SHahrar Ali is taking the Green party to court

[Igneococcus]

Over "fanatical clampdown on legitimate debate"
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/1cd0a19a-3e7b-11ee-87d9-ff29f95b54f7?shareToken=743d9060f8ee7dda519c50fb93882b73

I heard the BBC mention Shahrar Ali’s case in the headlines earlier on today, I forget when, maybe the 1pm news. I was pleased to see some proper reporting for once. But when I looked for a report on their website, annoyingly there’s nothing.

Joan Smith wrote an article for Unherd yesterday.https://unherd.com/thepost/green-partys-trans-court-case-is-a-sign-of-things-to-come/

An article about what's likely to happen in court on Wednesday from the Green Light.
https://thegreenlight.blog/2023/08/22/stonewalls-definition-of-transphobia-finally-challenged-in-court/

'This trial is not just about the machinations of a clique captured by the ideology of identity politics and running a sect whilst pretending to be a democratic political party, it may indeed mark a turning point in reinstating the right to Free Speech for members of all political parties within our parliamentary democracies. And restore academic freedom in the process.'

From Joan Smith's article:

'Ali was sacked last year as the Greens’ spokesman on policing and domestic safety after he was accused of breaking the party’s code of conduct. He was told that his “decision to champion a highly controversial position in the trans rights debate” was incompatible with the role. His offence? Arguing that sex is immutable, an opinion shared by most human beings who have ever lived.'

Also, I did not know Shahrar is a Dr and teaches philosophy, politics and ethics. Very apt.

https://www.bbk.ac.uk/our-staff/profile/8005449/shahrar-ali#business-and-community

I think I did a bit of gardening for this before but have planted a few more seeds this week.

Wishing Shahrar success with this trial. Thank you OP and others for updating.

I wonder if it'll help the members of the Labour Party, some of whom seem to have been expelled for being socialists.

'sex ballsed rates aren't contrary to party policy'

Took me far too long to work out that should probably be 'sex-based rights'!

Amazingly, the whole of this West societal shit show is based on a typo which got to the meeting.

"Men cannot become women" had a small missprint in the second word. We've been paying for those three extra letters ever since

Another brave GC person going public and bringing a case- with all that entails for personal public hassle- so thank you. Wishing this case every success

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1694331092596105447.html

1st part
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1694269156261351601.html

3rd part
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1694363523638280209.html

Thanks, Bore.

BBC coverage actually a pretty fair article:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66585309?

The attempt to portray SA as some kind of GCrit based takeover merchant on day 2 was pretty unconvincing.

Shahrar's case seems to be going pretty well now his barrister is unleashed from reading summaries.

Mary Clegg looks hopeless here. The whole Sian Berry saga looks bad. The Young Greens constant attacks on SA were obviously out of control. They hate anyone who believes sex is real.

JJ: [Jeffrey Jupp, barrister] MC I'm going to take u to 2 docs which are letters or motions made about SA. Then will explore ur response to SA saying u didn't do what u were supposed to do. Take a moment, its a open letter, few weeks before meeting I June. Familiar?
JJ: it's an attack on SA, u agree?
It's being g abusive and calling him transphobic.
MC [Mary Clegg, GPEW CEO]: it says he has a history of that
JJ: it's attack on him
MC: it's concerns about his opinions
JJ: do u think its acceptable to call someone with gc beliefs transphobic
MC: very complicated question and need to unpack that
JJ: is it discriminatory to call someone transphobic who is not transphobic?
MC: can't answer

Thank you for the updates. Going well so far 👍

Shahrar was friends with an ex of mine, so I knew him a bit in a former life. He's honest through and through, to the point of being a bit of a knob sometimes, but truth is fundamental to the way he lives his life. He's a good person, and I've not been at all surprised to see him take this on, and I really hope the case goes his way. Even if it doesn't though, he won't give up.

Not so, in the Green Party at least. E.g.
Official GP position is no to HS2, but there are members openly lobbying, via own website and motions to Conference, to change this policy.

Likewise, GP policy is anti-nuclear, but there is again members openly trying to change policy on this.

Israel-Palestine territorial conflict another area.

It is not a requirement to agree with all of GP policy. On the gender ID issue, GP policy itself is contradictory. Dr. Ali did not breach the code of conduct.

I recommend looking at Tribunal Tweets on Twitter if you have time or go to its substack for a daily round-up of the court proceedings.

