Thread by @tribunaltweets

Good Morning. This is day 4 of Mermaids v Charity Commission and the LGB Alliance. Our substack page on the case, with hearings from previous days, is here
tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/mermaids-vs-…

We expect the day to begin with continued evidence from Beverley Jackson, co-founder and chair of LGB Alliance

Abbreviations:

J or Judge - Judge Lynn Griffin, Presiding Judge,
AJ - Judge Joe Neville, Assistant to Judge
MM - Mermaids, the appellant
MG - Michael Gibbon KC, Counsel for Mermaids

CC - Charity Commission, the first respondent
IS - Iain Steele, Charity Commission counsel

LGBA - LGB Alliance, the second respondent
KM - Karon Monaghan KC - Counsel for LGBA
AR - Akua Reindorf, Assistant to KM

Current witness: BJ - Beverley Jackson, Co-founder and trustee of LGB Alliance

We expect proceedings to resume at 10am

Expect to start shortly. Waiting for judges.

While we wait other witnesses following BJ are expected to be Kate Harris (the other co-founder of LGBA and a trustee) and Eileen Gallagher OBE the LGBA Chair of Trustees

Starting. J confirms they received the gender bread diagram overnight

MG: Pick up a new topic pg 177 para 50 "we are of view no objective criteria for diagnosing GD" but you are not a doctor. BJ: No
MG: GRA defines GD though. GRC involves a panel and applicant must have GD. So all with GRC have GD?
BJ: yes only 5k or 6k issued

MG: You are campaigning to keep medical diagnosis req. Slight tension as you disagree with it as a concept
BJ: Docs have told me not possible to tell the difference between 2 children both of whom are utterly persuaded of their GD but may have very different outcomes. Doc cant

tell which is which.
MG: GRA too permissive in having a barrier?
BJ: Better than nothing for adults who are in extreme distress. If someone needs or wants medical treatment implies medical condition

MG: You looked on social media for some hours to find effectively GC ppl?
BJ: yes whether they were interested in coming to a meeting
MG: we dont have examples of emails. was it email/phone?
BJ: I phoned individually following DM

Had to be secret due to opposition
MG: KH (Kate Harris, co-founder) said she and you contacted stroppy ppl on twitter. So you wanted to form a GC institution?

BJ: No was about redefinition of homosexuality
MG: Was it a confrontational org you wanted to create?
BJ: No ppl who shared similar concerns. KH to clarify her own words but wanted ppl who were willing to express robustly that sex orientation is based on sex not gender

MG: Tweet from 2019. Response to Transgender Trend about MM "Big lottery funding should be stopped... action now... moratorium on teaching of GI in schools"
Those things are indicators of GC ppl?
BJ: Several months before LGBA founded but this is about taxpayer money

being used toward teaching of GI at schools which I understood to be linked to ideas MM at that moment were promoting. Other statements by MM 20 years were not like that, changed
MG: But its period leading up to formation. These views are sorts of views you were looking for?

BJ: as far as I recall all my conversations were about erasure of sex and concerns for lesbians and young gay men.
MG: Malcolm Clark tweet (2020?) "Cafe Nero doesn't fund medical abuse of children" what is your understanding of the meaning of this?

BJ: MC is here but I believe it was referring to starbucks link/funding to MM and his view that PBs for children is medical abuse. Harsh term but how he wishes to express it

PBs to children who would otherwise be LGB w/o being medicalised, he is entitled to that view. Not term I would use but it does also trouble me
MG: MC is director of LGBA
BJ: yes but has his own way of expressing himself.
MG: do you distance yourself from this?

BJ: not at all but would express differently
MG: Mission statement. Oppose elision of sex and gender. Iteration of mission statement of Jan 2020 I think although says 2019 this may not have been updated

Also says 'advance interests of LGB in context of concerted attempt to elide sex and gender' That is central to GC position?
BJ: yes

MG: And initial supporters agree with this?
BJ: yes they dont want homosexuality to be redefined. view that all have a GI is not one we share
MG: 22/10 meeting attendees all supported this
BJ: I presume so
MG: At time of app to register,CC received complaints and raised queries

about LGBA social media policy. Do you recall that?
BJ: Yes
MG: Reads from bundle 'Do not use words trans, trans rights etc refer to gender and GI..' Its to avoid direct reference to t ppl even when that's what is being discussed?
BJ: No not talking about individuals, talking

about a belief system
MG: so tweeters told must use gender /GI euphemism?
BJ: No I object, its not a euphemism its accurate
MG: Sorry my euphemism word can be replaced with synonym

