Megathread Tranny Sideshows on Social Media - Any small-time spectacle on Reddit, Tumblr, Twitter, Dating Sites, and other social media.

I laughed out loud at 'gender + queer archaeologists'; I'm sure that particular job market is absolutely booming with qualified applicants.
In the future you will be able to study the ruins of defunct and abandoned genders: enbies, demi-boys, agenders, auti-genders and fluctuating-genders...

There's just won't be a lot of actual digging involved, it will all be on the wayback machine.
 
Last edited:
History will always be rewritten to try and legitimize trans ideology
20220706_113653.jpg20220706_113721.jpg
20220706_113349.jpg20220706_113626.jpg
The cross dresser article shows that all-male armies were a thing and that men would go so far as to dress as women to avoid having to fight but somehow the utility of a woman passing as a man is just not an option here?
20220706_114048.jpg20220706_113434.jpg20220706_113804.jpg

This keeps happening. Female skeletons buried with artefacts associated with male warriors?
Its a trans man! Women warriors? Never existed.
As if societies of the past were so respectful of what women wanted that they would say "omg, welcome to the gang, bro. Lets go pillaging and rape some chicks!"

The trans theory is so far down the chain of possibilities that it isn't even worth mentioning.

More realistic explanations;
  • Wanting financial freedom.
  • Wanting social freedom.
  • Not forced to get married.
  • Not socially reviled for being unmarried.
  • Avoid unwanted sexual attention from men.
  • Being able to have more kinds of jobs.
  • Being left the fuck alone.
  • Social benefits unique to men.
  • Not expected to have children.
  • Avoid getting raped.
  • Being respected by other men.
Most of the people of the past had a lot of work to do. There was no such thing as convenience. You didn't have time to sit on your ass and contemplate how feminine and masculine you appear, nor were they on Reddit being groomed by coomers

Of course women of the past hated being women, they weren't treated as equals across many cultures.
It's the same now, TIFs are running away from sexism, internalized misogyny (and homophobia).

Ask them what they like about being seen as guys and you'll likely hear them describe what they hate about performative femininity. What people expected of them, and what they silently fear they are incapable of achieving so they don't even try because they don't want to be humiliated when they fail.
They convinced themselves that they were unique by leaning into the "I'm not like the other girls" cliche, but a lot of them are insecure and bitter that they couldn't be the blonde bimbo stereotype even if they tried their hardest, so they mercilessly mock women who embody that look.

I think there are tomboys and dykes who really do hate feminine clothes, but if you ever see the wedding dress shows, you'll inevitably see a tomboy who tries on a dress that they love, and the family inevitably says "that's so weird. It's not  your style.. I don't think you suit girly dresses."
And their face just drops, because they really felt beautiful/womanly in it.
It's their wedding day, if they cannot be feminine then, then when?
They're scared to want to be feminine because they'll feel like a like shit if they try on the dream dress and don't feel that they look beautiful in it.

You also see the alternative brides who are convinced they don't want a traditional wedding dress but a lot of them end up falling for a white princess gown, they're shocked that they can look feminine, pretty and look like themselves in such a dress.

It's a massive cope for some tomboys with a personality type that hates failure and so avoids trying.
They try to do the feminine thing, make up and hair, but they end up looking awkward because they haven't learned how to style themselves/body type, or apply makeup, and they end up just saying "whatever! I'm different. I'm not vapid and vain! I'm one of the guys!"​
You cannot fail if you don't try. They convince themselves that they're happy but they'll mock the fuck out of girls who can do makeup, hair and style themselves.
The bitterness seeps through.

The butch lesbians and tomboys who are comfortable with themselves don't feel the need to constantly shit on the bimbos, even if they they think it's ugly or stupid.
 
