F*ck the Tories: a Thread Dedicated to Suella Braverman

[winjim]

Just MHO, but I feel one might get a better feel for views from the church here:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...s-against-the-judgment-of-god-says-archbishop
or here:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...n-plan-branded-national-shame-church-england/

You've moved from 'a/the' to 'the'. I think it's important to recognise that there are many churches which may have different views regarding theology, doctrine, and morality etc. We can't really say there's a single communion which we can describe as 'the' church, so the reasonable position is to remain an 'a/the'ist.


Seriously though dude trained to be a priest till the CofE told him to do one, he surely knows Christian scripture better than many of us and is himself living evidence that people create and choose religion around their own personal set of beliefs rather than the other way round.

 

[icowden]

Getting back on topic, hear the keen legal skills of the lady herself as she defends Boris Johnson...

Tweet from @BarristerSecret: https://twitter.com/BarristerSecret/status/1537056639131557889

 

[Deleted member 49]

Getting back on topic, hear the keen legal skills of the lady herself as she defends Boris Johnson...

Tweet from @BarristerSecret: https://twitter.com/BarristerSecret/status/1537056639131557889

Link doesn't work for me sorry ?

 

[matticus]

and is himself living evidence that people create and choose religion around their own personal set of beliefs rather than the other way round.

I'm sure we could have a happy half hour comparing/contrasting with the members/views on NACA

 

[icowden]

Link doesn't work for me sorry ?

tried to do it from my phone.
The correct link...

View: https://twitter.com/BarristerSecret/status/1537056639131557889

 

[AuroraSaab]

Well the UCI have released their new regs. They are reducing the amount of testosterone allowed and extending the transition period to 2 years. Emily Bridges can't compete next year.

There's no evidence that residual advantage is lost after 2 years so it looks like the UCI are prioritising inclusivity over fairness. They pretty much say it:

More detail here:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Scienceofsport


View: https://mobile.twitter.com/TLexercise/status/1537487981115756544?cxt=HHwWgMCyjYjLoNYqAAAA

 

[matticus]

Sounds like they've picked the least painful part of the fence to sit on.

Sad business.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Like the first Twitter link says, I think they are just counting on only (relatively) mediocre transwomen competing so it doesn't look like such a big deal. Says a lot about how much they value amateur and non elite women's participation in competitive cycling. There's no science behind this decision.

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

Like the first Twitter link says, I think they are just counting on only (relatively) mediocre transwomen competing so it doesn't look like such a big deal. Says a lot about how much they value amateur and non elite women's participation in competitive cycling. There's no science behind this decision.

The science is that they ignore the science

 

[Fab Foodie]

Like the first Twitter link says, I think they are just counting on only (relatively) mediocre transwomen competing so it doesn't look like such a big deal. Says a lot about how much they value amateur and non elite women's participation in competitive cycling. There's no science behind this decision.

Here's a different one....
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...ns-after-fina-vote?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Science gets a mention....

 

[AuroraSaab]

Seems a sensible decision which acknowledges the residual advantage of a male puberty - an advantage that reduced testosterone doesn't negate. Suggests they are looking towards an 'Open' category too which allows fair inclusion.

I'm not clear from that article whether the ruling will apply to school and college level swimming. It will be interesting to see if other sports bodies follow suit now that a major organisation has been prepared to issue a fairly comprehensive ban. I'd also be interested in which science research informed this decision. Presumably the same research was available to the UCI and they saw it differently, even though swimming and cycling share similarities.

Edit: Just read a bit more and looks like they had a Science panel, a Legal panel, and an Athlete panel, who all reported to the conference. Then all the National reps got to vote in a transparent procedure. Very different from the UCI method where noone seems to know what evidence they based their decision on, and cyclists weren't consulted.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Another take on gender critical feminist activism:

https://www.theguardian.com/society...arrister-case-wider-debate-transgender-rights

 

[AuroraSaab]

I haven't followed the Bailey case in detail but it does seem clear, in my opinion, that Stonewall applied pressure on her Chambers because of personal views Bailey had expressed on Twitter - all pretty mainstream views. It seems clear in the email that Stonewall's Kirren Medcalf sent her bosses, which said that Garden Court Chambers continuing to associate with Allison Bailey put Stonewall 'in a difficult position', that they were seeking to have her superiors take action against her.

One thing I've realised though is that the procedure for allocating cases to barristers, running the cases, and charging for them, is really quite complicated. There are so many factors involved it would seem quite difficult to prove that any given factor, even bosses withholding work, led to serious professional and financial detriment as so many other things contribute to case management and earnings.

Stonewall were definitely trying to silence her by contacting her bosses but it's an employment tribunal, not a moral court. Judgement could go either way.

How would you guys feel if someone contacted your employers over an opinion you expressed on Cyclechat?

 

[icowden]

One thing I've realised though is that the procedure for allocating cases to barristers, running the cases, and charging for them, is really quite complicated. There are so many factors involved it would seem quite difficult to prove that any given factor, even bosses withholding work, led to serious professional and financial detriment as so many other things contribute to case management and earnings.

It is @secretbarrister speaks out a lot about how difficult it is to be a Criminal Barrister and how low the actual earnings are compared to other areas of the Law.

That said, I did have a read through Bailey's witness statement and she does present some compelling analysis showing just how much her earnings dropped off following the change in her clerking.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I agree, but I'm not sure there's enough to prove it was all caused by Stonewall. The case has been a bit of an embarrassment though. Stonewall's Kirren Medcalf had to have their mother, their solicitor, and their dog, in camera shot to provide support whilst giving evidence over Zoom. At one point they said there was no such thing as sexed bodies, no male or female. One of Bailey's supposedly transphobic tweets was about lesbians being coerced to accept transwomen as partners. Bailey's superior said this was more like those who were trying to racially integrate South Africa....

She deserves to win as Stonewall were exerting undue pressure and the whole Stonewall Index thing is a protection racket anyway. Employment tribunals hinge on very technical readings of the law though so I think it could go either way.