I made a thread about Maya Forstater’s case yesterday, with screenshots of her barristers’ skeleton, only for it to vanish into the ether of my drafts folder. Let’s see how far I get this time.
The question tomorrow is “is believing sex matters a belief worth protecting?”
The question tomorrow is “is believing sex matters a belief worth protecting?”
Women’s rights & believing that #SexMatters are not “transphobic” or “bigoted.” They’re not even beliefs about trans-identifying people.
Art 17 should only be used against the gravest forms of hate speech, eg. Nazi-like rhetoric which seeks to whip up violence
Maya Forstater’s beliefs accord with the law, which recognises the importance of both sex & gender reassignment; quotes Karon Monaghan’s essay
There is nothing remotely approaching unlawful about failing to address someone who ID’s as trans by their preferred pronouns
Once again for the trans extremists: gender recognition laws do not bite on the conduct of private citizens
One more time: gender change law doesn’t even begin to touch how ordinary people, going about their lives, can behave
It’s somewhat different in the workplace, but it depends on the particular facts. Honest mistakes aren’t unlawful.
Even with regard to a particular trans-ID person, even potentially distressing contributions to debate are OK
The Equal Treatment Bench Book was about courtroom etiquette, and was not intended to regulate the daily doings of difficult women
It’s not for an Employment Tribunal to judge that a claimant ought to have arrived at her beliefs on a different basis than she did
The first instance judge, instead of recognising Maya Forstater’s beliefs are worthy of respect, adopted the respondent employer’s belief system & judged her wanting
It’s characteristic of many different types of protected, respectable belief that they are absolutist, eg. pacifists don’t believe a little bit of war is grand
Even beliefs which do engage moral judgment of members of protected groups can enjoy Art 9/10 protection
Having failed to identify one trans-ID person harassed etc by Maya Forstater, the tribunal held that she must at all times express beliefs she does not hold
Difficult to avoid the conclusion that the tribunal regretted that self-ID was not the law, and that it had adopted the belief that sex and gender are the same
Karon Monaghan’s essay again: surprising that a belief held by the court for 40 years was deemed incompatible with democracy (slam dunk)
If believing in gender identity meets the Grainger test, then so does not believing in gender identity. Simples.
Not believing in gender identity doesn’t necessarily correlate with believing that trans-ID males are

In the era of cancel culture, we need especially robust protections for freedom of belief & expression
Please allow the appeal, finding that Maya Forstater’s beliefs were protected from discrimination by the Equality Act, and remit the case to the lower court for a full hearing on the issues.
@threadreaderapp please unroll