Honestly, no matter what gross stuff stink ditches might be leaking or the picture of half-rotten coke can "dicks", nothing is more revolting to me than those macro clits. They cause some kind of visceral reaction in me, maybe because they are "real" inasmuch as they are not surgically created. I'd seriously FGM myself if I woke up with one of those one morning. Absolutely disgusting.
It's the other way around for me. Megaclits are weird as hell, but it's easier for me to digest the concept because they register like they're elephantiasis or some congenital defect. It's a bodypart that's shaped wrong, not some butchery inflicted upon the human form.

Different strokes for different folks, of course.

Saw a link on twitter to this Daily Kos article on those new Pew research results, which reads like a parody:

When it comes to trans folks playing sports, public opinion is unfortunately backward. Just under 60% of respondents believe trans folks should compete on teams that align with the sex they were assigned at birth instead of their gender identity. I have no doubt misinformation from conservatives contributes to that stance, though, baffling, an overwhelming number of respondents from all sides of the issue say science is the number one determinant of their view.​
Decided to rephrase it a little:
When it comes to cardinal directions, public opinion is unfortunately backward. Just under 99% of respondents believe that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. I have no doubt misinformation from solar propaganda campaigns contributes to that stance, though, baffling, an overwhelming number of respondents from all sides of the issue say that the number one determinant of their view was "going outside and fucking looking at the sky."​
There's even some pushback in the comments. The TRAs can't even keep people who still read the Daily Kos on their side.
You know what really gives up their game there? That "baffling, an overwhelming number [...] say science is the number one determinant of their view". Because they're the "trust Da Science guise!" team, they can't understand people looking at actual facts and recognizing the whole thing is insane.
 
It's the other way around for me. Megaclits are weird as hell, but it's easier for me to digest the concept because they register like they're elephantiasis or some congenital defect. It's a bodypart that's shaped wrong, not some butchery inflicted upon the human form.

Different strokes for different folks, of course.


You know what really gives up their game there? That "baffling, an overwhelming number [...] say science is the number one determinant of their view". Because they're the "trust Da Science guise!" team, they can't understand people looking at actual facts and recognizing the whole thing is insane.


These people need “experts” to tell them what color the sky is.

but I’m also admittedly ignorant about the scientific evidence. IOW, are there/what are/how significant are the advantages for a person born with xy chromosomes competing in a given sport activity against persons born 2x? And vice versa?

Just use your fucking eyes and common sense man!

Is it “Republican propaganda” that makes the women around you smaller and less muscular than the men?

Is it some “Fundamentalist Christian plot” that made all mens record in athletics faster/higher than womens?

Does the Heritage Foundation bribe female soccer players to lose against male teams of literal nobodies?

PLEASE NYT! TELL ME WHAT TO THINK!
 
History will always be rewritten to try and legitimize trans ideology
View attachment 3462393View attachment 3462394
View attachment 3462395View attachment 3462396
The cross dresser article shows that all-male armies were a thing and that men would go so far as to dress as women to avoid having to fight but somehow the utility of a woman passing as a man is just not an option here?
View attachment 3462400View attachment 3462402View attachment 3462403

This keeps happening. Female skeletons buried with artefacts associated with male warriors?
Its a trans man! Women warriors? Never existed.
As if societies of the past were so respectful of what women wanted that they would say "omg, welcome to the gang, bro. Lets go pillaging and rape some chicks!"

The trans theory is so far down the chain of possibilities that it isn't even worth mentioning.

More realistic explanations;
  • Wanting financial freedom.
  • Wanting social freedom.
  • Not forced to get married.
  • Not socially reviled for being unmarried.
  • Avoid unwanted sexual attention from men.
  • Being able to have more kinds of jobs.
  • Being left the fuck alone.
  • Social benefits unique to men.
  • Not expected to have children.
  • Avoid getting raped.
  • Being respected by other men.
Most of the people of the past had a lot of work to do. There was no such thing as convenience. You didn't have time to sit on your ass and contemplate how feminine and masculine you appear, nor were they on Reddit being groomed by coomers

Of course women of the past hated being women, they weren't treated as equals across many cultures.
It's the same now, TIFs are running away from sexism, internalized misogyny (and homophobia).

