Would anyone mind if I ask a question about Robin Moria White?

[rabbitwoman]

I am sure she won't mind because she used to come here often to plug her book as the definitive guide to trans law.

I just wondered if it might need considerable editing after yesterday? As it will now have to take into account the judgement in Maya Forstater 's case?

Just to add, I had not read a huge amount about Maya. I had read Robin's piece in the independent and thought that it seemed maya was transphobic, and had behaved in a dreadful way.

But I have read all about it in the past few weeks and read the whole judgement yesterday and it's taken my breath away that Robin has not been even reprimanded for what she wrote. Why not?

www.google.com/search?q=robin+moira+white+forstater&oq=robin&aqs=chrome.0.69i59l3j69i57j69i60.2312j0j7&client=ms-android-vf-gb-revc&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

... Sorry, that link above is not right, here is the piece by white...

www.google.com/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/voices/maya-forstater-rowling-trans-b1838137.html%3famp

Robin has not been even reprimanded

Reprimanded by whom and for what?

Op-Eds and opinion pieces don't attempt to be accurate for the most part - they're polemic. It is unfortunate when they're accepted as factual or accurate and this tends to happen when people have a relevant qualification in the subject-matter that is the topic of that piece.

By and large, I would like public figures and politicians to be accountable for disinformation and misinformation. I embrace the related difficulties.

Previous thread about that Independent piece: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4230369-Maya-Forstater-is-entitled-to-her-views-but-anti-transgender-beliefs-don-t-belong-in-the-workplace

[quote EmbarrassingAdmissions]Previous thread about that Independent piece: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4230369-Maya-Forstater-is-entitled-to-her-views-but-anti-transgender-beliefs-don-t-belong-in-the-workplace[/quote]
Oh, thank you, I had looked and looked and it had eluded me.

Keep reading the judgement 👍.

The book won't help.

I was wondering what had happened with this book as RMW was shilling for it relentlessly a few weeks ago.

Has it been held back or has it been a damp squib?

No idea

It says you can read the first chapter for free here www.lawbriefpublishing.com/product/transgenderlaw/

It's "All about trans" 🙄

Prof Alex Sharpe at Warwick has also got some opinions that are at odds with the Maya judgement.

I am looking forward to seeing this all settle into a comfortable place.

Chapter 18 is probably out of date now.

Is this the person who once said that GC women are like concentration camp guards? They remind me of Alex Jones.

@Melroses

Chapter 18 is probably out of date now.

I wonder how many of the 318 pages make up this chapter that they now have to remove and replace with one page with one word that says “yes”?

Chapter Eighteen – Are Gender-Critical Views a Protected Belief?

Waffle waffle waffle, Maya is transphobic, blah blah blah, waffle…more waffle, pages and pages of a chapter, more waffle, lies about what Maya actually said, blah blah, waffle Yes.

Chapter 19

😆😆

That independent piece has got me so angry not least because I know someone who did not really know about Forstater, read this and only this and now refuses to believe any other version.

They would not believe White would out and out lie and get it published in main street press. It didn't matter what I said the reply was 'you are wrong, I read it in the Independent!'

R White is one of the counsel acting for Stonewall in Allison Bailey’s case against them, and tried to engage Allison in discussion on Twitter.

twitter.com/bluskyeallison/status/1391400015424282625?s=21

It has amazed me that this behaviour has gone unchecked - has it been unchecked?

I think running this opinion piece in The independent with its huge and obvious flaws was bad enough, but then add to it that white is counsel for Stonewall in a really significant upcoming case? Not only that, the Forstater case is going to directly inform the outcome of the Bailey case?

We talk on here about conspiracy theories sometimes and I always write them off. I am beginning to wonder.....

And we always say that one of the reasons noone really believes there is a problem is because when we tell them what the problems are they sound like utter lunatic ramblings of conspiracy theories!

The barrister of the Bailley case was allowed to write absolutely outrageous innaccuracies about the Forstater case and it was published in The Independent, the she contacted Bailley on twitter..... Sounds so ridiculous, and hard to believe....

You know someone who assumes it must be correct because it appeared in The Independent??

It seems to be fairly common for there to be a hierarchy of what sources can be trusted and what can't.

At the top is the BBC. followed by papers like the guardian, the independent, the Times..... With the daily mail firmly at the bottom.

I always recommend channel 4 news. And I read the mirror. Which has never printed a single word about the JK Rowling trans debate.....

@rabbitwoman

It has amazed me that this behaviour has gone unchecked - has it been unchecked?

I think running this opinion piece in The independent with its huge and obvious flaws was bad enough, but then add to it that white is counsel for Stonewall in a really significant upcoming case? Not only that, the Forstater case is going to directly inform the outcome of the Bailey case?

We talk on here about conspiracy theories sometimes and I always write them off. I am beginning to wonder.....

And we always say that one of the reasons noone really believes there is a problem is because when we tell them what the problems are they sound like utter lunatic ramblings of conspiracy theories!

The barrister of the Bailley case was allowed to write absolutely outrageous innaccuracies about the Forstater case and it was published in The Independent, the she contacted Bailley on twitter..... Sounds so ridiculous, and hard to believe....

Surely this goes against a code of conduct or something?

I can't imagine what this has not been flagged up as an outrageous conflict of interest.

And as a barrister, and author of such an esteemed book, surely White would know that. I think we are seeing a manifestation of eustress - the opposite of destress - where you have continued to get away with bad behaviour for so long that you become incredibly confident that you will get always get away with it and become more and more audacious.....

(great word. I have been waiting for the perfect occasion to use it since I first heard it. I hope I got it right!)

But, gahhhh, I could not even soe distress properly!)

*spell

Sheeeesh!

Must be awkward in the office as Anya Palmer and Ben Cooper QC are from the same chambers as RMW. They seem to be in a different league when it comes to legal expertise though.
RMW totally fails to see why any woman would be uncomfortable about sharing spaces with them. There is never even an attempt to see things from women’s perspective.
I too will be getting the popcorn out and read Alex Sharpe’s opinions. Must be tough for them now their empire is toppling.

www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1913715663/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_glt_fabc_7BNAPPM70ET0W7R4SMSS?tag=mumsnetforu03-21

Robin's book is still available on Amazon... seems to be lacking any reviews, though. I wonder if the people reading it were waiting for Maya's judgement to come through. After all, if harassing a person for.their pro-trans views is wrong, harassing someone for their pro-female views is wrong now. That's only fair....

I should think that's what they are really arsey about.

I may be reading the wrong sources but I am almost certain more people have lost work for their GC views than for being transgender. I may be wrong, but would definitely risk betting on it.