Maya Forstater hearing starts Monday

[MForstater]

Hi all,

Thank you so much for all your support: emotional, intellectual, financial, spiritual(!) reading the Mumsnet feminism board is where this all started for me!

The case starts tomorrow.

It is all online. If you want to watch you need to email the tribunal for a log in to [email protected]

It kicks off at 10am - the first bit will be "admin" between the judges and the lawyers working out the timings, issues and any reporting restrictions .

Once that is all sorted the judge and the panel will go away to read (probably for the rest of Monday and all of Tuesday)

I will most likely give evidence Wednesday and Thursday.

@tribunaltweets will be tweeting the whole thing (assuming they get permission from the judge)

Links to papers will go up throughout the case at www.hiyamaya.net.

Any other questions I am happy to answer them (apart from the ones where I have to say "that is for the tribunal to hear"...)

I have made a spectators guide with FAQs etc here

Lots of love

Maya

Bill Gates is behind all of this! (He's a funder.)

@Sophoclesthefox

Fucking hellfire, they’ve jumped forward a few hundred years from channeling a witch trial and gone full Senator Joe McCarthy now 🤣

“Are you now, or have you ever been…a marxist, Ms Forstater?

I think CGD are full on McCarthyists in respect of anyone speaking against Gender Ideology, they have effectively dismissed Maya and made her unemployable for her beliefs, all hail the progressive, inclusive liberals, eh.

Absolutely, vest

It looks like Mark Plant is also an American. I'm beginning to wonder how much UK-based thinking went in to the decision-making.

OD's examination of LE is over already. It's as if they want him to say as little as possible in case the more that's said, the worse it'll get.

OD's implied that MF is a Marxist and started a straw man argument about someone who believes in evolution continually harassing work colleagues by telling them Jesus didn't rise from the dead after three days. Marxist! Atheist! We're playing to a US audience here.

OD is a bit silly, the evolutionists argument is that the World wasn't created in 6 days by God and, funnily enough, they've got the science to back it up.

Definitely playing to an American audience which is again rather silly as this is a UK Court.

@Pluvia

OD's examination of LE is over already. It's as if they want him to say as little as possible in case the more that's said, the worse it'll get.

OD's implied that MF is a Marxist and started a straw man argument about someone who believes in evolution continually harassing work colleagues by telling them Jesus didn't rise from the dead after three days. Marxist! Atheist! We're playing to a US audience here.

But ... wouldn't that be to frame one of these positions as being grounded in scientific fact, and the other one on a religious belief held only by a minority of the population?

I'm just not totally convinced OD's implication will give the judges the impression she hopes it will ...

It looks like Mark Plant is also an American. I'm beginning to wonder how much UK-based thinking went in to the decision-making.

Quantum Impact is also American. (sorry if that's already been mentioned).

We're playing to a US audience here.

I'm probably not seeing the bigger picture, but I can't see how that would be a massive disadvantage.

As long as Maya wins, it will have implications for everyone in this country. We do appear to be leading the world on unravelling this nonsense, so I can't see why it would be a bad thing that they're playing to a US audience, as long as it fucks them over here. And we can build on it.

AG said she watched at least some of LE's testimony. She's being very guarded in her replies, keeping them as brief as possible and not expanding much beyond that. So far.

@Pluvia

OD's examination of LE is over already. It's as if they want him to say as little as possible in case the more that's said, the worse it'll get.

OD's implied that MF is a Marxist and started a straw man argument about someone who believes in evolution continually harassing work colleagues by telling them Jesus didn't rise from the dead after three days. Marxist! Atheist! We're playing to a US audience here.

Not their US audience though. That's what's confusing. In liberal DC circles being conspiracy like about atheists and marxists is considered right wing and 'Trumpist'.

@Pluvia

Yes, what's the Marxism about? Is that so that the US audience can roll their eyes and say MF's a commie?

And now OD building a huge straw man (Jesus rising from the dead) — and the judge intervening... Not sure that went to plan.

What did the judge say?!

The issue I see about the US audience is that even if CGD lose, so far the way they have pursued their case can be presented to that audience as showing their moral purity, in other words, showing adherence the the correct beliefs is worth a lot to them even if they lose the case. The worst outcome would be their US audience perceiving them as showing any tolerance at all to "transphobia", even if they won the case.

IIRC the judge's comment was something to the effect that it was so lengthy that it lacked focus.

BC: [Names 2 collegues, one strongly atheist one strongly Christian]
BC: These 2 have had robust exchanges on religion
AG: Had not heard of this

BC: you would object to this?
AG: It's about the topics CGD works on and people's private views not coming into work
BC: that's not how London operated?
AG: not sure

Interesting - this is basically the difference in working culture between America and the UK in a nutshell.

I do find it odd that it's all US HR people/ senior staff in a UK ET.

US workplace laws, policies and culture are so different from ours. I know plenty of Brits that have worked over there and vice versa. You'd think the witnesses would have to be really read up on their UK laws and customs, but clearly not.

Generally we (UK) have laws that allow people to keep their jobs and it's really hard to get rid of them (even if they're not very good at their jobs...). In the US generally hiring and firing is much more frequent. Not saying either is the best policy - somewhere in between would be good - or that laws can't be 'gotten around', but unless you have experience with both it's hard to see the contrasts.

That’s my take as well Nauticant. It doesn’t matter if they lose because they will have sacrificed themselves on the alter of purity on the evil TERF island 🤪

nauticant
The issue I see about the US audience is that even if CGD lose, so far the way they have pursued their case can be presented to that audience as showing their moral purity, in other words, showing adherence the the correct beliefs is worth a lot to them even if they lose the case.

Not sure they've done so well. They may have toed the line on gender identity, but in doing so they've announced that racial self-id (if sincerely felt) is fine. That's not going to land well.

Agree with CharleyParley though that losing in European courts is an operational cost for some big American companies.

AG is a tough cookie. She's clearly used to being in charge. I'm amused by how she keeps trying to direct BC with regards to what should be looked at.

@Theeyeballsinthesky

That’s my take as well Nauticant. It doesn’t matter if they lose because they will have sacrificed themselves on the alter of purity on the evil TERF island 🤪

If that's the plan, it's very shortsighted.

The one thing that this ideology crumbles under is sunlight.

And there are certain things like sport, which extend across countries.

If we start to undo the damage of the ideology, other countries are going to have to address it.

Openly.

It is possible for a witness to be overly guarded. It really sets of the spidey sense in judges.

She's very defensive isn't she?

I was about to comment on the way she's parrying very effectively and saying as little as possible. But yes, Ben keeps putting to her clear yes or no questions and there comes a point when the constant avoidance sends a message all of its own.

Was there an alternative for CDG not to have gone to a tribunal at all? Having their dirty linen aired in public like this looks bad.

Could they have settled out of court, or whatever they call it for this kind of dispute? Or is that not an option?

They're just making themselves look dodgy.

It's a gritty struggle but overall BC is slowly winning this one.