Ask them what they like about being seen as guys and you'll likely hear them describe what they hate about performative femininity. What people expected of them, and what they silently fear they are incapable of achieving so they don't even try because they don't want to be humiliated when they fail.
They convinced themselves that they were unique by leaning into the "I'm not like the other girls" cliche, but a lot of them are insecure and bitter that they couldn't be the blonde bimbo stereotype even if they tried their hardest, so they mercilessly mock women who embody that look.

I think there are tomboys and dykes who really do hate feminine clothes, but if you ever see the wedding dress shows, you'll inevitably see a tomboy who tries on a dress that they love, and the family inevitably says "that's so weird. It's not  your style.. I don't think you suit girly dresses."
And their face just drops, because they really felt beautiful/womanly in it.
It's their wedding day, if they cannot be feminine then, then when?
They're scared to want to be feminine because they'll feel like a like shit if they try on the dream dress and don't feel that they look beautiful in it.

You also see the alternative brides who are convinced they don't want a traditional wedding dress but a lot of them end up falling for a white princess gown, they're shocked that they can look feminine, pretty and look like themselves in such a dress.

It's a massive cope for some tomboys with a personality type that hates failure and so avoids trying.
They try to do the feminine thing, make up and hair, but they end up looking awkward because they haven't learned how to style themselves/body type, or apply makeup, and they end up just saying "whatever! I'm different. I'm not vapid and vain! I'm one of the guys!"​
You cannot fail if you don't try. They convince themselves that they're happy but they'll mock the fuck out of girls who can do makeup, hair and style themselves.
The bitterness seeps through.

The butch lesbians and tomboys who are comfortable with themselves don't feel the need to constantly shit on the bimbos, even if they they think it's ugly or stupid.

I don't understand how women in the past, with no HRT or surgeries, and who CLEARLY look like women in the pictures we have of them, passed better and unsuspected back then than the bearded manlets of today do.

Billy Tipton's life is a fascinating case study. Her kids (adopted) all say they had no idea she wasn't actually their father.

Willful ignorance? But this was during a time when such practices were still viewed as morally rephrensible, and carried pretty big social stigmas. Just, how?
 
New tranny holiday it this things "tism day." Let's hope it's sterilized it's self. Of course it's on Tik Tok.

View attachment 3458005
View attachment 3458006

View attachment 3458008
These playful claims of being special because of autism really drive me mad. A member of my family is highly autistic and while he is brilliant in a number of fields, he is so dysfunctional that he will probably never be able to live on his own and working a regular job with other people is extremely stressful for him. Now I know it is a spectrum and not all cases are that severe, but can do I hate those people who celebrate mild autistic symptoms as something that makes them interesting and cool like neopronouns or a tattoo.
For real full spectrum autists, it is a crippling disability with serious impacts on their own and their families lives. It's not a fun occasion for a cake. People like Ella here disgust me.

I'm a bit behind, so apologies in advance of these were posted before.


It's always uplifting seeing so many black women stand up for their rights:


IMG_20220706_143233.jpg

Owen Jones wrote an article in which he explained to all those feeble minded women out there that by not dedicating their lives to supporting men in drag, they are actually supporting the patriarchy. You know, the system in which men tell women what to do and think.

IMG_20220706_143649.jpg
Finally, another story proving once and for all that nobody can tell the difference between a neovag and a regular one. (This story might have been posted before. After all, there are.many such cases.)

IMG_20220706_143719.jpg
 
I don't understand how women in the past, with no HRT or surgeries, and who CLEARLY look like women in the pictures we have of them, passed better and unsuspected back then than the bearded manlets of today do.

Billy Tipton's life is a fascinating case study. Her kids (adopted) all say they had no idea she wasn't actually their father.

Willful ignorance? But this was during a time when such practices were still viewed as morally rephrensible, and carried pretty big social stigmas. Just, how?
The theory goes that in current-era, we've all grown up seeing women with short hair and trousers every day. It's a completely unexceptional sight. We're primed to clock women dressed like men in a way that our forebears weren't.
 
