Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Cosmic Yak]

I suppose we shall see, one way or another. In the meanwhile, we might ask whether similarly vocal gender critical activists are being interviewed by the NYPD or the LAPD or the Chicago police for their tweets and (possibly) referred for prosecution. For all that you guys get smeared with "TERF island" and the like, it's still way easier to be terfy on this side of the pond.

It is, and I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree on whether or not that's a good thing.
Hate speech is specifically allowed in the States, and I find that troubling.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_in_the_United_States

Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express "the thought that we hate". United States v. Schwimmer, 279 U. S. 644, 655 (1929)

 

[Cosmic Yak]

As has been explained to you MULTIPLE times now, its not just "being locked up" that chills free speech - Police using threats and intimidatory tactics such as arrests and questioning which also chill free speech.

When you express gender-critical views in the UK...

You can be taken to a tribunal - https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-67934781

A social worker who was suspended for sharing gender-critical views on social media has won an employment tribunal.
Rachel Meade, from Dartford, Kent, won her claim on the basis that the views shared were protected beliefs under the Equality Act.Her employer, Westminster City Council, apologised for the way she had been treated.

Gender critical views are protected speech. As I keep saying.
Note also that it was Meade who took her employers to a tribunal, not the other way round as you allege:

Ms Meade took both organisations to an employment tribunal, which was heard in July.
In the judgment published on Monday, the tribunal said all of her Facebook posts and other communications "fell within her protected rights for freedom of thought and freedom to manifest her beliefs".

Highlighted to show that what I've been saying is, in fact, true.

You can lose your job - https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-wiltshire-68681038

Lister was dismissed for causing distress to a student, not for expressing gender critical views:

"A thorough investigation resulted in Mr Lister being dismissed for actions that were deemed discriminatory, causing significant upset and potential harm to a student, amounting to gross misconduct, and not simply for holding gender critical beliefs."

You can expelled from a course - https://www.theguardian.com/society...logy-over-expulsion-for-gender-critical-views

A student psychotherapist who was expelled from his master’s course after expressing gender-critical views has received an apology from the training institute where he was studying....
The institute admitted in a statement that it had breached its own policies when it expelled Esses from his course, and failed to offer him a hearing or an internal appeal. He was three years into a five-year course, training to become a therapist, and was unable to complete the training.

In the statement, the college noted: “Metanoia recognises that gender-critical beliefs are protected under the Equality Act 2010. These are the beliefs that sex is binary, immutable and biological and is fundamentally important.”

Highlighted yet again....

You can be arrested - https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ist-charged-over-allegedly-transphobic-tweets

Charges related to alleged homophobic and transphobic messages on social media have been dropped against a Scottish activist.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-59076966

And there you go again, sidestepping this important part of what we are saying. There does NOT need to be a prosecution in order to chill free speech.

Take the example of Morag Brown, a 74 year-old pensioner who had an argument with her neighbour. That neighbour accused her of using a slur, as you say, "a single shouted insult". The result was that Mrs Brown was arrested, put into the back of a Police van and taken to Kilmarnock police station where she was searched, her jewellery and the contents of her handbag taken and then she was questioned under caution. Eventually, she was released without charge.

I'm guessing you are fine with all this? Do you believe the arrest, search and interrogation of this old woman is not going to deter her from speaking her mind?

No, of course I'm not fine with this. I have said, over and over and over again that I'm not fine with this. What part of 'I'm not fine with this' are you construing as 'I'm fine with this'?

Police investigations should START with interviewing the complainant and/or reading the alleged offending post or online comment. If it is there established that no crime has been committed, the investigation should END right there.... immediately. They should not proceed to arrest/detain or question the person the complaint has been made against. No crime has been committed, so there is absolutely NO reason to proceed any further.

And again, I have said over and over and over and over and over again that I am not defending the police in these cases. I am opposed to TRAs trying to shut down free speech. Once again, I invite you to find any part of anything I have ever said, at any time, that led you to believe I think the opposite of what I've just said here.
Good lord.

 

[smartcooky]

Gender critical views are protected speech. As I keep saying.

Yes, you keep saying it

Yes its true, gender critical speech IS protected

Nonetheless, people DO get wrongly fired, suspended and arrested for it. Only afterwards are they cleared.... BUT ITS TOO ******* LATE BY THEN. THEIR FREE SPEECH HAS ALREADY BEEN CHILLED!!!!

They have been dragged though the mill, have had to pay out for lawyers and court costs and had to take time out of their lives to attend tribunals and hearing to clear their names and get their ******* jobs back!!

