Forstater judgment tomorrow

[achillestoes]

In case we hadn’t had enough drama.

Good luck, Maya.

When engaging in debate on a matter of public interest, such as sex and gender, it is also not objectively unreasonable to express support for material that uses the tools of political campaigning or advertising to enhance its message, or to engage on social media in ways that (provided it is not taken too far) involve mocking or satirising the opposing view: such is “common currency of debate” in a democratic society;

That's an interesting one. You're allowed to take the piss, as long as it's not too ott ?

That's great news

Maya Forstater, today:

“We are all free to believe whatever we wish. “What we are not free to do is compel others to believe the same thing, to silence those who disagree with us or to force others to deny reality.”

Amen.

Finest mealworms only, dahling 😁

Just finished reading the judgement - some really good stuff. And in pretty much every instance of different views being expressed by Maya and Ben and the Respondents, the Tribunal agreed with Maya and Ben's evidence/argument. A brilliant day for free speech in the workplace (and elsewhere).

I have been wondering this also, particularly regarding trade unions. There seems to have been a fairly concerted attempt to silence gender critical members in some unions with the implication that the union would not support gender critical members who were disciplined / sacked as a result of their views (or for expressing these views). Surely the decision in Maya's case means that any employer acting in such a way - where there has been no harassment, for example, of another employee - would be discriminating against the GC employee as would the union if it refused to support the employee because of a protected belief?

Some interesting points made in these tweets:

twitter.com/JonHolb/status/1544689407290216448?cxt=HHwWgMC8nZ616-8qAAAA

'Maya Forstater’s victory goes further than this as the principles applied by the Tribunal weren’t confined to protecting gender critical beliefs

'Her victory shows how beliefs in general are protected.

'Belief discrimination is outlawed & is as bad as race/sex discrimination.'

'Key passage is where Tribunal applies the view that:

'beliefs may well be profoundly offensive & even distressing to many others, but they are beliefs that are & must be tolerated in a pluralist society' (para 283).

'ie it's prob unlawful 2sanction politically offensive views!'

This is wonderful news! Well done Maya - and thank you.

Happy days. Maya is legendary!

Well now that the law on it is clear Mumsnet should relax their rules.

Congratulations Maya, what a total legend you are!

Hurrah!

Maya is a 21st Century suffragette, she battled for all women and won. I'm doing the happy dance around my lounge and will be opening a bottle to celebrate later.

Maya you're a LEGEND!

Its a huddle

Why is it called a huddle?

In 1894, the Gallaudet football team was playing against another deaf team. Paul Hubbard, the quarterback didn't want to risk the other team seeing him using ASL to explain the play to his teammates, so he asked them to form a tight circle formation, now known as a huddle.

Anyways, Maya, the bestest news ever. Well done for holding on for these years. And thank you.

I'm so so relieved.

Yes it means there may be views coming out at work that I don't agree with, and that's not always going to be easy. I mean, that's happened plenty of times already in my life and it's not nice. But at least I am protected from getting sacked because of my legitimately expressed views.

I won't forget what it feels like to feel women under attack because they see a male person as a male person. The extraordinary reality that our defence was that we held the strange and extreme belief that sex is immutable and real. I mean, it still blows my mind.

Off topic, but the latest Jesus 'n' Mo cartoon is as applicable to gender woo as it is to religious beliefs: whyevolutionistrue.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/effort.png

It looks like people are being lead to believe that compliance in this area of equality law is a massive minefield that no one can understand except stonewall.

It is also now hard to miss that when Stonewall get to court, not only can they not coherently demonstrate understanding of it to anyone else in a way that relates to actual existing law, they look incoherent to the point of slightly unhinged, and they turn out to be wrong.

The Guardian has covered the story, but not as news. It's in the lifestyle section, sub-section money, sub-sub-section careers, i.e. in a backwater of the site, and with comments turned off.

I don't have anything to add apart from WOOOOOOOOOT!!! Well done, Maya and team!

Sharing the #IStandWithMaya hashtag on my social media two years ago got me denounced as a bigot, blocked, and one-star reviews magically appearing on my product website. So today is particularly joyous for me. (Has JKR tweeted yet? ;) )

This should also nicely bugger up a whole lot of recorded 'hate incidents'. I'm sure Fair Cop are all over that one.

Just seen this in the news. Fantastic!

Just wanted to share this. Alex has an A level in law, Sarah Phillimore has a great come back.

Amazing!

Hallelujah! Congratulations Maya. Thank you! 😊 🥰😍🤩. A victory for women and girls 🙌 👏

A level in law 😂😂😂😂