I know this will tug at some terf heartstrings but read this carefully before getting too soppy with sympathy for this nut. She's so deplorably self-focused, so stuck in her own head and her what if a what if a what if a race to the bottom paranoia. She isn't a trauma survivor. She has not got a thought to spare for anyone who is. Nothing has happened to her that made her this frightened. She is just up her own asshole with fantasies of what if a what if a what if a and then a guy exploded next to me and shot semen in me and my dad wouldn't drive me to the clinic for Plan B WHAT THEN?


100% byproduct of 24 hour News and Social Media.

Literally go outside, touch grass, make friends, get a hobby. That will fix her issues 100%.
 
These playful claims of being special because of autism really drive me mad. A member of my family is highly autistic and while he is brilliant in a number of fields, he is so dysfunctional that he will probably never be able to live on his own and working a regular job with other people is extremely stressful for him. Now I know it is a spectrum and not all cases are that severe, but can do I hate those people who celebrate mild autistic symptoms as something that makes them interesting and cool like neopronouns or a tattoo.
For real full spectrum autists, it is a crippling disability with serious impacts on their own and their families lives. It's not a fun occasion for a cake. People like Ella here disgust me.

I'm a bit behind, so apologies in advance of these were posted before.


It's always uplifting seeing so many black women stand up for their rights:


View attachment 3462591

Owen Jones wrote an article in which he explained to all those feeble minded women out there that by not dedicating their lives to supporting men in drag, they are actually supporting the patriarchy. You know, the system in which men tell women what to do and think.

View attachment 3462592
Finally, another story proving once and for all that nobody can tell the difference between a neovag and a regular one. (This story might have been posted before. After all, there are.many such cases.)

View attachment 3462593
Try New McDonald’s McVagpus: Salty, Bloody and Sour! Just like off milk!

Someone needs to tell this woman she is just a prop in a mental illness. A prop who now needs to use mouthwash.
 
I don't understand how women in the past, with no HRT or surgeries, and who CLEARLY look like women in the pictures we have of them, passed better and unsuspected back then than the bearded manlets of today do.

Billy Tipton's life is a fascinating case study. Her kids (adopted) all say they had no idea she wasn't actually their father.

Willful ignorance? But this was during a time when such practices were still viewed as morally rephrensible, and carried pretty big social stigmas. Just, how?
There are many reasons. This is similar to how in strictly sex-separated and anti-gay societies people do not, for example, clock men as homosexual who you and I would recognise as absolute flamers. I've met the gayest gays ever in an Islamic country and no one there suspected they were gay, or if they did they repressed it. They were the single brothers of the family who didn't marry and took care of the parents, and that was it.

In a society is which gender roles are quite rigid people simply don't expect troonery, and thus they don't recognise it, or they ignore it if their brain tells them something is off. People were also far more private and formal in the past: no one was going to ask if the short and rather effeminate man was actually a woman - it's just not done, and if you asked other people would have shut you down because even the concept was considered ridiculous. People also often wore more formal clothes even around when family, which also hides the FTM.

Another thing is that the current crop of FTMs is extra and unusually small, short, feminine and neurotic (as often noted in the SRS/GRS thread), so not necessarily reflective of the women who would dress and live like men in the past. A 5'5-5'7 working class woman might have easily passed as a somewhat malnourished man if she dressed the part. People were far less healthy and less well nourished even just a few decades ago, so more variety in bodyshape was expected.
 
I don't understand how women in the past, with no HRT or surgeries, and who CLEARLY look like women in the pictures we have of them, passed better and unsuspected back then than the bearded manlets of today do.

Billy Tipton's life is a fascinating case study. Her kids (adopted) all say they had no idea she wasn't actually their father.

Willful ignorance? But this was during a time when such practices were still viewed as morally rephrensible, and carried pretty big social stigmas. Just, how?

Probably because people saw what they wanted to see. None of them publicly said they were living as men. It just wasn't something that was done. So everyone just assumed that if you wore a suit, had short hair, and introduced yourself as Fred that you were a 100% true and honest man.