BJ: im confused with q. when we discus GI we call it GI
MG: Prohibition - do not use word trans is what is said, use G/GI/GD. I put to you it is a synonym for trans
BJ: No I dont agree and many agree with us
MG: I put to you its a minority of t ppl who agree with you

BJ: More research is needed we cant know
MG: On face of it no suggestion words you have used have any particular definition legally or o'wise. You say its clear to you but no reference to specific definition
BJ: No explicit reference as not thought necessary thought obvious

MG: In practice it is commonplace that sex /gender used interchangeably ?
BJ: Yes but explained why that has become a problem. Used in a new way as inner sense of masc/femininity
MG: You recognise that others use language more loosely. Also you have said you oppose notion of

trans lesbians. But others eg PR use lesbian word more loosely.
BJ: yes and I profoundly disagree
MG: not for you to police language
BJ: Of course not. Not suggesting everyone should agree with us

MG: Lets think about discrimination. LGBA believe gay ppl face disc due to spreading idea of GI?
BJ: as a result of imposing the belief that everyone has a GI and that that is the basis of sexuality bc it suggests that a gay man should be open to sex with a female.

Thats a disc. idea.
MG: And you think GI lobby involved in transing away the gay?
BJ: I dont think that is an actual campaign, that is not what I believe. One thing we haven't discussed is enormous influence of internet and influencers 'if you think you are trans you prob are'

Quite often isolated people who feel they are misfits and told they will get a family etc sorry Im talking too much
MG: No that's fine. Does LGBA believe trans conversion is greatest risk to LGB ppl. today.
BJ: In some countries and not others E.g. not in Uganda but here

I think so yes. As I said its not an explicit campaign it is the overall impact of this eg detransitioners
MG: Well we dont have good info on detransitioners do we?
BJ: discusses some indications but we do need much more research and long term follow ups

MG: Shared belief that LGB ppl can face disc. and abuse at the hands of gender activists?
BJ: yes as we saw recently at Pride where lesbians were ejected
MG: Turning to your statement pg 175. 'its an important part.. to educate public on importance of sex to LGB rights'

but this cant be discerned on the face of articles of association. Wider discussion going on around sex being plural
BJ: humans are sexually dimorphic
<MG having computer troubles - J orders 5 min break>

MG: ...SS attraction being undermined.. underlying sentiments such as this cant be determined from your articles of assoc.
BJ: this is a longer exposition
MG: 2.1.4 'approaches its charitable purposes from the position that...'
BJ: homosexuality = SS attraction is understood

around the world. 69 countries prohibit it. We should not cloud that definition so cant be understood

MG: LGBA positions: only 2 sexes, gender a construct etc. LGBA aim is to put forward the GC view that sex is immutable
BJ: ok
MG: your not standing back from the GC view you are saying GI view is wrong?
BJ: GI lobby advocate their position, we advocate ours. Charities can have

opposing positions.
MG: When you advocate its to put forward this view and that's what LGBA is for?
BJ: no its protecting and promoting rights of LGB ppl. and we define that on basis of sex not gender

<apols lost a tweet>

BJ was asked about hostility and said it was from the other side.

She also discussed how you have pro life and pro choice charities co-existing
MG: lets focus on position vis a vis MM. You said its up to public to listen to views of other orgs and make a judgment and that LGBA is in an entirely different space to MM?
BJ: yes

MG: Doesn't make sense as you are opposed
BJ: we are concerned with sexual orientation. MM concerned with GI. We believe those are separate although sometimes confused.
MG: perhaps but they occupy contested space eg about being gender inclusive
BJ: im sure most ppl working at MM

are well-meaning but we have a difference of opinion.
MG: BB said LGBA spread misinformation about MM
BJ: I dont know what she is referring to there

MG: reads tweet 'profound homophobia at heart of GI theory' This isn't education, this is a lobbying agenda, provocative?
BJ: it is provocative, does refer to time before we were a charity

MG: reads a further tweet 'actively promoting transing of children'. MM deny this?
BJ: its a q of interpretation I think
MG: Not a challenge to funding?
BJ: clearly a challenge about taxpayer funding around promoting PBs to children on a slim evidence base

