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

BC: QI also said all objection to self-id = prejudice. Not impartial. Not right people to investiage
MP: don't know

BC: MF says one consultant said yes but then they couldn't call themselves lesbians becsause that must include transwomen. Isnt' that denying people's identity?
MP: Don't know

Just a couple from tribunal tweets, BC is on fire!!

This exact argument is being made on another Mumsnet thread right now.

And another one!

BC: When you got claimant's statement, did you investigate QI consultants for saying things that challenge other people's reality and identity?

MP: No we did not

In a month BC is up against Stonewall.

Did he just say that he did tell her that her tweets had alienated people at HQ and her VPship wouldn't be renwed?

I thought earlier he'd said he didn't recall.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

In a month BC is up against Stonewall.

I hope this is giving Allison Bailey even more confidence.

The discussion now is that the QI report was not based on the actual facts they were supposed to reporting on, continual misinterpretations of what MF said.

BC is getting all the GC points into this - brilliant work!

10 minute break and then to return to discuss the timetable for tomorrow.

@nauticant

The discussion now is that the QI report was not based on the actual facts they were supposed to reporting on, continual misinterpretations of what MF said.

CGD is unable to refute this every time its raised!

@nauticant

I did think it was best to leave EM off my list.

Witch-finder General

Thank you to tabby and everyone else on this thread. It is proving an excellent distraction for me from other anxiety-inducing worries.

Can anyone give me a 2 liner about what the AB v Stonewall case is about?

CGD is unable to refute this every time its raised!

To misrepresent what has been said is really the only way to make the GC position to appear bigoted and unreasonable. It's why we constantly have people on here lying that Maya was distributing leaflets at work or that Maya was misgendering and bullying people in the work place.

Thank you Tabby and team, mucho apprecioso.

I think Maya & her defence are missing a key point.

It doesn't matter if she was issuing leaflets or not... nor does it matter the actual the contents of any blog she might recommend reading. Some people feel that she did and that is the key point their feelings about what Maya did are the actual reality as feelings and reality are the same. Don't you see best beloved ?

Another who's grateful, if a little surprised, to hear BC referring to the actual issues facing women and lesbians as a result of the GI onslaught on their rights. I didn't envisage talk of penises and lesbian dating preferences, but it's good to hear it being said out loud in a British court.

@TeenPlusCat AB is a barrister and her chambers kept work from her (probably due to Stonewall's inteference) after she became publically GC

CGD are learning that if you outsource to an ideologically-driven consultancy company to come back with the answer "burn the witch", if matters go to court it doesn't get you off the hook. The consultancy company do manage to scuttle away with their consultancy fees though.

@Findwen

I think Maya & her defence are missing a key point.

It doesn't matter if she was issuing leaflets or not... nor does it matter the actual the contents of any blog she might recommend reading. Some people feel that she did and that is the key point their feelings about what Maya did are the actual reality as feelings and reality are the same. Don't you see best beloved ?

I assume you're being ironic — otherwise you would be arguing against freedom of speech.

No one has the right to live a life free of offence or to live in a bubble where only people who agree with them are allowed to speak.

Anyone out there, if you are thinking about hiring diversity consultants, this case will make you think verrrrryyy carefully about your due diligence.

Little hint for you, if they suggest lesbians who dont do dick are lesbians, run a fucking mile.
I wonder how much they charged for that little nugget?

Thank you drwitch

I think the fact that QI's report says Maya did things when she did not does highlight again (if it were needed) that this was a witch hunt rather than a fair procedure. It shows CGD (and those they appointed) to be bigoted and biased, which surely is important in an unfair dismissal case?

New thread will be needed quite soon!