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

Quite, Bernard.

Yes, and there are some trans women who believe (correctly) that they have the 'legal' right to participate in women's sport, use female single sex changing rooms, be referred to as she/her etc

No, even women don't have those rights. They can't turn up and demand entry to any female space. Organisations and places have the right to refuse entry.

The EA2010 prevents refusal on certain discriminatory grounds, but excluding males from female spaces is an exception, if for a good reason.

How is one to differentiate men from men with the correct piece of paper?

A conundrum that never seems to be answered.

Absolutely @crossparsley, what about the dignity of WOMEN?? Don't we have dignity?

Indeed - stating TWAW removes my dignity as a woman.

But no-one should be allowed to veto their spouse's medical treatment, unless you were getting into the area of turning off a life-support machine or something like that.

Usual BS. No one is vetoing - even her Lord and Mistress Baroness Hunt got told off in the HoL for stating that.

Women have the right to remove themselves from a marriage and not be forced into being a legal lesbian. The husband has plenty of time to whatever he wants... usually at great cost to wives and children.

I imagine that even if Maya wins this case, misgendering could still be considered to be harassment in the workplace (depending on the circumstances and if it's deliberate etc.)

I think the trans community need to help us out here. If someone is gender fluid and you haven't double checked exactly what gender they are on a particular day (don't TRA's say that gender has nothing to do with external expression or stereotypes? So Pip Bunce could be wearing fishnets and a pink skirt and still be their male gender identity that day, non?) you could inadvertently be harassing them? How do you actually argue that isn't a deliberate action? And what about the person I know who was adamant for 10 years they were non-binary and then decided they were definitely a transman. Someone could have been on maternity leave or sick leave and come back to work and use the wrong pronoun based on not having the up to date information. Harrassment or ignorance?

I mean, if we're taking this seriously and we want to go down this road, then TRA's have an urgent duty to a)define exactly what gender actually is so we can all get up to speed on the science of it and b)throw that science at those of us with very small brains so we can understand how to get things right.

I do of course understand there are far more clear cut examples of actual harassment of trans people, which are never ok but misgendering should only be considered harassment under limited circumstances.

A total separation of sex and gender is required if womens needs are to be met. Women are ignored
If they were separate there could be 2 fields on the passport and spaces could be single sex and mean single sex
I also believe it needs to be written into law that actual sex should be declared in some circumstances. Care work, requesting a same sex HCP, for relationship purposes are some that spring to mind
The effort put into pretending males are females is mind blowing

The enormous pain is only recognised one way
It causes me enormous pain to pretend males are women but that is ignored

@Anovaneway

There are some men who believe (erroneously) that they have the 'legal' right to participate in women's sport, use female single sex changing rooms, be referred to as she/her etc

Yes, and there are some trans women who believe (correctly) that they have the 'legal' right to participate in women's sport, use female single sex changing rooms, be referred to as she/her etc

It would be really nice to hear these trans women explain why they think their gender ideology has a right to trump biological sex based acquired rights, and whether they think there is any misogyny involved in trampling over the rights of women who simply wish to play sport without the risk of being seriously injured by someone with almost all of their born body privilege.

The holocaust denial thing is baffling.

We know that the atrocity of the holocaust happened. We have an abundance of irrefutable evidence. Surely denying that biological sex exists and is immutable in humans has much more in common with holocaust denial than Maya's reality-based position?

Genuinely trans individuals need to have their status recognised

Can I ask why you think that? I can't see how it makes a difference other than when someone gets medical treatment or in cases where someone is attacked or harmed because they are trans. The former doesn't require any official documentation, the information that needs recording is what medications someone might be taking, etc. With the latter, you could argue it's useful to have statistical information about how many people are trans in a population and how many are being harmed but even then, what does 'trans' actually mean? You don't feel comfortable with the stereotypes ascribed to your sex? You use a different name? You want to wear dresses/bras/wear nail varnish or make up? It is such an umbrella term now that it honestly seems to be meaningless.

The enormous pain is only recognised one way
It causes me enormous pain to pretend males are women but that is ignored

Absolutely. I'm losing lost a long time ago patience with the idea that people have "enormous pain" dealing with reality, so everyone else in the world has to play along with something they believe is a lie and when they don't, for whatever reason at all, they are literally evil.

