As we discussed at the Hate Crime Seminar yesterday, this is additional impetus for #LawFare as considered strategy now. Upper echelons of the judiciary do not appear to be captured.
As the younger generation of lawyers move up the ladder, I do not think we can be confident that will remain the case if we do not reverse the current environment of silence, complicity and deliberate misrepresentation of the law.
That anyone gives primacy to their ideology above facts and the law is bad enough: for a judge to do this, heralds something very dark indeed.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
But at least we know what the journalist feels about it! The problem here Steve is I have been reported for ‘hate’ for saying my dog likes cheese. So we do need to know a little more about the actual message
What reference did the legal advisor make to the successful appeal in Scottow v CPS? Or Miller? If none and if this tweet did not involve a threat of violence or profoundly abusive language, consider an appeal.
Just what is the medical professional doing about the medical and surgical transition of children? Are we moving from silent complicity to active encouragement?
Regardless of the outcomes in @8RosarioSanchez, @MForstater and @BluskyeAllison cases, interest in each case has been significant and very troubling details emerge about how ostensibly respectable organisations are prepared to operate.
This is thanks to the efforts of @tribunaltweets. Not only does it provide a useful service in publishing an account of the hearings - it’s a good litmus test of how many want to know
‘The eye of mumsnet’. The implication being that only middle aged women can possibly object to the conflation of sex and gender - and of course, we know middle aged women have zero worth.
So let’s have a look at these mumsnet users
Seems to be quite a lot of legal/academic and male tweeters objecting
"...we are committed to reforming the Gender Recognition Act, banning conversion therapy for all LGBT+ people, and believe that trans women are women and trans men are men. We do not believe that this in any way runs into conflict with the rights of cisgender women and girls"
I think if you want someone's vote, they are entitled to ask you why you believe this - why you reject the opinion of the @EHRC, and many thousands of women. Or would such questions be 'transphobic'? (of course they would)
"Political extremism is common in the UK, as is anti-trans extremism. If at any time you feel that engaging in a debate will be unsafe for you or others around you, please withdraw and ensure that you are not in a position where you/they are likely to be harmed."