It seems a more considered view of Forstater from some of those who have read the judgment, is that it is a victory, but one based on an error in law which conflates a belief with its manifestation. transsafety.network/posts/dont-ove…
Trying to wrap my head around this underscores that I am NOT a specialist discrimination lawyer. But I have immediate unease in trusting the analysis of anyone who can write this.
No wonder there is confusion about belief versus manifestation of belief when one side is so firmly wedded to the notion that ANY manifestation of a gender critical belief is ‘transphobic’.
It seems to me relatively simple. You are allowed to manifest your belief and cannot be sacked for so doing. If however that manifestation tips into actual harassment of a colleague or refusing to do your job you won’t have a defence.
But the simple expression of views that others find offensive cannot, without more, be a legitimate reason for ending your employment. And that was what I understood to be the crucial finding of the ET.
As a side note, interesting to see how the response is likely to develop. The ‘she lost 60%!’ is unsustainable for even the most enthusiastic TRAs, so we move to ‘ET got law wrong’ to ‘it’s all the fault of the CGD’
Also highlights my growing unease that #LawFare will not prove as swift an end to current madness as hoped. The nuance and complexity of employment law provides fertile ground for continued argument
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.