@derailedthought.bsky.social
Suspicious of both standpoint epistemology and credentialism. Leaves me little to say here, doesn’t it?
So many were gloating over the initial Forstater judgement too. Rivkah Brown seems not to have noticed that GCs are having success with judges at higher tier courts. Ones that actually set precedent.
December 16, 2025 at 9:28 PM
So many were gloating over the initial Forstater judgement too. Rivkah Brown seems not to have noticed that GCs are having success with judges at higher tier courts. Ones that actually set precedent.
I'm surprised you didn't mute sooner. I admire your patience!
These MRAs always know the relevance of sex when they decide whether someone should have rights or should STFU and "educate" themselves.
These MRAs always know the relevance of sex when they decide whether someone should have rights or should STFU and "educate" themselves.
December 16, 2025 at 5:45 PM
I'm surprised you didn't mute sooner. I admire your patience!
These MRAs always know the relevance of sex when they decide whether someone should have rights or should STFU and "educate" themselves.
These MRAs always know the relevance of sex when they decide whether someone should have rights or should STFU and "educate" themselves.
You don't have to believe us. There are so many articles out there about what female people have to deal with
Again it's possible you just miss them
But I'm starting to think you are not interested in understanding female people. More interested in being an obtuse MRA.
Again it's possible you just miss them
But I'm starting to think you are not interested in understanding female people. More interested in being an obtuse MRA.
December 16, 2025 at 5:34 PM
You don't have to believe us. There are so many articles out there about what female people have to deal with
Again it's possible you just miss them
But I'm starting to think you are not interested in understanding female people. More interested in being an obtuse MRA.
Again it's possible you just miss them
But I'm starting to think you are not interested in understanding female people. More interested in being an obtuse MRA.
Reposted
It's awfully rude and unkind to draw attention to these kinds of risks, I know. But isn't that rather the point of safeguarding? Kindness is complicated.
December 16, 2025 at 2:12 PM
It's awfully rude and unkind to draw attention to these kinds of risks, I know. But isn't that rather the point of safeguarding? Kindness is complicated.
Dialectical materialism is too transphobic. SelfIDealism is the one true and righteous faith!
December 16, 2025 at 3:03 PM
Dialectical materialism is too transphobic. SelfIDealism is the one true and righteous faith!
both that permitting Upton's presence wronged Peggie, and that objecting to it wronged Upton. Both cannot be true.
Between subs and deliberation, the EHRC intervened. NHS Fife adopted the policy Peggie had argued for. The tribunal was not required to consider this, but it is a useful sanity check.
Between subs and deliberation, the EHRC intervened. NHS Fife adopted the policy Peggie had argued for. The tribunal was not required to consider this, but it is a useful sanity check.
December 16, 2025 at 1:41 PM
both that permitting Upton's presence wronged Peggie, and that objecting to it wronged Upton. Both cannot be true.
Between subs and deliberation, the EHRC intervened. NHS Fife adopted the policy Peggie had argued for. The tribunal was not required to consider this, but it is a useful sanity check.
Between subs and deliberation, the EHRC intervened. NHS Fife adopted the policy Peggie had argued for. The tribunal was not required to consider this, but it is a useful sanity check.
contingent on permission.
The tribunal found that merely permitting Upton's presence wronged Peggie. That only makes sense if Upton's right to enter was contingent. But if so, Peggie's objection was legally correct.
Stating a correct legal position cannot be harassment. The tribunal found... 2/3
The tribunal found that merely permitting Upton's presence wronged Peggie. That only makes sense if Upton's right to enter was contingent. But if so, Peggie's objection was legally correct.
Stating a correct legal position cannot be harassment. The tribunal found... 2/3
December 16, 2025 at 1:41 PM
contingent on permission.
The tribunal found that merely permitting Upton's presence wronged Peggie. That only makes sense if Upton's right to enter was contingent. But if so, Peggie's objection was legally correct.
Stating a correct legal position cannot be harassment. The tribunal found... 2/3
The tribunal found that merely permitting Upton's presence wronged Peggie. That only makes sense if Upton's right to enter was contingent. But if so, Peggie's objection was legally correct.
Stating a correct legal position cannot be harassment. The tribunal found... 2/3
Reposted
A man might be a biological father, adoptive father, step father. All types of father. Similarly race horses, cart horses, bay horses are types of horse.
A trans woman isn’t a woman because he is male and a woman is a person of the female sex.
Like how sea horses or pommel horses aren’t horses.
A trans woman isn’t a woman because he is male and a woman is a person of the female sex.
Like how sea horses or pommel horses aren’t horses.
December 13, 2025 at 11:32 PM
A man might be a biological father, adoptive father, step father. All types of father. Similarly race horses, cart horses, bay horses are types of horse.
A trans woman isn’t a woman because he is male and a woman is a person of the female sex.
Like how sea horses or pommel horses aren’t horses.
A trans woman isn’t a woman because he is male and a woman is a person of the female sex.
Like how sea horses or pommel horses aren’t horses.
Reposted
Trans identifying men are a subset of men so it's up to other men to ensure their safety in men's single sex spaces. Women aren't human shields.
December 7, 2025 at 8:55 AM
Trans identifying men are a subset of men so it's up to other men to ensure their safety in men's single sex spaces. Women aren't human shields.
Reposted
Nothing non partisan, unfortunately.
December 12, 2025 at 6:59 PM
Nothing non partisan, unfortunately.
'z's instead of 's's are not grounds to appeal. But the effects of AI use are relevant to viewing the judgement in the round.
December 12, 2025 at 5:48 PM
'z's instead of 's's are not grounds to appeal. But the effects of AI use are relevant to viewing the judgement in the round.
Americanisms found at paragraphs 96, 98, 587 (changing the spelling in a quote), 591, 912, 1017, 1019, 1020, 1069, 1071 and appendix 5 (twice).
Yes. Definitely some AI input.
Truncated quotes of FWS suggest this has altered court's reasoning and consistently in respondents' favour.
Yes. Definitely some AI input.
Truncated quotes of FWS suggest this has altered court's reasoning and consistently in respondents' favour.
December 12, 2025 at 5:42 PM
Americanisms found at paragraphs 96, 98, 587 (changing the spelling in a quote), 591, 912, 1017, 1019, 1020, 1069, 1071 and appendix 5 (twice).
Yes. Definitely some AI input.
Truncated quotes of FWS suggest this has altered court's reasoning and consistently in respondents' favour.
Yes. Definitely some AI input.
Truncated quotes of FWS suggest this has altered court's reasoning and consistently in respondents' favour.
‘Read, learn and do not forget: those Summerland victims need not have died,’
December 12, 2025 at 3:57 PM
‘Read, learn and do not forget: those Summerland victims need not have died,’
It's both. If you take 827, it is not consistent for the tribunal to find as it did for 1(a) while also reasoning that non-compliance with R24 does not give rise to risks. The harassment finding proves violations of propriety create risks (according to this ET). Exactly what Schedule 22 addresses.
December 12, 2025 at 1:39 PM
It's both. If you take 827, it is not consistent for the tribunal to find as it did for 1(a) while also reasoning that non-compliance with R24 does not give rise to risks. The harassment finding proves violations of propriety create risks (according to this ET). Exactly what Schedule 22 addresses.
You mean wearing a dress and long hair DOESN'T make him a woman?!
December 12, 2025 at 12:41 PM
You mean wearing a dress and long hair DOESN'T make him a woman?!