Humans have an unbelievable capacity to see only what they want and expect to. If you believe in aliens, you're more likely to believe you were abducted than if you don't. Go looking for Bigfoot? You are more likely to see "him" in the shadows.

Now we all know about trannies and they do everything short of tattooing TRANNY on their forehead. So if we see one we recognize it for what it is.

I'm pretty sure it's that simple.
 
Bette Midler apologized. You know what happens.
View attachment 3462339

This transsexual is so narcissistic and deluded that he thinks his farts are newsworthy.
View attachment 3462299

He looks like something out of Aphex Twin's "Come To Daddy" video.
View attachment 3462317

View attachment 3462319 View attachment 3462310

View attachment 3462328 View attachment 3462331

Nice fiveheads, ladies! (There must be a factory somewhere that makes these things.)
View attachment 3462324 View attachment 3462327

View attachment 3462333 View attachment 3462337
Ari Drennen, or as he should be known Zach Dallmeyer-Drennen, was recently doxed in the Keffals thread. Some notable images not shared here in this thread:
36553BB4-B98D-4DBF-9C4F-D6583A515D31.jpeg
This tweet is still up, even after being included in the dox.
5CC7DC2C-038C-4ED0-BE55-FFF6FC603F65.jpeg
 
Maya Forester won her most recent legal battle. They ruled that it was unlawful to discriminate against her like they did.



PRESS STATEMENT: MAYA FORSTATER’S VICTORY IN EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL: A WIN FOR FREE SPEECH AND SEX-BASED RIGHTS

6th July 2022: Maya Forstater, who took a claim for belief discrimination against her former employer, the Center for Global Development, has been vindicated by a ruling that she was unlawfully discriminated against by her former employer on the basis of her protected belief.
This follows a ruling at an Employment Tribunal in June 2021 when Ms Forstater successfully established a binding legal precedent that gender-critical beliefs were in principle protected by the Equality Act. Following that appeal, her case continued at the Employment Tribunal, to determine whether she was unlawfully discriminated against by her former employer on the basis of her protected belief.
The Tribunal unanimously found that, as acts of unlawful discrimination on the basis of Ms Forstater’s beliefs, CGD:
1. Did not offer her an employment contract;
2. Did not renew her visiting fellowship; and
3. Removed her from its website.
Among the findings in the judgment are that Ms Forstater’s tweets and comments, which formed the basis of CGD’s treatment of her, were statements of her protected gender-critical beliefs. The negative consequences which flowed from them were therefore unlawfully discriminatory.
The statements that Maya Forstater made in this regard included:
- “A man’s internal feeling that he is a woman has no basis in material reality”.
- Describing Pips Bunce, a male who identified as a woman for part of the
week, as a “part time cross dresser”.
- Drawing an analogy between self-identifying transwomen and Rachel Dolezal.
- That “the places that women and girls get assaulted and harassed are ‘normal life’”; in the context of a discussion of whether recognising transwomen as female potentially posed a risk to women and girls. This was not, as CGD’s counsel had argued, “catastrophising” but was instead “an unobjectionable observation in the course of the debate … [which was] not an objectively unreasonable observation to make”.
- That describing self-identification as a woman as “a feeling in their head” was not to equate self-identification with mental illness and “did little more than assert Ms Forstater’s gender critical belief”.
The Tribunal also recognised that Ms Forstater had been entitled to criticise those holding an opposite view to her, and had done so legitimately. The Tribunal found in particular that the mere fact that offence may be taken to a particular statement was not sufficient to render it incapable of legal protection. This included describing opposing views as “stupid, dangerous or unfair” and the statement that allowing male-bodied individuals access to women-only spaces gave rise to “an increase in risks, threats and discomfort” to women.
Forstater, a public policy researcher, who co-founded human rights organisation Sex Matters a year ago, welcomed the verdict.

