Shocked/not shocked by the responses to the BBC on lesbians being pressurised and cooerced to have sex with men who identify as women
1) Lots of data geeks suddenly taking an interest & yelling "its a twitter poll" (it wasn't), "not a representative sample (no one said it was)
2) Stonewall Nancy pronouncing love and listening to "trans women" (but not to lesbians who recognise sex is real)
3) "Queermale" academic Finn saying yes this might be a LGBTQ community problem but don't talk about it in public (😢)
4) A bunch of people signing an open letter saying "but trans women we are legally women!" (1- no they are mainly not, 2- In this situation, of all others, that is irrelevant)
Thanks the the Equal Treatment Benchbook Judges & courts are saying "her testicles"
This man undertook *self-harm* to remove his testicles and the professionals around him (discussing whether this person is pathologically delusional or just a sadistic murderer) must say "she"
We are back.
Naomi - The questions before you are 1) Is the Judicial College a public authority under FOIA 2) Does it hold the information for its own purposes
or 3) If it is the MOJ does it hold the information for its own purposes
Why it matters - your question - if a training director could dream up a course that could create a steady stream of work for a friend.
If it was treated solely as a matter for the judiciary, then without transparency there would be no way to check that sort of abuse.
This appellant's own story is powerfully important for why the Judicial College should be subject to FOI.
Ms Forstater worked for a think tank as a contractor on tax policy. Around the time the govt was consulting on the GRA 2004. Ms Forstater became engaged in that debate