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Yes, you keep saying it

Yes its true, gender critical speech IS protected

Nonetheless, people DO get wrongly fired, suspended and arrested for it. Only afterwards are they cleared.... BUT ITS TOO ******* LATE BY THEN. THEIR FREE SPEECH HAS ALREADY BEEN CHILLED!!!!

They have been dragged though the mill, have had to pay out for lawyers and court costs and had to take time out of their lives to attend tribunals and hearing to clear their names and get their ******* jobs back!!

Yes, I know. Why do you keep shouting at me about this? I'm not arguing with you. I agree with you.

 

[smartcooky]

Yes, I know. Why do you keep shouting at me about this? I'm not arguing with you. I agree with you.

You were disagreeing with damion earlier, and he was saying exactly what I have been saying.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

You were disagreeing with damion earlier, and he was saying exactly what I have been saying.

No. Damion was saying that gender critical speech is illegal in the UK. That was what I was disagreeing with. Because it's not.
I have been very clear throughout that I disapprove of TRAs trying to shut down debate on trans issues.

 

[smartcooky]

No. Damion was saying that gender critical speech is illegal in the UK. That was what I was disagreeing with. Because it's not.
I have been very clear throughout that I disapprove of TRAs trying to shut down debate on trans issues.

As I read what damion was saying, he was arguing that is it (often) treated as though it is not protected speech.

In any case, its legal status as protected speech hasn't stopped people with gender critical viewpoints from being labelled transphobic, and then being fired, suspended, expelled, dismissed, de-platformed or arrested for speaking their mind.

 

[Elaedith]

Amnesty weighs in on the history of women's oppression in Afghanistan:

"Under the Taliban, women and girls were discriminated against in many ways, for the 'crime' of identifying as a girl."

 

[Cosmic Yak]

As I read what damion was saying, he was arguing that is it (often) treated as though it is not protected speech.

Indeed. A lot of these cases are from the early days of trans activism, while the precedents were being established in the courts. A lot has changed since then.

In any case, its legal status as protected speech hasn't stopped people with gender critical viewpoints from being labelled transphobic, and then being fired, suspended, expelled, dismissed, de-platformed or arrested for speaking their mind.

No, it hasn't- but every single one of those cases you listed earlier failed.
To rephrase you: Its legal status as protected speech hasn't stopped TRAs trying to get people with gender critical viewpoints labelled as transphobic, and trying to get them fired, suspended, dismissed, de-platformed or arrested for speaking their minds.
Which is what I have been saying all along: TRAs are trying to weaponise hate speech laws to shut down legitimate debate and legitimate freedom of expression. However, the tide has most definitely turned against them, and these attempts are going to get less and less traction with the police and the CPS as time goes on.

 

[d4m10n]

Damion was saying that gender critical speech is illegal in the UK.

No, I was saying that your local constabulary seem confused on this point of law since they keep interrogating people who publicly affirm gender critical views. I was also saying that if you wanted to make a fair comparison between the US & UK on this point you should ask whether this happens in both countries.

TRAs are trying to weaponise hate speech laws to shut down legitimate debate and legitimate freedom of expression. However, the tide has most definitely turned against them, and these attempts are going to get less and less traction with the police and the CPS as time goes on.

From your keyboard to gods' ears.

 

[d4m10n]

"Under the Taliban, women and girls were discriminated against in many ways, for the 'crime' of identifying as a girl."

You have to admit it was stunning and brave for these (hypothetical) young males to come out as girls under Taliban rule.

 

[Darat]

No. Damion was saying that gender critical speech is illegal in the UK. That was what I was disagreeing with. Because it's not.
I have been very clear throughout that I disapprove of TRAs trying to shut down debate on trans issues.

Yes you have.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

No, I was saying that your local constabulary seem confused on this point of law since they keep interrogating people who publicly affirm gender critical views.

No, I was saying that. You seem a little confused yourself.

I was also saying that if you wanted to make a fair comparison between the US & UK on this point you should ask whether this happens in both countries.

I don't recall you saying that at all. When did you say that?

From your keyboard to gods' ears.

Simple me saying again what I have said several times before- something you seem to have missed the first few times. At least you've caught up now. Well done.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Yes you have.

Thank you.

 

[smartcooky]

No, it hasn't- but every single one of those cases you listed earlier failed.
To rephrase you: Its legal status as protected speech hasn't stopped TRAs trying to get people with gender critical viewpoints labelled as transphobic, and trying to get them fired, suspended, dismissed, de-platformed or arrested for speaking their minds.
Which is what I have been saying all along: TRAs are trying to weaponise hate speech laws to shut down legitimate debate and legitimate freedom of expression. However, the tide has most definitely turned against them, and these attempts are going to get less and less traction with the police and the CPS as time goes on.

