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

and you can think what you like about trans people but, you still just have to treat them as you have been doing with respect.

The ruling was actually that women and men who are gender critical are protected under exactly the same protection from discrimination and harassment that people who believe in gender identity ideology are.

Whether an individual action, on either side, which could be perceived as discrimination or harassment towards either gender critical women advocating for sex based rights, or people with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment would be judged by the facts and argument of the individual case.

This judgement was about Maya’s rights, not about those of her imaginary transgender co worker. Her beliefs are protected, and her right to continue her employment while holding those beliefs has been clarified.

This.

Several recent cases that involve Twitter would indicate that you can not. Likewise the recent appeal from police in Bristol for a street incident involving misgendering language would suggest that they would disagree with you.

I said as much as I like.

I am not on Twitter and consider people directly addressing in arguments there about their sex puerile and pointless and as awful as insulting anyone in the street. It seems a lot of people consider directly calling a TW a man is fighting for women's rights. I don't, it's a lot of pointless attacks.
These are not thing I like to do.

It seems a lot of people consider directly calling a TW a man is fighting for women's rights.

I've not seen much along those trite lines so it's interesting that's your impression is of "a lot of people."

Place marking with popcorn.

It seems a lot of people consider directly calling a TW a man is fighting for women's rights.

Does it. I think you're somewhat disingenuously missing why out it's considered important by many women to retain the ability to acknowledge people's biological sex, and why campaigns around that might indeed be considered women's rights campaigns.

You are protected in your belief in much the same way that flat earth believers, anti-vaxers, race realists and others are.

Yes, exactly the same applies to gender identity ideology.

Are there really people who still believe Conservative voters only live in the Home Counties? No wonder we have a Tory government with an 80-odd majority. I suggest statsgeek1 that you do justice to your user name, find a map and look up Blyth, Bassetlaw, Redcar, Bolsover, Leigh, Mansfield, Rother. Valley and now Hartlepool.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

It seems a lot of people consider directly calling a TW a man is fighting for women's rights.

Does it. I think you're somewhat disingenuously missing why out it's considered important by many women to retain the ability to acknowledge people's biological sex, and why campaigns around that might indeed be considered women's rights campaigns.

And yet this is the fundamental point of Maya's defence.

Good point, Floisme though I expect statsgeek was trying not to think about that.

And yet this is the fundamental point of Maya's defence.

I didn't say, essentially, it wasn't. Sex matters.

Not sure what your point is? You disagree? Great, it's a free country. Her belief and your lack of belief are both protected as they should be.

@PearPickingPorky

I’m really looking forward to seeing how her employers are going to play this one: having exerted themselves so much to prove that her beliefs are wholly unacceptable and that just her holding them is enough for her to be let go, they will now have to pivot and make those beliefs so unremarkable and bland that they didn’t in fact let her go for manifesting those beliefs, but for something completely different and hitherto unexplained...or that she manifested those acceptable beliefs so vilely that she created a hostile environment for transgender people at her work who don’t even exist 😱

Oh, that sounds like a difficult argument to make, doesn't it.

Perhaps they'll just settle. This whole thing has been embarrassing enough for them (among the non-extremist vast majority of the population).

I have admired maya's strength hugely throughout this. I know the huge swell of support, especially from JK Rowling, must have been encouraging but at the end of the day she was just a normal lady, living a normal life, trying to make ends meet. Now suddenly she has become this public figure and so much rests on her. She is pulled apart publicly and lied about and vilified - the fight must be exhausting. The criticism must be so hurtful, but she never shows it.

Although I really hope and wish this continues to the next legal stage, I would not blame maya if she wanted to settle and get on with the rest of her life.

And that's the worst part. It should never have been this hard. No one should never have had to fight so hard for something so fundamental.

Same with Allison Bailley and God bless her for her strength in the face of all this. I hope she takes Stonewall down. I hope it all becomes very public and anyone who influenced this issue away from serving the needs of a small group of vulnerable people is held to account...

But somehow, I don't think it will. No one will interview maya or Allison on a large platform like the BBC, politicians and the media will just turn their backs and pretend it never happened and will get away with all the harm they have caused.

The Christian bakers were allowed to refuse to write a pro gay marriage slogan on a cake. Can I similarly be allowed to refuse to refer to a biologically male person with female pronouns? And if so, how would I then refer to that person, supposing I were to work with them, in a way they didn’t feel constituted harassment, and I didn’t feel constituted coercion?

Yes. I think you ought to be able to refer to them using gender neutral pronouns or by name (eg "Stephanie said... Then they told me that... Then Stephanie asked if I could get X for them."). It's a little clunky but it works. Stephanie might be unhappy that you are not using their preferred "she/her" pronouns, but it's a suitable compromise in my opinion.

@TinselAngel

It reminds me of the criticism of Stonewall, ie that they've been giving advice based on how they want the law to be rather than how it actually is.

Yep. The TRAs always (with a slight delay) take our arguements and rehash them. It's Darvo,. Which in massive twist of irony is an accusation they also appropriated and turned on us.

Hear hear, rabbitwoman. Maya’s courage and fortitude has been amazing, as indeed has JK Rowling’s.

And the outrageous bias is something I hope will be fully exposed and condemned with the passage of time. Along with the hateful misogyny I believe it is all based on.

I would not blame maya if she wanted to settle and get on with the rest of her life

I wouldn’t either. I shouldn’t be flip about any of this, because the impact it must have had on her life is immense. I am happy to be part of her human shield though, and keep on holding the line on what did and did not happen in this case, no matter how people try to misrepresent it.

She’s been amazing, and has played a blinder.