MG: Way it is expressed it actively hostile to MM.
BJ: I can see it is a challenge
MG: In what sense?
BJ: challenge around suitability of use of taxpayer funding

Should say PBs often said to be reversible , which is contested. Many go on to x-sex hormones etc
MG: BB would plainly disagree with you and everyone agrees further research needs to be done.
BJ: Cass report makes clear

MG: reads more from bundle (assume same tweet) "hope you are taking notes re starbucks ... scandal brewing... transing away the gay happening to kids" this is accusing my client of t away the gay?
BJ: discusses how many of the children if not medicalised would grow up gay.

may be unintentional but I believe will be a scandal
MG: Im suggesting you are saying it is a deliberate policy
BJ: Ive said dont think it is but promoting the belief of GI etc
MG: I suggest it is a deliberate attempt to undermine MM
BJ: its seeking to change policy

MG: reading out words by Malcolm Clark where he refers to monsters at MM. do you distance yourself from this, hes a director?
BJ: I distance myself from word monsters
MG: was he disciplined?
BJ: no

MG: discusses statement (by MC I think) that 'GI motivated by homophobia.' that suggests they are homophobes?
BJ: we support GNC children we dont support medicalising them
MG: Reads further words by MC. asks again if BJ distances herself from inflammatory language

BJ: There I dont as Ive spoken to clinicians from GIDS one of whom came across institutional homophobia at GIDS. On his exit form he said this

MG: You say in a tweet 'furious that rampant homophobia is leading to hormones and surgery' Word rampant? Inflammatory
BJ: yes I think this is big problem

MG: 5 Jan 2021 re Stonewall 'its time to stop spending public money on lobby group promoting GI' deliberately confrontational isn't it?
BJ: yes
MG: consistent with central purpose of LGBA
BJ Again this is before our reg as a charity, small group that has to be forcible to be

heard.
MG: Turn to page 931. Another tweet date not clear. 'adding the + to LGB gives green light to paraphilias like bestiliaty... wake up policy makers... LGB ppl refused to be used' Unpleasant allegation, do you accept should not have been made?
BJ: No. This tweet was a

retweet of a tweet by Allison Bailey in which she was responding to an academic article which was arguing that bestiality should be included in the alphabet soup. Allison B quite rightly calling out/against this.

MG: I suggest its taking an outlier position and amplifying it. It is confrontational and unpleasant. Seeks to build a narrative on something that nobody in any mainstream org is putting forward
BJ: I disagree. An academic article republished in 2019. This is about the open-ended

+ and what does that mean
MG: I suggest it is scaremongering and against gender inclusive approach
BJ: I dont know what you mean re gender inclusive but this is about what + means

James Cantor has repeatedly said that pedophilia should b in the +
MG: Mentioning JC is in itself inflammatory
BJ: No, this is about LGB being brought into disrepute

MG: goes to written speech by Bev. You say 'what is our work? right now press pause on GR reform, stop roll out on Stonewall schools initiative, against SW law, seat at the table where LGB issues discussed' This demonstrates LGBA is all about rolling back what you call GI lobby

BJ: we need to stop what was going re risk to LGB
MG: that's a political objective?
BJ: in pursuant of our charitable objects
MG: I think its higher than that it puts in front and centre
BJ: I disagree

MG: Appropriate time for break?
J: Yes

MG: new topic. campaigns. PR referred to 6 campaigns on website. 1. End conversion therapy. 'affirming a child as trans when otherwise LGB is a form of conversion therapy' refers to another Allison Bailey tweet and asks if BJ agrees
BJ: ultimate example is most notably Iran.

MG: that's not trans movement though
BJ: No but connection here, notable case of Kai in America. Mother horrified child might be gay, relieved to have found solution in declaring child trans

In extreme Christian circles homosexuality considered a sin so that's the context Allison Bailey is speaking about
MG: but extreme Christian is not part of t movement
BJ: It is in some of those circles, may sound odd but they would prefer BITWB narrative than homosexuality.