No, don't bloody-well rephrase me if you are going to change what I mean.

I said "its (gender-critical speech) legal status as protected speech hasn't stopped people with gender critical viewpoints from being labelled transphobic, and then being fired, suspended, expelled, dismissed, de-platformed or arrested for speaking their mind" and that is EXACTLY what I meant!!

Just because efforts to do these things ultimately fail does not mean they didn't happen. This is what you do not seem to be able to understand.

When a person is fired, suspended, expelled or dismissed for gender-critical speech, and then ultimately reinstated, it doesn't change the fact that they were fired, suspended, expelled or dismissed in the first place, and then had to go through all the needed legal steps to get their jobs back.

When a person is de-platformed for gender-critical speech, and then ultimately wins in court, it doesn't change the fact that they were deplatformed in the first place. Their free speech rights have already been infringed

When a person is arrested and interrogated for gender-critical speech, and then ultimately released without charge, it doesn't change the fact that they were forced to go through the wrongful arrest and the stress of interrogation in the first place!!

You claim to understand this, but the fact that you still come out with statements like these.....

Post #365 - "How about the main point, which was about how I couldn't find any cases of anyone being successfully prosecuted for gender critical beliefs?"
Post #373"...the case mentioned above is the only one I could find that was successfully prosecuted."
Post #389"...every single one of those cases you listed earlier failed"

... informs my opinion that you really don't get it!

 

[d4m10n]

Damion was saying that gender critical speech is illegal in the UK.

Where exactly did I say that?

I don't recall you saying that at all. When did you say that?

#378

 

[d4m10n]

Australia judge awards transgender woman $10k for gender discrimination claim against women-only app

https://www.jurist.org/news/2024/08...-discrimination-claim-against-women-only-app/

 

[Samson]

Australia judge awards transgender woman $10k for gender discrimination claim against women-only app

https://www.jurist.org/news/2024/08...-discrimination-claim-against-women-only-app/

I went to Sall Grover"s event in Auckland staged by the Women's Rights Party NZ.
She is an outstanding advocate for the rights of women, girls and children.
Australia treats women as Afghanistan does, is the general bleak comparison on social media, particularly X.
I will post a video clip of her oratory at some point.

Note this judge is a man who states in the judgement there is international case law establishing men can change sex.

 

[Samson]

And while Amnesty International calls for Afghan women to be liberated, they also rejoice at Mr Roxanne Tickle being liberated to persecute Australian women.

https://twitter.com/amnesty/status/1826982698226737303?t=wRtRKdvwTwIlFLMAnb4q5g&s=19

"Roxanne Tickle has won her discrimination case against the social media app 'Giggle for Girls', which blocked her from joining on the basis of being male. This is a step forward in ensuring transgender women are not discriminated against on the basis of their gender identity."

 

[Cosmic Yak]

No, don't bloody-well rephrase me if you are going to change what I mean.

I said "its (gender-critical speech) legal status as protected speech hasn't stopped people with gender critical viewpoints from being labelled transphobic, and then being fired, suspended, expelled, dismissed, de-platformed or arrested for speaking their mind" and that is EXACTLY what I meant!!

Just because efforts to do these things ultimately fail does not mean they didn't happen. This is what you do not seem to be able to understand.

When a person is fired, suspended, expelled or dismissed for gender-critical speech, and then ultimately reinstated, it doesn't change the fact that they were fired, suspended, expelled or dismissed in the first place, and then had to go through all the needed legal steps to get their jobs back.

When a person is de-platformed for gender-critical speech, and then ultimately wins in court, it doesn't change the fact that they were deplatformed in the first place. Their free speech rights have already been infringed

When a person is arrested and interrogated for gender-critical speech, and then ultimately released without charge, it doesn't change the fact that they were forced to go through the wrongful arrest and the stress of interrogation in the first place!!

You claim to understand this, but the fact that you still come out with statements like these.....

Post #365 - "How about the main point, which was about how I couldn't find any cases of anyone being successfully prosecuted for gender critical beliefs?"
Post #373"...the case mentioned above is the only one I could find that was successfully prosecuted."
Post #389"...every single one of those cases you listed earlier failed"

... informs my opinion that you really don't get it!

I understand you fully, exactly and precisely. I think that it's you that doesn't understand me.
I can only ask you to read my posts again, more carefully this time, and see if you can get what I'm saying. This shouty approach won't work on me at all.