Maya Forstater Profile picture
Aug 23, 2019 8 tweets 3 min read Read on X
The performance of the liberal legal commentator blokes who have sought to be the 'voice of reason' on the sex and gender debates, sitting above the 'toxic' and furious and women, while refusing to engage with the content of what women are saying is telling
It shows how if you are not willing to challenge the foundational logic of the trans rights activist orgs like RightsInfo, Mermaids, Gendered Intelligence etc.. that "transwomen are women & anything else is transphobic" then you will have to throw women under every bus that comes
Because its no good just saying 'balancing rights' in theory, you have to be willing to be able to stand up for women some time. Males in women's prisons? Males playing contact rugby with women? These are extreme examples of real harms to women really happening ...
If you won't draw a line to protect women from discrimination, harassment & physical harm here, where will you draw it? But drawing the line anywhere means standing up to the bullies, including the economic bullies & that is too much to ask. So could women please just shut up?
The tragedy of all this is that there really is need for a grown up debate about how to protect women's rights & trans people's rights. As @GoonerProf points out, it starts w recognising that sex & being trans are different (as are disability, age etc...) forwomen.scot/public-meeting…
Thats why the Equality Act has separate protected characteristics. Sex =/= gender identity fairplayforwomen.com/single-sex/ Including trans people in public life does not depend on undermining women and girls boundaries, and their ability to organise politically.
That no grown up organisations have been willing to stand up (including orgs like @fawcettsociety) is why guys who i am sure are lovely & clever in other spheres are able to mistake their shallow pronouncements on this for wisdom & use any excuse for not listening to women
But women are not shutting up. And men are speaking up too. Time to be brave!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Maya Forstater

Maya Forstater Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @MForstater

May 11
This, by one of the Darlington nurses is heartbreaking (CW: CSA)

Women should not have to tell these stories to get the basic dignity that is their right under workplace health and safety law.

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1…
This is what we mean when we say sex matters. It is what the Supreme Court meant when they said you have to be clear about what the different groups are.

It's not a legal nicety. It's not complex. It's not difficult.

It's just basic respect for women's humanity, with common sense.Image
I am so angry at all the highly paid people failing to do their job, who would not see that it is abusive to allow men into women's changing rooms, toilets and showers.

And even now who are resisting implementing the law. @NotPostingMatt @NHSConfed Image
Read 7 tweets
May 7
Minister @RhonddaBryant says “We are opposing the amendment and are not intending to introduce similar legislation.”

Let’s look at the knots he ties himself in

He says “data accuracy is important. That is equally true for any data used in a digital verification service.”

OK so your new law will enable people to prove their sex accurately then? 🤔
Bryant says “the government is already developing data standards on the monitoring of diversity information, including sex, via the Data Standards Authority.”

This is distraction.

Monitoring diversity information (which is about populations) is not the only reason why you want sex data.
Some times people want to make sure their sex is accurately recorded:

- For their own healthcare
- For social care
- For a job where sex matters
- For sport
- For safeguarding
- For use of single sex services
“the @StatsRegulation published updated guidance on collecting and reporting data and statistics about sex and gender identity last year, and all Govt Departments are now considering how best to address the recommendations of the Sullivan review, which we published.”

“That is the first reason why we will not be supporting this new clause or the amendment today.”
Read 10 tweets
May 4
A 🧵about signs.

What do I mean by this sign excludes all men?

I mean the sign itself is discriminatory. Image
It says women only, which means no men.
It is lawful because the situation meets one or more of the “gateway conditions” for a lawful single sex service in the EqA, and it is a proportionate means to a legitimate aim.
Who does the sign discriminate against? 

Men directly.

What all of them?

Yes, because they are all excluded by the rule. Even the femmes, the crossdressers, the transwomen, the non-binaries and the gender fluids.
Read 31 tweets
May 1
Here we are at @LSELaw for a legal panel discussion on the FWS case. Video will be available later. Image
Naomi Cunningham says the ruling changes very little .. and it changes everything. Image
Under the old understanding there was a route to exclude men with GRCs from women only services but it was unclear and uncertain. It sounded difficult to operate. And the @EHRC statutory code said case by case.
Read 21 tweets
Apr 28
Wow...

So the lineage of that policy that Sussex University has just been fined £0.5m for goes back via Advance HE and the Equality Challenge Unit to the SWP! 🤯
The Sussex policy comes almost word for word from the ECU policy which is based on the Association of Colleges Policy 2005 Image
Which Dave Renton said he drafted with SWP Laura Miles (author of Transgender Resistance: socialism and the fight for trans liberation) Image
Image
Read 5 tweets
Apr 18
I have seen quite a lot of this question going around.

Its called the "transman gotcha" and it is addressed in the Supreme Court judgment. Image
It goes like this: If you exclude "trans women" from women's spaces then you must include burly, bearded "trans men" Image
The answer in the judgment is that the Equality Act exceptions mean that both sex discrimination and gender reassignment discrimination prohibitions are disapplied so a service provider can lawfully exclude both ways. Image
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(