“My case matters for everyone who believes in the importance of truth and free
speech.
“We are all free to believe whatever we wish. What we are not free to do is compel others to believe the same thing, to silence those who disagree with us or to force others to deny reality.
“Human beings cannot change sex. It is not hateful to say that; in fact it is important in order to treat everyone fairly and safely. It shouldn’t take courage to say this, and no one should lose their job for doing so.
“I am pleased that the Tribunal has allowed me to put on record what happened to me at the Center for Global Development. The tribunal has found that I was a victim of discrimination because I stated that biological sex is real and important, a view shared by the vast majority of people in this country. I hope employers will take note of the judgment.
“I would like to thank my family, who have gone through this with me over the past three years, and my legal team: barristers Ben Cooper QC and Anya Palmer, and my solicitor Peter Daly. Above all I want to thank the thousands of women and men who sent me their support, and in particular JK Rowling for standing by me in the darkest of days.
“To hear that my case has helped other people to speak up against unfair and
discriminatory practices at work makes the hardship of the last three years easier to bear. All those who are fighting similar battles — and there are many such people now — have my solidarity and support.
“I also want to thank all the brilliant organisations fighting to protect sex-based
rights. They will make the world a safer, fairer place for women and girls. They are stepping into the democratic space that well-funded organisations like CGD have vacated through cowardice.
“CGD’s unfair treatment of me, and prejudice against people who believe that sex is real, changed my life. If the organisation hadn’t ended my employment, I would never have co-founded Sex Matters. I would never have had the opportunity to be part of the amazing movement in the UK to re-assert the importance of sex-based rights.
We have had enough of being sidelined in language, law, policy and public spaces. This judgment is further evidence that the tide is turning.”
Notes for editors:

1. Maya Forstater is available for media interviews on the Tribunal judgment.
Please email interview requests and questions media@hiyamaya.net
2. For technical questions on the judgment and its significance for employment
law in the UK, contact Peter Daly at Doyle Clayton Solicitors
pdaly@doyleclayton.co.uk .
3. High-res photographs of Maya Forstater are available for download and use
here https://hiyamaya.net/photographs/(including with JK Rowling).
4. About Maya Forstater: Maya Forstater worked for many years in the field of
international development, with a focus on taxation and sustainable development. She was a visiting fellow at the European arm of the Center for
Global Development, a Washington-based think-tank, between 2017 and 2019, before losing her job in March 2019 after she publicly advocated against
planned changes to the Gender Recognition Act (2004), which the government later shelved. Since April 2021 she has been executive director of Sex
Matters.
5. About Sex Matters. Ms Forstater is Executive Director of Sex Matters, which is the not-for-profit human-rights organisation she and others co-founded in
2021 to campaign for sex-based rights. Sex Matters lobbies for clarity on sex
in law and institutions; in areas including single-sex services, sports, schools
and freedom of speech.
6. About Forstater’s legal case: Forstater took her claim to the employment
tribunal in March 2019. In November 2019 a preliminary hearing was held on the question of whether her gender-critical beliefs were protected under
discrimination law. On 18th December 2019 Judge James Tayler ruled that
her beliefs were not protected and failed the Grainger criteria for protection
under UK human-rights law by being “not worthy of respect in a democratic
society”.
Forstater appealed that judgment to the Employment Appeal Tribunal. In a
precedent-setting ruling on 10th June 2021, Tayler’s decision was overturned
in its entirety. His Honour Judge Choudhury, President of the Employment
Appeal Tribunal, held that Forstater’s belief fell within the protection of Article 9(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, and therefore was covered by UK discrimination law. Forstater’s claim was sent back to the EmploymentTribunal to determine whether the treatment she had received at the hands of CGD was unlawfully discriminatory on the basis of her belief.
The most recent case was heard remotely in the Employment Tribunal from
7th to 22nd March 2022, by a tribunal of three members chaired by
Employment Judge Glennie. This was the hearing on the facts of the matter,
seeking to determine whether Forstater was, in fact, discriminated against on
grounds of her belief. The judgment handed down on 6th July 2022 concluded CGD has until 17 August 2022 to apply to the Employment Appeal Tribunal for permission to appeal this judgment.

