Maya Forstater Tribunal March 2022- Thread 3

[Whatamesssss]

Thread one, here:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4498167-Maya-Forstater-hearing-starts-Monday

Thread two, here:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4505825-Maya-Forstater-Tribunal-March-2022-Thread-2?pg=1

[quote Chrysanthemum5]@HardyBuckette originally they were not going to be in tomorrow, however other schedules moved which allowed it to be a tribunal day[/quote]
Ah, cheers. Might try and get a login for tomorrow then.

@Awkwardy

Quantum Impact is a new non-profit organization on a mission to help globally-focused organizations build the most diverse and inclusive teams possible.

The most, you hear?

Are they still in business?

Handy list of all the unrolled live tweeting from this (and many other cases) by @tribunaltweets

threadreaderapp.com/user/tribunaltweets

Thanks to Tabby, also :) Stressful enough just watching!

Many thanks to everyone doing the updates.

'Are they [QI] still in business? '

No activity (that I can find) for some years, and founders are on LinkedIn in other roles.

@HellonHeels their website quantumimpact.org/ links to dodgy online casinos so if they are it's fair to say the business model isn't too successful

Thank you for thread 3 and for all the amazing work in reporting - I'm in awe. So much to catch up on!

This has been absolutely riveting. Thank you so much Tabby for your incredible real-time posting.

I am in the US. I just saw this article and thought I'd post here to give some context about the absolute zealotry gripping US academia and elite segments of society in general right now:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10622005/Police-called-deal-liberal-protesters-closed-Yale-Law-FREE-SPEECH-debate.html

Highlights:

Police were forced to escort the guest speakers from Yale Law School's free speech debate after more than 100 students intimidated the conservative panelist by yelling they would 'literally fight you, b*h' and caused a riot in the auditorium by blocking the hall's exits.

Miller was harangued ahead of the event by totalitarian students claiming her very presence at the event was 'harming the flourishing of queer lives,' with Waggoner and ADF supporters hit with threats at the meeting itself.

The protesters berated the speaker, chanting 'protect trans kids' and 'shame, shame' throughout the law school building after police officers escorted her and Miller out of the building.

[a letter signed by many of the students] alleged the protesters had been 'imperiled by the presence of police'.

'The danger of police violence in this country is intensified against Black LGBTQ people, and particularly black trans people,' the letter, which was obtained by the newspaper, read.

'Police-related trauma includes, but is certainly not limited to, physical harm. Even with all of the privilege afforded to us at YLS, the decision to allow police officers in as a response to the protest put YLS's queer student body at risk of harm.'

Others alleged the bullying began prior to the open letter, citing that some student activists littered the law school with flyers claiming attending the free speech panel was a bigoted act.

'Providing a veneer of respectability is part of what allows this group to do work that attacks the very lives of LGBTQ people in the U.S. & globally,' the flyers read.

'Through your attendance you are personally complicit, along with the Federalist Society, in platforming and legitimizing this hate group.'

Do we know when a decision is likely to be made?

Placemarking on this shiny new thread.

“It would be unkind to ask how that panned out” is today’s “he’s dead, Ben, you can stop now”

This is absolutely gripping! Thank you so much for those supplying the running commentary here.... Good luck, Maya!

@ThrowawayBerna

Handy list of all the unrolled live tweeting from this (and many other cases) by *@tribunaltweets*

threadreaderapp.com/user/tribunaltweets

Thanks to Tabby, also :) Stressful enough just watching!

Lovely, thank you!

BC: If we look ahead, we see email from you on 22 Feb that says there is some PR risk but in UK the PR risk could run in opposite direction. Reflects same divergence of views doesn't it?

MP: Y

BC: It would be unkind of me to ask how it's all panned out...

MP: No comment.

Anyone know why Masood Ahmed is a respondent as well as a witness? Is that because he was the senior leader who made the final decision about Maya's employment?

What are the potential implications for him if Maya wins?

But the 'no comment' from MP sounded like it was said with a smile (I was away from the screen but could hear the exchange)

There are a lot of people lurking on the Tribunal Tweets account. (screenshot taken from Twitter.)

Gah, screenshot didn't post so here's the twitter link. twitter.com/SVPhillimore/status/1504505381694943237?cxt=HHwWisC56YzrieEpAAAA

1.33M visits to tribunal tweets account, 14M twitter impressions!

That is a lot of views.

Just think of all that publicity for us! What do you mean, it looks bad?

Just caught up with today's happenings. Thank you everyone for commentary and updates.

Loving BC's snarky asides. He is now top guest on my fantasy dinner party list.

I have a free day tomorrow so looking forward to following in real time.

Heres a link to the QI report - hiyamaya.files.wordpress.com/2022/03/quantum-impact-internal-report.pdf

[quote MayaWasSackedForGCBeliefs]Heres a link to the QI report - hiyamaya.files.wordpress.com/2022/03/quantum-impact-internal-report.pdf[/quote]
Christ, I'd be asking for a refund considering how badly that advice has steered them.

I'd be asking for an IQ test.

[quote MayaWasSackedForGCBeliefs]Heres a link to the QI report - hiyamaya.files.wordpress.com/2022/03/quantum-impact-internal-report.pdf[/quote]
Wow. There can be few comparable occasions when one can so confidently exclaim, "Patronising much!?!" for the opening.

When QI started preparing for this report, we started from a position that this might not be Maya’s area of expertise and therefore she may not be familiar with the nuance of the debate and/or language that is considered offensive by the trans community and allies. However, in reviewing materials, we came to realize that Maya does know the subject matter well and is choosing her words and her arguments to achieve a specific outcome.

I have to wonder how the matter was represented to them that they were surprised that a researcher at a think tank had an expert knowledge of a controversial topic on which she was airing an opinion in public.

Based on Maya’s depth of knowledge of this topic, we believe that it will be highly counterproductive to discuss any specific tweets or comments and engage in a discussion of whether, why or how specific comments are disrespectful, contribute to a hostile work environment or are offensive to co-workers

While at the same time:

we found that the quality of Maya’s arguments are problematic - her blog includes poor citations, use of questionable sources, including citing the Daily Beast and weak citations, including pulling information - sometimes almost verbatim - from Wikipedia and a general lack of engagement with the authentic academic research around LGBTQ studies. When I consulted a colleague who chairs the LGBTQ studies for her university, she was surprised to learn that Maya was a researcher, and mentioned that she would be unlikely to seriously consider any scholarship coming from Maya’s employer based on the lack of academic rigor and weak argument structure from the blog (note: I did not share CGD or Maya’s name in this discussion.)

"In person, Maya has argued that the law is on her side. For example, she said that CEDAW recognizes women based on sex so we all have to. Maya again and again says that because laws around the world don’t necessary fully recognize and protect transgender individuals, that CGD cannot either. That’s just not true. CGD is a private organization and can do essentially what it wants. The definitions and requirements of CEDAW or any other international or national convention place floors, not ceilings on protecting basic human rights. Maya has also argued that the Equality Act in the UK does protect sex. It also explicitly protects transgender individuals."

How dare she argue the law is on her side. How dare she understand the Equality Act, a law in the country she is actually from...