[Thread] My case raises Qs about freedom of speech & belief & how to reconcile women's rights & the rights of transgender people.
So how have the human rights organisations and other NGOs responded?
[Disclaimer: individual staff views do not necessarily represent orgs]
@IndexCensorship@jodieginsberg said back in Nov "I cannot see that MF has done anything wrong other than express an opinion that many feminists share – that there should be a public and open debate about the distinction between sex and gender.”
Incidentally 1,100 people would really, really like to Fawcett society step up and hold some grown up discussion about sex and gender ID
Amnesty International had this to say
Amnesty UK Trustee Senthorun Raj @senthorun endorsed @cmclymer view that JK Rowling (and I) are transphobic for “stating that sex is real"...."a common transphobic assertion that has been dismissed by medical experts and other scientists."
When I was trying to keep my job @CGDev I wrote this in a letter to senior management. I thought that as a think tank we should be open to thinking about the issue.
In practice CGD was not.
But i did end up sparking a lot of conversations around a lot of tables over xmas
I know that while people can say "begone TERF" publicly, people in NGOs who are concerned about the issue are afraid to speak up.
And no mainstream org (or funder) has stepped up to host dialogue or analysis.
This issue will keep running. I hope they find their voice.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The OfS-Sussex judgement is logically flawed and can't be allowed to stand. @ObhishekSaha with a very good analogy about paths.
Sussex's defence was that it had a high level sign saying "this path will only be closed for very good reasons". Therefore it must have had a very good reason 🙄
In order to keep the footpath functionally open the local authority has to apply some rules to the users of the path. It has a duty to keep the path open for cyclists and pedestrians, but not for motorbikes. This is in the bye-laws
(this is the university's equality act compliant equality policy that is part of its governance)
There are some short parts of the path that are so unavoidably narrow that the local authority puts up signs saying "cyclists dismount here" to keep the whole path safe and open for all users.
That is fine, the path is still open to pedestrians and cyclists.
(that's a proportionate means to a legitimate aim in the Equality Act, its "no noisy protests that disrupt exams")
This is quite the exercise in missing the point by Prof Shreya Atrey in Modern Law Review.
FWS will have a severe impact on "transgender, gender fluid, gender non-conforming, polygender, genderqueer and intersex" it says (without defining any of these terms).
Remember, FWS was just about whether a GRC changes a person's sex for the purpose of the Equality Act.
Atrey says the protected characteristic of sex should be amended to include sex characteristics, gender, gender identity, gender expression and gender performance. 🤨
A curious thing about the draft government guidance: It has no conceptual underpinning at all
“In recent years, we have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are questioning the way they feel about being a boy or a girl, including the physical attributes of their sex and the related ways in which they fit into society. “
Er ok…🤷♀️
It then dives into “where a child or their parent has raised a request relating to social transition”
The phrase appears 29 times in the guidance, but is never explained what it means or what it might involve.
The schools are told they must "consider what is in the best interests of the child and other children, and a decision relating to social transition may not be the same as a child’s wishes. "
The phrase “gender identity” appears 36 times in the judgment
Leonardo’s policy is that any member of staff who is proposing to to undergo, is undergoing or has undergone a process for the purposes of reassigning their gender can use the toilets intended for the opposite sex.
I am hugely grateful to Naomi Cunningham for the work that she has done as the first chair of Sex Matters, and for her equally important role as a barrister representing claimants using the law to fight for justice.