I suppose some issues are bound to be contentious, from an environmental perspective. Rail is mostly better than road, but is HS2 merely an environmentally destructive vanity project with undefined benefits? Some environmentalists think that nuclear is a better option than fossil fuels, despite its own hazards.
Gender ideology, however, is a totally unjustifiable distraction from proper Green concerns, with no environmental advantages*, anti-scientific as well as anti-women.
*unless it’s part of a plan to save the Earth by wiping out the human race by undermining its reproductive facility.

The line that leapt out to me in the BBC article was that his views are protected in law "because of the Equality Act".

Actually they are protected because of the Maya Forstater tribunal precedent.

The Equality Act is still awaiting the clarity needed for this protection to be fully clear. Obviously it is there if you interpret the protected characteristic of sex as meaning biological sex. Maybe the BBC now do......? I doubt that but it's certainly helpful that they stand by it, even if they didn't mean to.

Actually they are protected because of the Maya Forstater tribunal precedent.

The appeal court finding was that gender critical beliefs, that sex is biological and immutable are protected under the Equality Act 2010. The EA hasn't changed in scope. That's the kind of thing the religion/belief protected characteristic was always meant to cover, as other judgments have found it covers any belief which is worthy of respect in a democratic society. So the BBC are correct, for once. It doesn't need caveating.

Ah cool. Very useful to know. It's so much clearer when it can be said that way.

Gpew witnesses are melting down today can't define transphobia making the gallery laugh. So many examples of bigotry against SA being discussed. If Shahrar doesn't win because of some technicality it will be infuriating.

JJ Jeffrey Jupp, barrister for Shahrar
MSC - Molly Scott Cato, GPEW External Communications Coordinator

JJ: moving on from launch. After launch, there was sustained abuse of SA on SM. We see raft of Tweets where he's singled out as transphobic
MSC: I reject ur characterisation of abuse, its exaggerated
JJ: well disagree on that. You've got 50K members & only small amount on twitter
MSC: don't know
JJ: the ppl on other side of debate are very vociferous
MSC: I'd say it's nature of Twitter to be divisive and both sides become very heated.
JJ: do u think its appropriate to call people transphobic when they're not transphobic.
MSc: shouldn't use that term, we don't have a party definition of term, and shouldn't use the term TERF
[Judge clrifies]
MSC: my position is that both terms are damaging and cause offence.
JJ: u say there's no definition of transphobia. Phobia is a fear, so fear of trans people
MSC: find difficult to say
JJ: trans activists bandy that around with everything and use it to accuse people of being terfs or transphobes,
particularly women's spaces and spaces of vulnerability, that's what we're talking about?
MSC: that's a broad thing to say, contest its a general term and that's why I say don't use it.
JJ: email from Rosemary says SA was transphobic to GP members, u don't see that as abusive?
MSC: no, it's critical.
JJ: a 'known transphobe'
MSC: don't know how he's using it, for some it's abuse some it's not
JJ: people use that and you know, that it's used as a term if abuse.
CC: someone just laughed and I'd ask judge to reiterate rules
J: yes do not respond
JJ: [reads 'these people, anyone who has GC beliefs are transphobic' 'should be sacked for transphobia'] U don't see this as abusive?
MSC: disappointed they communicate this way
JJ: do u agree content of email is abusive?
MSC: it'll say its hurtful
JJ: well at least we're getting somewhere. Now this email accuses SA of being highly transphobic? Accept?
MSC: I haven't accepted the use of the word is abusive.
JJ: this email describes views as toxic and dangerous. They say as a non binary transpersonal. Is this Abusive?
MSC: that's the view of someone who feels personally threatened by SA beliefs. Since we don't have a clear
definition of what homophobic means can't go much further.
JJ: here we have a journalist asking about transphobia.
MSC: I see this as a response from party to potentially damaging story
JJ: u asked him to say as little as possible?
MSC: that's usual.

Part 1 of Day 4
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1694628956245291333.html

Part 2 of Day 4
https://archive.is/eqFex

Its a shame that Joe and Joely Public would likely choose not to watch this stuff.
Because tbh it's dynamite stuff.
Feeds of this, verbatim unredacted pure craziness from the TRAs and their allies, pure Toytown legal inexpertise from their team, solid and unflashy reality from the GC/under attack side. No finessing in the trans ally MSM.

Throw in the revelations that Malcolm Clark has been revealing on the dark seedy underbelly of the John Money revelations, incl the most recent Triggernometry interview.

And Brits would literally peak overnight.

All the while, the typo that is "men can become women", has frozen the discourse, infantilising the West.

We'll look back in years to.come at events like Sharar's appeal, and wonder what drugs people in the West were on.