Maya Forstater Tribunal March 2022- Thread 2

[Sophoclesthefox]

Forgive the presumption, @Mforstater, but you’re probably busy in the pub right now, or passing on all of the fan mail to you legal team so I’ve made a new thread to carry on the fascinating discussion.

Round up your cats, rabbits and weasels, and let’s go!

——————————————————————————————

From thread one, here: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4498167-Maya-Forstater-hearing-starts-Monday

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 hmm.

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

Adjourned.

Adjourned till 10am tomorrow.

Thank you Tabby!

This will make an excellent podcast series with dramatisation of the key court exchanges.

Phew! tabby, you're not familiar with "pencils", are you?
Sterling work.

God what duplicitous weaselry there

tabby - 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

Thank you TABBY!

Thanks Tabby I've been catching up while travelling

Two things strike me. If they wanted to avoid reputational damage they should have avoided going to hearing. They come across badly and frankly slippery with what appears to be attempts to re write history.

Second, what's the point of a think tank which doesn't think

@nauticant

"the pleadings which we can assume were carefully drafted"

miaow

The number of 'mistakes' made by CGD suggests they are incompetent at drafting anything, not a good look for an organisation such as theirs one would have thought.

Did we find out what this new evidence that CGD suddenly found and wanted to disclose was?

If I were a Judge I wouldn't allow it, it's sharp practice, they had more than enough time for disclosure and if they aren't competent enough to have found and disclosed it in time, tough.

Well done tabby go have a nice or

@RoaringtoLangClegintheDark

God what duplicitous weaselry there

Harry Frankfurt's On Bullshit comes to mind on the point of whether the witnesses today believed what they were saying or if it's irrelevant to them because they needed to create answers to protect themselves and the organisation.

Essay here: www2.csudh.edu/ccauthen/576f12/frankfurt__harry_-_on_bullshit.pdf

Are we circling back to LE's perspective on the sincerity of an espoused belief or identity as the clincher rather than plausibility or material reality?

Thanks so much tabby.

Utterly gripping.

Thank you so much Tabby!!

From reading Maya's witness statement, Mark Plant didn't come out too badly. He came across as having his hand forced by decisions made by senior personnel in the Washington office. I'm honestly not sure why he's agreed to be a witness for CGD - he's going to look ridiculous, because he'll have to defend positions he didn't appear to support at the time.

Brilliant and valuable work tabby, thank you.

(On the FPFW flyer, the hand always reminded me of Dastardly from Whacky Races.)

Top work, tabby. Thank you so much.

Thank you so much @tabbycatstripy, that is magnificent work!

I’ve finally caught up now, and again there’s so much to digest today.

On the grant application, I don’t believe for a second that there was any error in Maya being assigned as an employee. Staff costs would be far and away the most major cost of the project, wouldn’t they? Beggars belief you’d get that line item wrong, really.

They do seem keen to be seen as incompetent rather than malicious which is understandable given where they are, of course.

MP indicated several times that he didn't have an issue with Maya's opinions. It struck me that there was so much more pressure on the women to demonstrate their TWAW belief while men could just kinda shrug about it.

Tabby, I have no idea how you do what you do. Amazing ability. Thank you.

No problem, everyone!

For me, he's the first witness who doesn't come across as an outright fool. He's still shady.

His job seems to be to try to undermine the case that it was the substance of her beliefs, rather than the expression and the workplace issues in managing that, that made it untenable to continue the relationship. He doesn't seem to have a strong view on sex and gender.

Thank you muchly tabby, it has been such an interesting thread 🤨

And thank you. :)

They do seem keen to be seen as incompetent rather than malicious

It's incredible that it's come to this, isn't it? A global think tank, feigning incompetence because the real motivation behind their actions is unjustifiable. Especially when that same motivation lies behind innumerable under-the-radar changes of policy and legislation in government departments, sporting bodies, organisations, businesses, etc etc. all over the world.

I wonder how many times the it was a mistake, it was an error has been used by CGD, this is supposed to be a professional company, they do funding applications as a matter of course, they know how to do them. They look incompetent at best.

@VestofAbsurdity

I wonder how many times the it was a mistake, it was an error has been used by CGD, this is supposed to be a professional company, they do funding applications as a matter of course, they know how to do them. They look incompetent at best.

It's laughable

I think MP was correct to lay more emphasis on the smooth functioning of the office rather than arbitrating on whose beliefs are right or WORIADS. It’s much more understandable. Plays better.

Fortunately for us, LE and AG were more than happy to take the less understandable approach

It does play better for him personally. I think the question has to be, though, why didn't they view those 'organising opposition' as also a disruption to the smooth workings of the office? Where were their reprimands and cancelled contracts?