The decision in Forstater v CGD (drive.google.com/file/d/12P9zf8…). THREAD
Forstater says: "I reserve the right to use the pronouns 'he' and 'him' to refer to male people." The case is about whether this is a protected belief such that she cannot be discriminated against for expressing it.
The Judge points out that Forstater's belief can be separated from - is unnecessary to - the debates about balancing rights.
You do not need to believe sex is immutable to argue for, where necessary, safe spaces for women or the exclusion of trans women from women's sport.
You do not need to believe sex is immutable to argue for, where necessary, safe spaces for women or the exclusion of trans women from women's sport.
Forstater can also continue to campaign against self-id and against changes to the Gender Recognition Act.
But the law does not protect what Forstater sees as her right to call a transwoman a man.
The reason for this is expressed by the judge to be that "people cannot expect to be protected if their core belief involves violating others dignity."
Standing back from the detail - and it should be read in full - the judgment asks principally that we speak to and about one another in a thoughtful and respectful manner.
"Do unto others..." remains a pretty good motto.
"Do unto others..." remains a pretty good motto.
