Maya's judgement Thursday 10th June 10.30am

[Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g]

Wishing her the very best of luck. twitter.com/MForstater/status/1402310977115279362?s=20

I'll be absolutely gutted if the original decision isn't overturned, but at least her case has let a lot of sunlight in.

Aargh. I'm at work and can't keep up with this thread or any other Maya news today.

Can someone clarify for me?
As I understand it, today's ruling isn't a simple overturn of the original judgement. More that it gives Maya permission to have the tribunal heard again?

This is a good thing right? It means that the two sides have their cases heard in court again. However this time the arguments will receive much greater scrutiny and coverage in the media.

@lazylinguist

Actually I think that part is important too:

Not only is it worthy of respect, but it is also one that is consistent with the common law under which sex is regarded as binary and fixed at birth for the purposes of all legal provisions which make a distinction between men and women.

Well quite. The previous judgment seemed to be saying "We important lawmakers and doctors all know of course that sex is binary and unchangeable - for important stuff like law and medicine. But ordinary women being allowed to actually express that fact, even as an opinion? Nope. That's hateful and has no place in a civilised country. Why won't they just shut up and #BeKind?"

Absolutely.

Everyone knows that sex is binary. It's assumed all the time. Including by trans people. Otherwise what are they transitioning from and to?

We just have to shut up about it, when it comes to us utilising the exact same knowledge.

@GingerAndTheBiscuits

So gender dysphoria may be a disability? And TWAW is a philisophical belief?

Yep, that’s how I read it

So a mental health condition?

Obviously assuming that it goes Mayas way

The original judgment was that her belief was not protected, so she couldn't go on to the next stage to claim discrimination for that belief.

That judgment has been fully overturned - her belief is protected.

She can now go on to claim discrimination for that belief.

@ChazsBrilliantAttitude

Shedbuilder One possibility is belief. For example:- Transgender beliefs are also protected beliefs. So you can’t harass someone for believing TWAW and more than you can harass them for believing TWANW.

Thanks, yes, I understand that. I was wondering if it was likely to be referring to those who identify as Queer and Non-binary, and I thought that might rub up against another case, a while ago, in which I thought the judgment indicated that Q and NB was covered by gender reassignment. But I've probably remembered and got that all wrong.

Thinking like a lawyer isn't my strong point. (To put it mildly)

@MondayYogurt

I probably won't get an answer here but if a trans person alleges harassment via pronouns and is found in favour, then detransitions to natal gender, what happens to the ruling?

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that if such a case of pronouns was found to constitute harassment, then the judgement stands, because, well, harassment. If it doesn't then the issue doesn't arise.

I see, thanks NecessaryScene

@Toomie

Aargh. I'm at work and can't keep up with this thread or any other Maya news today.

Can someone clarify for me?
As I understand it, today's ruling isn't a simple overturn of the original judgement. More that it gives Maya permission to have the tribunal heard again?

This is a good thing right? It means that the two sides have their cases heard in court again. However this time the arguments will receive much greater scrutiny and coverage in the media.

I don't think she has had her main employment tribunal yet. It relied on her protected beliefs and that has only now been recognised in law.

The judgement says that you can not use your sincerely held beliefs to harass other people. I have no problem with that, and I don't think anyone else who thought about it would either.

So gender dysphoria may be a disability? And TWAW is a philisophical belief?

Yes. If gender dysphoria is a disability, then I using the transperson's preferred pronouns might be form a reasonable adjustment. With a philosophical belief, it's more complex as it would be wrong to force others to manifest that belief, but using gender neutral pronouns ought to suffice because then you are not constantly reminding your colleague that you think their belief is a liar of tosh, but you should not be forced to refer to your male colleague as "her" on the basis of their belief. That's my quick take anyway.

*load of tosh

This is a good thing right? It means that the two sides have their cases heard in court again. However this time the arguments will receive much greater scrutiny and coverage in the media.

Well, as the judge somewhat grumpily says at the end of this judgment - we shouldn't have been spending so long on the particulars of her case, or the details of her belief at this stage. The beliefs clearly pass the "Grainger" tests, and they shouldn't have been looking at her behaviour yet.

For GC people, it's this part of the judgment that's most important - the legal precedent. GC people are protected from discrimination for not believing TWAW, and that TWAM, and acting upon that. (As long as it doesn't stray into harrassment etc).

Whether Maya wins her individual discrimination case is less important generally, although obviously it's important to her and everyone here thinks she deserves it. That case will likely clarify some legal points about what does and doesn't "stray into harrassment". Where is the line, and did she cross it?

Brilliant news! Thank you Maya on behalf of me and my daughter

@IShouldBeSoLurky

Just saw someone on Twitter refer to MN as “Prosecco Stormfront” which to be fair is pretty funny.

Is there not a risk that such a description helps build the picture that GC beliefs are only held by privileged middle class women who have nothing to do but hang out on mumsnet, drink prosecco and abuse trans women?

What happens now?
Do we have to wait to hear what her decision is, next step is, re the case with her previous employers?

My ability to hang out on mumsnet was entirely facilitated by breastfeeding.

@nauticant

There are two Maya threads in the TRENDING NOW box.

Three now :)

Would not using preferred pronouns constitute "harassment" in a workplace I wonder.

Just managed to catch up with the verdict. Well done Maya!

I enjoyed this Twitter response to someone asking about the implications for trans people in the workplace:

The implications are for women's free speech and sex based rights in the work place. This might come as a surprise but not everything is about you.

news.sky.com/story/maya-forstater-woman-who-lost-job-over-transgender-views-wins-appeal-against-employment-tribunal-12329249

Well done.,

@CrumpetShaw

Would not using preferred pronouns constitute "harassment" in a workplace I wonder.

Almost certainly, yes

My ability to hang out on MN is due to no more than sheer laziness and lack of motivation on my part.