@YourSexNotGenderIsOnFire

The Christian bakers were allowed to refuse to write a pro gay marriage slogan on a cake. Can I similarly be allowed to refuse to refer to a biologically male person with female pronouns? And if so, how would I then refer to that person, supposing I were to work with them, in a way they didn’t feel constituted harassment, and I didn’t feel constituted coercion?

Yes. I think you ought to be able to refer to them using gender neutral pronouns or by name (eg "Stephanie said... Then they told me that... Then Stephanie asked if I could get X for them."). It's a little clunky but it works. Stephanie might be unhappy that you are not using their preferred "she/her" pronouns, but it's a suitable compromise in my opinion.

Thanks.

In honesty, it even causes me deep distress and offence to use a female first name for someone I know to be male (in the context where that name is being used to claim that person is actually a woman), as it is still demanding that I be complicit in a denial of reality and with my own oppression, so it’s not a complete solution but it’s a workaround, such as is often employed here.

The judgement also includes this attached section:

Thanks very much for that, Fallingirl, I hadn’t seen that and that’s really helpful to know.

@NotBadConsidering

What do I think the judge inferred? It seems he said that you can believe what you like as long as it it doesn't hit the threshold of Nazism. a reasonably high bar to be fair.

And the judge said believing in biological reality is in “no way” equivalent to Nazism or totalitarianism.

You are protected in your belief in much the same way that flat earth believers, anti-vaxers, race realists and others are.A protected belief but, not one that is to be any more than tolerated.

How very sneaky, to equate biological reality with science denial, when the opposite is true. It’s not gender critical beliefs that deny science, that’s for sure .

If you want to continue this analogy, if I am adamant that the Earth is in fact an oblate spheroid, and a Flat Earther is upset by that, is my protection shaky because of the discomfort I’ve created in that Flat Earther?

Perhaps he wasn't confident that MF and co would be able to resist misrepresenting what was said, who knows?

Ooh, a bit more sneakiness, slurring Maya with a speculative shrug. You are naughty.

Sadly, It's a shame to see so much money being spent in recent weeks in our courts with an outcome that suggests that, it isn't legal to blanket ban trans people from single sex services (the unreported AEA) and you can think what you like about trans people but, you still just have to treat them as you have been doing with respect. (MF)

Yes it is sad that a woman had to go to court to demonstrate biological facts are worthy of a reasonable society. Utterly bonkers that anyone thinks differently. Robin Moira White clearly does, and wrote as such in the article about which this thread is about, but Robin hasn’t explained how they erred.

And again a sneaky slur on Maya, suggesting she didn’t treat people with respect originally. Of course you can quote what she said that was disrespectful?

Meanwhile, whilst everyone is fighting amongst themselves, the Tories are stripping vital funding from the services that protect the vulnerable.

But thankfully, due to campaigning, legal cases, hard work and challenges, the Tories have no plans to further strip protections from vulnerable women, whereas the Labour Party would do so in a jiffy were they elected tomorrow (Ha!). This is important, unless you don’t think protecting vulnerable women and women’s rights is important of course.

I know if you live in Surrey or the Home Counties that there is a good chance you will support the likes of Truss and Boris et.al but, if not, ask yourself, what do their plans mean for you?

Interesting reverse snobbery, assuming that only those comfortable, middle class Tory voters are concerned about this, and working class people living in the rest of the country should be worried about other stuff. “Oi! Working class people! You’re not supposed to care about THAT, you’re supposed to care about THIS you mindless idiots! Vote for us!”

And people wonder why the Labour Party is struggling 😆.

So what do you think about what Robin wrote and how the judgment shows that Robin was wrong to write that in the Independent?

Fantastic post, NotBad. Brava.

suggest ....that you do justice to your user name

I love that. Surely great life advice for all.

In honesty, it even causes me deep distress and offence to use a female first name for someone I know to be male (in the context where that name is being used to claim that person is actually a woman), as it is still demanding that I be complicit in a denial of reality and with my own oppression, so it’s not a complete solution but it’s a workaround, such as is often employed here.

I do too, particularly in cases where it’s very clear that individual is not treating women with respect. I often use surnames, in that event. My conscience genuinely troubles me otherwise and ignoring that leads directly to bad feelings and poorer mental health.

@Sophoclesthefox your mentioning 'happy to be part of her human shield' made me think of the last Harry Potter book, when during the Battle of Hogwarts, a character points at Harry and shouts 'There he is! Hand him over!' (Slight paraphrase by me) and rows and rows of students stand up to provide a protective barrier and to show their support of him. I feel like that - happy to hold the line.

In honesty, it even causes me deep distress and offence to use a female first name for someone I know to be male (in the context where that name is being used to claim that person is actually a woman), as it is still demanding that I be complicit in a denial of reality and with my own oppression, so it’s not a complete solution but it’s a workaround, such as is often employed here.

I get what you mean although I remind myself that masculine/feminine names are purely a gender construct rather than sex thing. It's the sex-based rights I'm really concerned about. If we could just regain the ability to recognise that someone is biologically male and refer to it in situations where it is relevant, then any male would welcome to whatever aspects of femininity that they like as far as I'm concerned.

There was that recent US case where the professor was allowed to refer to the trans student by their surname rather than their recently adopted feminine name. I'm not convinced the U.K. courts would take the same approach though in a work or education setting though.

In honesty, it even causes me deep distress and offence to use a female first name for someone I know to be male

Imagine how it feels for trans widows.

[quote Waitwhat23]@Sophoclesthefox your mentioning 'happy to be part of her human shield' made me think of the last Harry Potter book, when during the Battle of Hogwarts, a character points at Harry and shouts 'There he is! Hand him over!' (Slight paraphrase by me) and rows and rows of students stand up to provide a protective barrier and to show their support of him. I feel like that - happy to hold the line.[/quote]
sniffs

Beautiful.

I agree.