Round 2.

@RedDogsBeg

I think you are right, it's on a service provider to use an excemption. In some cases it will be absolutely proportionate, especially in some DV shelters why wouldn't it be? Personally, I think this is an area where a consensus could be reached.

It is always proportionate for a single sex space or service to be exactly that. Why the hell should women have to beg, plead and be forced to justify their single sex provision and right to it, how gracious of you to think this is an area where consensus could be reached in respect of DV shelters.

Nobody has to beg for anything. It's just that there may be a very small number of occasions where you or AN Other service provider has to by law be able to show that turning a vulnerable trans woman away and putting her at increased risk was proportionate to achieving a legitimate aim.

Susannah Rustin (Leader writer ("The Guardian view on..")

"One of 1st things that happened when I joined Guardian 19 yrs ago was @arusbridger invited me to an @IndexCensorship dinner. I had plans & didn't go..
@EHRC is a v late comer to the feminist free speech cause so I just want to say thank you & respect to @IndexCensorship"

twitter.com/SusannaRustin/status/1387111706707566595

Susanna is great.

I am intrigued as to what the other side will say tomorrow.

In this household we were wondering about this. Despite my refusal to take anything for granted, it's feeling as if a fairly substantial steer has been given to J Choudhury by EHRC and a clear statement that the original tribunal EJ erred.

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

Susanna Rustin
@SusannaRustin
·
1h
&
@jk_rowling
. just saw someone mention her & it reminded me: she's a feminist free speech hero too

Well said Susanna

Sex Matters
Reflecting on today's #MayaAppeal at the Employment Appeal Tribunal, we have selected some highlights from Karon Monaghan QC's submissions on behalf of the Equality and Human Rights Commission - Intervenor in the Appeal.

The EHRC submitted

1. Maya's philosophical belief is that sex is a material reality not to be conflated with gender identity and that sex matters.

1. Employment Tribunal Judge Tayler should have concluded that Maya's philosophical belief (that Sex Matters) falls under the protection of the Equality Act 2010

1. Employment Tribunal judge Tayler confused consideration of whether Maya's belief could be an Equality Act protected characteristic with how she might have expressed her beliefs. This was a mistake and the wrong approach.

1. EHRC stressed the importance of the following point.

It is not the State's role to monitor belief.

The Tribunal should not have embarked on an inquiry as to the value of Maya's belief. Value judgments (whether in beliefs about God or sex) are not the function of the ET.

1. EHRC submitted that the law treats sex as biological and binary and gender identity as social.

Many will think Maya's belief controversial and wrong. Nevertheless her belief is entitled to be protected"
twitter.com/SexMattersOrg/status/1387148818270064647

[quote BewaretheIckabog]@Steph751

This tribunal case really isn’t about whether someone can be rude to you at work. There is already adequate legal protection around bullying and harassment and discrimination relating to gender reassignment.

As I understand it MF was never rude or aggressive to trans people - she said that out of politeness she would use preferred pronouns.

Same as JK Rowling - saying you believe in sex does not mean you spend your life trying to upset and out trans people.[/quote]
If Maya was willing to keep her personal beliefs to herself, I'm quite confident we wouldn't be here.

As I understand it her case rests on her right to upset or act in a way that may upset trans employees. If I had to place a bet, I think she'll be successful but, I'm not sure many large employers will be frothing at the mouth to take her on. It's sad really as I'm all for tax researchers, there's far too many off shore accounts owned by old white men with too much influence.

Women should not be compelled to keep their knowledge that sex matters to themselves or risk loss of livelihood.

Sex matters for women's rights and Safeguarding.

The era of #NoDebate is over.

Why should she have to keep her beliefs to herself? They're not illegal, and as was stated numerous times today, the law agrees with her.

If only the uppity women would keep quiet and stop insisting on their rights.