7. Further background information on Forstater’s case and her employment at the Center for Global Development can be found on her website: hiyamaya.netPRESS STATEMENT: MAYA FORSTATER’S VICTORY IN EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL: A WIN FOR FREE SPEECH AND SEX-BASED RIGHTS
6th July 2022: Maya Forstater, who took a claim for belief discrimination against her former employer, the Center for Global Development, has been vindicated by a ruling that she was unlawfully discriminated against by her former employer on the basis of her protected belief.
This follows a ruling at an Employment Tribunal in June 2021 when Ms Forstater successfully established a binding legal precedent that gender-critical beliefs were in principle protected by the Equality Act. Following that appeal, her case continued at the Employment Tribunal, to determine whether she was unlawfully discriminated against by her former employer on the basis of her protected belief.
The Tribunal unanimously found that, as acts of unlawful discrimination on the basis of Ms Forstater’s beliefs, CGD:
1. Did not offer her an employment contract;
2. Did not renew her visiting fellowship; and
3. Removed her from its website.
Among the findings in the judgment are that Ms Forstater’s tweets and comments, which formed the basis of CGD’s treatment of her, were statements of her protected gender-critical beliefs. The negative consequences which flowed from them were therefore unlawfully discriminatory.
The statements that Maya Forstater made in this regard included:
- “A man’s internal feeling that he is a woman has no basis in material reality”.
- Describing Pips Bunce, a male who identified as a woman for part of the
week, as a “part time cross dresser”.
- Drawing an analogy between self-identifying transwomen and Rachel Dolezal.
- That “the places that women and girls get assaulted and harassed are ‘normal life’”; in the context of a discussion of whether recognising transwomen as female potentially posed a risk to women and girls. This was not, as CGD’s counsel had argued, “catastrophising” but was instead “an unobjectionable observation in the course of the debate … [which was] not an objectively unreasonable observation to make”.
- That describing self-identification as a woman as “a feeling in their head” was not to equate self-identification with mental illness and “did little more than assert Ms Forstater’s gender critical belief”.
The Tribunal also recognised that Ms Forstater had been entitled to criticise those holding an opposite view to her, and had done so legitimately. The Tribunal found in particular that the mere fact that offence may be taken to a particular statement was not sufficient to render it incapable of legal protection. This included describing opposing views as “stupid, dangerous or unfair” and the statement that allowing male-bodied individuals access to women-only spaces gave rise to “an increase in risks, threats and discomfort” to women.
Forstater, a public policy researcher, who co-founded human rights organisation Sex Matters a year ago, welcomed the verdict.
“My case matters for everyone who believes in the importance of truth and free
speech.
“We are all free to believe whatever we wish. What we are not free to do is compel others to believe the same thing, to silence those who disagree with us or to force others to deny reality.
“Human beings cannot change sex. It is not hateful to say that; in fact it is important in order to treat everyone fairly and safely. It shouldn’t take courage to say this, and no one should lose their job for doing so.
“I am pleased that the Tribunal has allowed me to put on record what happened to me at the Center for Global Development. The tribunal has found that I was a victim of discrimination because I stated that biological sex is real and important, a view shared by the vast majority of people in this country. I hope employers will take note of the judgment.
“I would like to thank my family, who have gone through this with me over the past three years, and my legal team: barristers Ben Cooper QC and Anya Palmer, and my solicitor Peter Daly. Above all I want to thank the thousands of women and men who sent me their support, and in particular JK Rowling for standing by me in the darkest of days.
“To hear that my case has helped other people to speak up against unfair and
discriminatory practices at work makes the hardship of the last three years easier to bear. All those who are fighting similar battles — and there are many such people now — have my solidarity and support.
“I also want to thank all the brilliant organisations fighting to protect sex-based
rights. They will make the world a safer, fairer place for women and girls. They are stepping into the democratic space that well-funded organisations like CGD have vacated through cowardice.
