Good morning to our followers, new and old.

The Sex Matters team will be live tweeting proceedings from day 2 of Maya Forstater v CGD Europe in the Employment Appeal Tribunal, Central London.

We will be using the hashtag #MayaAppeal

Proceedings should start at 10.30 am

Yesterday we heard from Appellant's counsel, Ben Cooper QC. We also heard from Karon Monaghan QC for the Equalities & Human Rights Commission, in support of the appellant; and from Aileen McColgan QC for civil liberties watchdog Index on Censorship, in support of the appellant.

Today we will hear from Jane Russell, appearing on behalf of the Respondent employer CGD Europe. Ben Cooper QC should have time to respond towards the end of the day to any issues raised by the respondent's submissions. That's the plan, anyway.

The judge has joined us.

JR: the appellant believes that a transwoman can't honestly describe herself as a woman. The Tribunal found that she doesn't avoid causing the enormous pain of misgendering a TW.

Tayler J wrote in his judgment "She positively believes that TW are men, and will say so whenever she wants."

She is creating, in my submission, a sort of sex superiority, which creates two classes of women: real and fake women. That is beyond the pale. That is denying a group of people with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.

If this appeal is allowed it will cause great harm to trans people in the workplace. Any workplace will be a dangerous one for them.

This is not a "hecklers veto" per Miller v College of Policing.

This strikes at the heart of equality.

Conspicuous by their absence, yesterday, were the following points:

--there was no articulation of the Grainger 5 test
--there was no mention of the dignity or equality of transmen and women. Not their Art 8 rights, not even from the Equality Commission, although I recognise they're not making representations on the core issues

--there was no recognition of how the law has moved on since Corbett v Corbett
--"where a full Gender Recognition Certificate is issued, that person becomes for all purposes their acquired gender"
--how can sex be immutable when this gives legal recognition to a change in sex?

As Simone de Beauvoir wrote in The Second Sex, "one is not born but becomes a woman." Why can't that apply to transwomen?

--the word "workplace" was not mentioned, even once; the appellant wants to mould this case into something it is not; they want to mould this case into a wider debate about gender critical theory

Trans people won't be safe in the workplace if this appeal is allowed.

Thread breaks but continues here: https://twitter.com/sexmattersorg/status/1387341224525406208