A passport may be an identity document but it is not a self identity document.

If I identify as 23 years old and born in London should I be able to have that on my passport? If I can change the sex marker on my passport, why can't I change my date or place of birth?

It's ridiculous to say your passport should reflect your chosen identity. It should be accurate.

@WhoNeedsaManOfTheWorld

A total separation of sex and gender is required if womens needs are to be met. Women are ignored If they were separate there could be 2 fields on the passport and spaces could be single sex and mean single sex I also believe it needs to be written into law that actual sex should be declared in some circumstances. Care work, requesting a same sex HCP, for relationship purposes are some that spring to mind The effort put into pretending males are females is mind blowing

That's far too sensible!

We should never have had a law that means someone can change their legal sex. It's the pebble in the pond and we are now all suffering from the ripples. It's an impossible concept to legislate over.

Human beings can't change sex, and saying they can legally, is making all sorts of assumptions over something that can't actually happen.

It's unworkable.

This is your daily reminder to stay on topic and not be distracted by certain posts. Merci.

20 minutes until the hearing starts again, just time to make a cuppa.

We should never have had a law that means someone can change their legal sex. It's the pebble in the pond and we are now all suffering from the ripples. It's an impossible concept to legislate over.

Human beings can't change sex, and saying they can legally, is making all sorts of assumptions over something that can't actually happen.

It's unworkable.

I agree, and Hansard shows that this was brought up at the time, but it was handwaved away because it would only ever apply to a few thousand medically transitioning people.

They made a mistake.

They made a mistake.

They did.

I noticed this little gem, presumably uttered by the QC?
"HL came to a different view. Lord Nicholls was reluctant to acknowledge that a man can literally become a woman. He was wrong about that "

It's not often one sees this claim made so openly - that a man literally becomes a women when they say they are.

Agreed, Datun, plus the ridiculous veil of secrecy over having a GRC.

Wouldn’t deliberate misgendering be the same as calling someone fat. It may be factual/biological but it’s rude and unnecessary in most situations, safeguarding and health reasons are exceptions. Both would come under bullying policy and rightly so.

Accidentally misgendering needs to be addressed differently. It can be very difficult, particularly as we get older (in my experience) and for those with additional needs. It’s really hard when it’s someone you’ve known a long time prior to transition but you don’t see often. Even more so if they appear still to be their birth sex.

No doubt women will be attacked more for accidental misgendering as we are seen as the “supportive sex” who should get it right. While it’s more expected from men to slip up.

I imagine that even if Maya wins this case, misgendering could still be considered to be harassment in the workplace (depending on the circumstances and if it's deliberate etc.)

This was specifically referred to and accepted in her skeleton argument:-

54.2(e) ...Thus, no doubt, deliberately addressing a colleague with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment using pronouns that do not correspond to their reassigned gender in circumstances where there is no good reason to do so would constitute direct discrimination and/or harassment. But to do so accidentally to a colleague someone has known for years as their biological sex and/or who still presents with many physiological characteristics of that sex would be unlikely to be unlawful conduct under the EqA10.

We've got bookmarking back on MN. This pleases my sense of order.

I'm finding it fascinating to see the legal equivalent of reciting the TWAW mantra over and over again in todays case live feed.

All they do is attack the player, Maya rather than the ball, why the lack of belief in GI theology is so beyond the pale that it is a thought crime for which people should be discriminated against.

It's not often one sees this claim made so openly - that a man literally becomes a women when they say they are.

I think the argument presented there is solely based on the GRA while studiously ignoring sex existing in any other context. One of those literally true but factually false statements.

Honestly I think the most likely thing to happen if people start being forced to use wrong-sex pronouns, when they've been used to using sex-based pronouns their entire life, is to not bother with pronouns at all and simply use names. Or just use 'they' all the time.

Especially if the penalty for getting it wrong is so high.

There are sex exemptions that can be applied, and should be applied in certain circumstances. However, thanks to the advice of some charities cough stonewall cough, the exemptions are poo pooed away.

So you have places that don't apply them, where they can and should because they've been led to believe at worst they're unlawful, and at best, just really really mean so they shouldn't.