Good Law Practice launch a EHCR/Supreme Court challenge over toilets

[fromorbit]

After raising over 418K it turns out the GLP's amazing legal case is all about toilets. Details:

https://archive.is/TWRTl

No doubt it will fail like most of their previous legal cases.

Previous thread:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5336208-good-law-project-suing-the-ehrc-and-bridget-phillipson-letter-before-action?page=1

True, though I often question whether humans should be considered an intelligent species, given how good we are at arguing nonsense.

Jolyon Maugham visited my college this week
Some thoughts from a talk by a particularly odious man

https://jealousfaithless.substack.com/p/jolyon-maugham-visited-my-college

Maugham began with a brief overview of himself and his work. Much of this was done in a sort of cringey “how do you do, fellow kids” way—at one point he even implied he was gay—that I see often in woke middle aged men. He talked about how difficult experiences in his youth inspired a hatred of bullies. There was a moment when he tried to awkwardly explain away his previous work as a lawyer helping people avoid paying tax as a kind of anti-capitalist action. He talked about the Brexit cases he took, humbly crediting himself with Labour’s July 2024 election win over the desiccated husk of the Conservative Party. His audience of septum-pierced 19-year-olds was starting to get bored through this, though, so Maugham then turned to the main event.

lmao

He complained that when Theresa May announced the consultation on changing the Gender Recognition Act to allow for self identification back in 2018, “literally no one cared”.

Maugham knows that this is a lie, as he originally donated to Jennifer James’ crowdfunder to take action against the Labour Party over TIMs on women only shortlists all the way back in the mists of time of 2017, even before Foxing Day. Or maybe he thinks the women who cared then are “literally no one”? Either way, he’s a disingenuous dick.

Ooh, I didn't know that. I wish his audience had been aware during that talk.

I’m sure he was counting on the fact that his audience would have been at school then.

"Foxing Day" 🤭😆

This is interesting and relevant from Michael Foran.

https://knowingius.org/p/what-is-a-womens-service-a-reply

Hm. Eight years ago, he was already deeply involved in these issues, and a committed trans rights activist. How interesting.

Wait, what?! The opposite?! I am very confused.

Yes, we can only speculate why he changed his mind so dramatically.

We could speculatively check how his three offspring used to be described, vs how they're described now. For example.

I don't like to dig into the minor children of public figures, but I'm pretty sure at the time he had three daughters. In the interim two of them have identified as his sons.

Yep. Poor kids.

At least one is a leading light of the Trans Kids Deserve Better group which camped out outside the DfE and released crickets at the LGB Alliance conference.

Documented for posterity on this thread, with the text of both his support tweet and his reverse ferret.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3136545-Labour-party-invents-new-bollocks-made-up-non-existent-definition-for-woman?reply=74914515?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=app_share

Took me a while to find it!

I can’t check if either of those tweets are still up of course as he blocked me around then.

how it started:

I have supported this.
It should be important to all who care about the Labour Party that it be somewhere where both trans people and women can flourish. But simple self-ID does not, for me, draw the line in the right place.

how it ended, after massive Twitter pile on:

I regret my donation and the support it implied for an attitude towards trans women that I do not share. I have asked for it to be returned and I apologise for my careless intervention.

The Michael Foran link posted just upthread led me to the case law which explains why that's not how it works:

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2015-0148

I can't believe GLP had the bare-faced cheek to run an argument that has already been ruled out by the Supreme Court. These people are either utterly incompetent or the world's worst grifters.

Both can be true.

“Where is the evidence that the inclusion of trans women in sports is unfair?” he asked flippantly.

“Where is the evidence that there is any negative affect at all from allowing trans women to use the right bathrooms?”

Either he is stupid or he is arguing in bad faith. Or both.

I'm also a bit shocked by how they treated their 'intersex' claimant. As discussed upthread, FWS has not changed her legal position at all, and she has a good case against her employer. GLP should have advised her of that, not involved her in a court case which is irrelevant to her. Isn't this unethical?

I hope Swift J is going to pick up all these nuances.

Jolyon in 2018:

”But simple self ID does not, for me, draw the line in the right place”

If he’s on here, I have offered to give him the evidence about toilets. I have also tried to engage on other types of social media in the past. He hasn’t replied.

Ironically his sentence is right as technically the right ‘bathrooms’ are the men’s. I can’t find the evidence either because the negative effects come from them using the women’s.

As I keep saying, I want to keep everyone safe. The design for single sex toilets is most likely to do that. But as soon as there is any ambiguity, the designs become mixed sex, which makes it less safe for everybody.