MG: AB is not part of LGBA but connected
BJ: yes
MG: PR has given evidence that never come across any LGBT+ org that supports transing away the gay. Do you agree that's the case?
BJ: Ive said before its not deliberate its unintended results of imposing belief in GI on society

MG: Why does LGBA use hashtag stop transing gay away then?
BJ: Because that is what we believe is going on
MG: Implied allusion to pray the gay away.
BJ: Its about ending conversion therapy in the proper use of the term to make a gay person straight and we oppose that

MG: Pushing a message that has none of the subtleties you suggest. Implies active transing gay away going on
BJ: Its drawing attention to what we believe is a medical scandal
MG: Discusses Allison Bailey LGBA launch tweet. Her fundraiser re suing Stonewall. LGBA is engaging in

that to push back on Stonewall
BJ: I would see it as a free speech campaign opposing SW attempt to curb her free expression. We promote free expression on sex/gender issues

MG: "Can the plan" re Welsh Government. Political isn't it?
BJ: We were concerned with absence of materials for the LGB in a campaign that called itself LGBT+. Reason is they didn't engage with us. Helping LGB feel good about themselves material wasn't there

MG: 'this plan embeds ideology ... denies importance of sex.. ' reference to ideology is combative?
BJ: Can I point out that this is words from LGBA Cymru which isn't us. We talk to each other and have similar aims but not us
MG: You dont disagree with what they say?

BJ: I think would agree
MG: Demonstrates point that you see GI in opposition to LGB rights?
BJ: No I see the imposition of GI ideology as the issue, similar to if a religion was imposed on society. I have respect for different beliefs. Its the imposition that is the issue

MG: reads 'MM lobbies hard re PBs at Tavi' correct statement in your view?
BJ: I believe it to be in relation to response to GR bill in Scotland where MM wanted age limit abolished altogether
MG: do you agree that MM doesn't lobby hard, focuses on work
BJ: Disagree

MG discusses 'child abuse' phrase being used (I think in LGBA material)
BJ: I dont use that term and dont think its the best way to discuss this but do believe will be a scandal
MG: But this would have been approved not by you?
BJ: Not what it says here. It says some people view

it as child abuse which is true. Does not say LGBA view it that way.
MG: But those words included.
BJ: Saying some people view it as child abuse is correct
MG: As Mr Nicolson put it this is being coy and putting in a way that can be denied.

MG moves on. When you say you want to ensure children are taught facts, its central that this includes immutability of sex?
BJ: Well yes as sex in every cell of body
MG: Central to GC belief
BJ: I personally think that every child is born from a women is a fact not a belief

MG: Discussing LGBA campaigns further. PR said not a single campaign focussed on LGB people.
BJ: I dont agree. So many message of thanks we have received for supporting LGB people

MG: Move on to gender reform in Scotland. March 2020 advert opposing GR reform in Scotland 'Self ID gives predators the green light' Emotive, inflammatory
BJ: Certainly emotive, I can accept might be seen as inflammatory

MG:"Even a man convicted of sex offences against women and girls..." again combative to link this to self ID
BJ: No, with any proposed legislation there needs to be assessment of unintended consequences. Thats what it is here

<conversation with J around distinction between LGBA and LGBA Scotland, think its an LGBA Scot advert>

MG: Put to you ridiculous someone would go to all the trouble to get GRC ...
BJ: Disagree. Predators do go to extraordinary lengths unfortunately.

MG: Pamphlet flippant to say self declaration. Must live as a woman for a period, would be criminal offence to make a false declaration...
BJ: Entirely legitimate to point out that tiny group of predatory men would be able to exploit this. Lots of example of this happening

MG: I suggest the advert is to provoke?
BJ: Its to warn against unintended consequences. Something is being rushed through w/o proper consideration
MG: I suggest consideration had gone on for some time and advert is alarmist
BJ: Disagree. Those consultation were only with groups

that already agreed
MG: Moving on. LGBA was criticised by funding regulator wasn't it?
BJ: We were criticised for saying we were the only charity that supported SS orientation. The regulator said it would be clearer to say only charity that supports that exclusively.

MG: Discussing criticism from funding regulator. LGBA acknowledged could be clearer and would be in future.
BJ: what is the q?
MG: I suggest you are inclined as an organisation to give impression nobody else out there supporting LGB. Vast majority are happily served by others

BJ: Regulator happy if add word 'exclusively'. Nevertheless, we would have appealed ruling if had the resource (we are volunteers), as we are the only ones to focus on definition related to sex. We do not actually know what LGB as a whole think

MG: Reading out from your fundraiser for this hearing. Talk about charity status enabling you to counter GI which is homophobic at its core
BJ: Where we see this leading to lesbians being ejected from Pride you can see this is homophobic.

MG: Natural point to stop. Expect 15/20 mins more with Ms Jackson
J: Come back 2 o'clock sharp

@threadreaderapp please unroll