Mermaids versus LGB alliance in court today??

[GrabbyGabby]

www.theguardian.com/society/2022/sep/09/trans-charity-mermaids-appeal-lgb-alliance-status

Not sure if it is today or next week. Do we know if this is open like the tribunals?

It’s soooo satisfying listening to a genderist being forced to answer the questions that never get answered here. If a man with no GRC and no surgery (i.e. most men who identify as women) uses a women’s space or resource, is it still for women?

All the experts in this field must be very busy if they can't actually make it to any sort of case where they could present their expertise, meaning we're always left with the clowns.

Sadly nothing I could quite discern.

All the experts in this field must be very busy if they can't actually make it to any sort of case where they could present their expertise, meaning we're always left with the clowns.

And we are left to wonder how those clowns got into senior roles. Maybe it is just automatic if they can stay long enough....

This is what happens when people in public bodies are stupid enough to do cosy cups of tea off the record. Things are said in those private little chats that steer policy, and yet no one dares actually own them in public because they know that they are indefensible.

Which leads to absolute messes like this in court when they have to face reality and actual law and process.

I've always thought that too Necessary.
Where are all the well-spoken intelligent TRAs? They seem to send in the dregs of the barrel with their support dogs and mums a friends..

So either the cleverer ones are hiding away because they know they'll be publicly shamed, or, there just aren't any clever ones?

PR - I don't know about this but I accept that it might be happening but I don't know how frequently

Also PR: but it's unreasonable to be concerned about it

Because he believes that a male who states a feminine gender identity is now transubstantiated into being a female and no biological female could possibly be justified in objectively perceiving otherwise.

He has already been confronted with 'you do realise GC beliefs (that biology and sex exists separately regardless of gender identity and the right to perceive by sex AND say so) are protected?'

His answer: (paraphrased) yes, but I don't agree so don't recognise that.

So let's hear it. If he believes that a male is a female if he says so and expects that to be respected, what is he going to do with the females with different beliefs who do NOT perceive it and want and require single sex spaces where sex is a fixed unchanging fact since birth?

We're back to third spaces. And the need to realise that this belief is not the only one on the planet nor the top trump, and is actually going to have to accept that other people exist too.

So either the cleverer ones are hiding away because they know they'll be publicly shamed, or, there just aren't any clever ones?

I think there aren't any clever ones. At the intellectual "top" you've got people like Butler and Fausto-Sterling, but they're also incoherent.

But they are sensible enough to never let themselves get into a cross-examination/debate setting - they aim to preserve a sort of "mystique", where they are never forced to justify their proclamations from on high, or the consequences of them.

If anyone is interested, I found someone on the pro gender identity side also doing live tweets. There aren't a lot of comments, but it is interesting to see how the other people are viewing how this is going:
Vivian Wulf

But isn't it the case that even a man with a GRC turns a ss female space into a mixed sex space, because of the exceptions in the EA2010? I thought that was what Suella Braverman explicitly said. (I know that's not what Reindorf is saying, for good reasons.)

I've been following the tweets with my mouth open. Agog. So many WTF moments. At the very beginning, mermaids person is asked 'would you agree with the LGBA's charitable objectives if they agreed with your beliefs?' "YES'. So no problem with their charitable aims at all, it's just the fact they believe in heresy: that being gay has to do with sexual orientation, not genderist orientation.

I think what pisses me off the most about these people, is that they NEVER EVER answer questions. We've seen it happen here. But they won't even answer questions in court. Mermaids is asked perfectly straightforward questions like 'what does gay mean?', "what is a trans man?", "what does trans mean?" and they refuse to answer because the questions are 'too binary"(??) or 'it's complex'. The reality is they don't have answers to these questions, because it's all a load of bollocks.

Mermaids surely has to fail. It's quite clear now that the LGBA has their own views about what being gay means, and mermaids/stonewall has a very different view. And so the charities serve different members of the public with different beliefs. I'm bisexual and I don't agree that being bisexual means I'm attracted to 'more than one gender'. In fact, I find that idea offensive. I prefer the LGBA view that being bisexual means you are attracted to males and females: both sexes.

But what we are seeing here is Mermaids refuses to view this as two different ideas about the world, two different belief systems. They think that what they say is a moral truth, and if you disagree you are an evil bigot. It's exactly like a christian charity trying to shut down a muslim charity because they deny that Jesus is God, and that's 'bigoted'. Absolutely bonkers, and I hope the judge sees that.

It’s soooo satisfying listening to a genderist being forced to answer the questions that never get answered here.
This. It's glorious. Worth every penny of those donations. Is this chap from one of the parties to the case, or a witness for Mermaids side? More effective as witness for LGBA but I assume bringing witnesses to parody the other side's views is frowned on.

Reminds me of the game I used to play with my kids where they declared themselves invisible and I used to pretend I couldn’t see them. We gave it up after they were about seven years old and realised I could see them. Pity some of these men who declared themselves women don’t grow a bit and realise that biology is biology

Roberts is being invited to explain male lesbians and why it's wrong for actual lesbians to not want to date them.

So true. And when their explanations fall apart when exposed to the light of day, the minions blame themselves for not understanding or explaining properly, instead of seeing that the arguments/definitions themselves are simply incoherent.

I think it is a collective madness.

An entirely incoherent ideology where group membership means you have to go along with all of it or you are evil.

If it wasn't so batshit, it would be very interesting.

It's exactly like a christian charity trying to shut down a muslim charity because they deny that Jesus is God, and that's 'bigoted'. Absolutely bonkers, and I hope the judge sees that.

In a nutshell. This is pure religious intolerance.

Ooh, AR's raised the SW glossary of including 'cross dressers'.

Even if Anne Fausto-Sterling was willing to appear in court, I'd hope that Mermaids, which identifies as children's charity, would understand how inappropriate it would be to call her as a witness.

A F-S wrote speculating that babies born with conditions causing differences of sexual development (DSDs) could be popular as sexual partners. It comes across as fetishising the future of babies with complex medical conditions.

I just looked up this inept witness.

Paul became Chief Executive for Consortium in April 2011 and has over 18 years’ experience working in the LGBT+ voluntary sector.
Paul leads on the strategic direction of the organisation working with the staff team, board and Members to ensure Consortium stays community focussed and LGBT+ issues are listened to by a range of stakeholders, including Government and the wider voluntary sector.

www.consortium.lgbt/meet-the-team/paul-roberts/

I kid you not. He has been the CEO of the LGBT Consortium since 2011!

And he 'leads' strategic direction! How? He now should be terminated as he clearly doesn't know anything.

💯
Heresy must be rooted out.

Not to mention viewing the main purpose of a child as being to grow up to be useful in providing sexual pleasure. Words bloody fail. 😣

They can't possibly win this I don't think He can't answer the question.

Have you noticed how often Roberts simply cannot answer a question because there is language that he knows he is ideologically forbidden from using and he doesn't actually have any other words with which to give a meaningful answer?

This is a great example of Orwell's Newspeak.