“CGD’s unfair treatment of me, and prejudice against people who believe that sex is real, changed my life. If the organisation hadn’t ended my employment, I would never have co-founded Sex Matters. I would never have had the opportunity to be part of the amazing movement in the UK to re-assert the importance of sex-based rights.
We have had enough of being sidelined in language, law, policy and public spaces. This judgment is further evidence that the tide is turning.”
Notes for editors:
1. Maya Forstater is available for media interviews on the Tribunal judgment.
Please email interview requests and questions media@hiyamaya.net
2. For technical questions on the judgment and its significance for employment
law in the UK, contact Peter Daly at Doyle Clayton Solicitors
pdaly@doyleclayton.co.uk .
3. High-res photographs of Maya Forstater are available for download and use
here https://hiyamaya.net/photographs/ (including with JK Rowling).
4. About Maya Forstater: Maya Forstater worked for many years in the field of
international development, with a focus on taxation and sustainable development. She was a visiting fellow at the European arm of the Center for
Global Development, a Washington-based think-tank, between 2017 and 2019, before losing her job in March 2019 after she publicly advocated against
planned changes to the Gender Recognition Act (2004), which the government later shelved. Since April 2021 she has been executive director of Sex
Matters.
5. About Sex Matters. Ms Forstater is Executive Director of Sex Matters, which is the not-for-profit human-rights organisation she and others co-founded in
2021 to campaign for sex-based rights. Sex Matters lobbies for clarity on sex
in law and institutions; in areas including single-sex services, sports, schools
and freedom of speech.
6. About Forstater’s legal case: Forstater took her claim to the employment
tribunal in March 2019. In November 2019 a preliminary hearing was held on the question of whether her gender-critical beliefs were protected under
discrimination law. On 18th December 2019 Judge James Tayler ruled that
her beliefs were not protected and failed the Grainger criteria for protection
under UK human-rights law by being “not worthy of respect in a democratic
society”.
Forstater appealed that judgment to the Employment Appeal Tribunal. In a
precedent-setting ruling on 10th June 2021, Tayler’s decision was overturned
in its entirety. His Honour Judge Choudhury, President of the Employment
Appeal Tribunal, held that Forstater’s belief fell within the protection of Article 9(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, and therefore was covered by UK discrimination law. Forstater’s claim was sent back to the EmploymentTribunal to determine whether the treatment she had received at the hands of CGD was unlawfully discriminatory on the basis of her belief.
The most recent case was heard remotely in the Employment Tribunal from
7th to 22nd March 2022, by a tribunal of three members chaired by
Employment Judge Glennie. This was the hearing on the facts of the matter,
seeking to determine whether Forstater was, in fact, discriminated against on
grounds of her belief. The judgment handed down on 6th July 2022 concluded CGD has until 17 August 2022 to apply to the Employment Appeal Tribunal for permission to appeal this judgment.
7. Further background information on Forstater’s case and her employment at the Center for Global Development can be found on her website: hiyamaya.net

Edit: Monty proves how not smart he is. Legal briefings are really not hard to understand unless they involve already complicated things like property law or unfamiliar to layperson doctrines of legal practices. Most of the time you can skip those bits and still grok the whole thing.

Judges try to write things clearly enough for laypeople in their decisions. They know the person receiving it doesn't speak lawese and want them to understand it.

The fact that Monty can't understand them is very telling. We have cows here that are tards, but still capable of Vaguely understanding legal stuff. At least enough to file lawsuits, which they then lose.

FBDEA646-3F94-4243-914B-B38CAF0C595D.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Someone mentioned in the topic about the "problem of bottom growth"
What's the problem with these clitoris besides looking awful?
do these hurt?
i cant imagine
The fact that Monty can't understand them is very telling. We have cows here that are tards, but still capable of Vaguely understanding legal stuff. At least enough to file lawsuits, which they then lose.
Is Kate retarded?
It is simply impossible not to understand the essence.
Obviously lazy asses just want the gist of it in one tweet.
 
Last edited:
Back