Gender again. Sorry!

[monkers]

Yes, a review the BMA are undertaking because a small number of activists engineered the committee to support a motion to critique Cass in July. More committee members voted against or abstained on the key anti-Cass motion than voted for it. But as abstentions don't count, it passed.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...p/07/bma-cass-report-gender-identity-services

Since then 870 doctors have signed a letter criticising the BMA for opposing the recommendations of the Cass report.

" ...it was signed by 57 professors and 22 former or current presidents of royal medical colleges and other clinical leaders, among others. Of the 870 signatories, more than two-thirds are BMA members".

https://www.newstatesman.com/politi...allenging-the-bmas-stance-on-puberty-blockers

Other European countries have made their own analysis of their gender services provision and have come to the same conclusions as Cass. Sweden, Finland, Denmark are all adopting a more cautious approach.

Cass isn't some outlier, out of step with everyone else. It's simply that health services are finally looking seriously at the lack of evidence around puberty blockers, and starting to ask why the numbers referred to gender clinics went through the roof in the last 15 years, and why the patients went from mostly older adult men to mostly young teens.

The change in direction to evidence based care must be hard to swallow, but there you go.

Evidenced based care has led to no care, and in your case don't care.

As for your suicide assertions, N read that and was astounded. It is not the case that trans youth think of suicide because or people giving out warnings of the risk of suicide. The truth is, as she told the thread, trans youth are at risk of suicide because of the non-acceptance of people, the campaigning to prevent them from living their authentic lives, people campaigning against their lives on a fabric of lies.

People like her father, and her mother, and you, are the very people that mouth off to crush people, and destroy them. She sees you. N has gone to bed upset with the news that the body of a trans women who has been missing for a few days was found in the Thames today; no suspicious circumstances.

Why not just leave alone and let people live their best lives? I know, nothing will ever stop you because of the kind of person you are - no compassion, no kindness, no humanity.

https://www.wandsworthguardian.co.u...found-river-thames-confirmed-southwark-woman/

 

[AuroraSaab]

You've shown zero compassion for women and girls whose lives are impinged upon by the demands of those men who wish to 'live their best lives'. Stop asking women to be kind at their own expense.

 

[monkers]

You've shown zero compassion for women and girls whose lives are impinged upon by the demands of those men who wish to 'live their best lives'. Stop asking women to be kind at their own expense.

Oh fark off. I'm generally very kind to everyone and known for it. And don't speak to like I'm not a woman just because I'm a lesbian woman so not in your group (in your tiny mind).

N is very much not 'a man' but you continue with your bigot credentials in every post.

 

[monkers]

Forstater appeal case...

However:

a. This judgment does not mean that the EAT has expressed any view on the merits of either side of the transgender debate and nothing in it should be regarded as so doing.

b. This judgment does not mean that those with gender-critical beliefs can ‘misgender’ trans persons with impunity. The Claimant, like everyone else, will continue to be subject to the prohibitions on discrimination and harassment that apply to everyone else. Whether or not conduct in a given situation does amount to harassment or discrimination within the meaning of EqA will be for a tribunal to determine in a given case.

c. This judgment does not mean that trans persons do not have the protections against discrimination and harassment conferred by the EqA. They do. Although the protected characteristic of gender reassignment under s.7, EqA would be likely to apply only to a proportion of trans persons, there are other protected characteristics that could potentially be relied upon in the face of such conduct.

Aurora, what makes you feel you are exempt from discrimination and harassment legislation?

 

[AuroraSaab]

I am not, neither is anyone else, including you. In what practical way do you imagine you have been discriminated against or harassed? You have chosen to take part in this forum.

"Whether or not conduct in a given situation does amount to harassment or discrimination within the meaning of EqA will be for a tribunal to determine in a given case".

This is talking about in employment though. You really do have a poor understanding of the law if you imagine the Equality Act applies to social media.

 

[monkers]

This is talking about in employment though. You really do have a poor understanding of the law if you imagine the Equality Act applies to social media.

You're kidding me right? I'll let N attend to this if she feels inclined.

 

[monkers]

"Whether or not conduct in a given situation does amount to harassment or discrimination within the meaning of EqA will be for a tribunal to determine in a given case".

N here.

Your interpretation of this is quite mad. When discrimination or harassment happens within the workplace, the employer is required to deal with it under the provisions of the EqA. Complaints brought to tribunal are cases of complaints against a company and can be heard at tribunal. These are distinct to complaints brought against an individual. These are not criminal cases, so are more similar to contract law (civil).

Discrimination and harassment are defined in law. If and when it happens outside of the workplace, the complaint becomes against the individual, and is an allegation of criminal behaviour. In other words the police may become involved.

What can be alleged in respect of your actions is, in simplest terms, cyberbullying, and falls under the legal definition of harassment. From your own words, it is clear that you consider the harassment of trans women to be acceptable on the basis that you feel that you are entitled to do so as a cisgender woman. You couldn't be more wrong. This is clearly criminal intent and criminal behaviour.

Cyber bullies are easily spotted, when a victim complains about their behaviour, typically they reply with a meme, say a woman spraying her keyboard with tea because she is laughing so hard, or just replying 'Lol', indicating that they are admitting enjoying causing distress. It is an admission of guilt.

Cyberbullying on social media is at contagion level. Cyber bullies tend to think that either the state does not have the means to identify (invariably it does), however a consideration is interstate bullying. In the UK it is much more difficult to seek remedy against a bully in say the USA because international law to tackle the problem is not established. However you are from what you seem to say resident in the UK bullying on what I think is a UK based website. There are obligations on the site owner to protect people from bullying on the site. I believe the site owner is aware since they ask posters to hide behind avatars.

Will the police take action against you? I will say it is unlikely. First there needs to be a complaint made to UK police, and secondly because of the lack of resources (including court time) means that their interest will only be piqued by a higher level of harm. However a person taking their own life or self-harming following on-line interactions with you and citing your avatar would lead to an investigation into your behaviour with possible consequences.

The ability to hide from the authorities does not make the behaviour less criminal.

 

[AuroraSaab]

N here. Your interpretation of this is quite mad. When discrimination or harassment happens within the workplace, the employer is required to deal with it under the provisions of the EqA. Complaints brought to tribunal are cases of complaints against a company and can be heard at tribunal. These are distinct to complaints brought against an individual. These are not criminal cases, so are more similar to contract law (civil).

The quote was from an employment law ruling.
It's irrelevant to behaviour on an internet forum. It was made simply to intimidate.

Discrimination and harassment are defined in law. If and when it happens outside of the workplace, the complaint becomes against the individual, and is an allegation of criminal behaviour. In other words the police may become involved.

What can be alleged in respect of your actions is, in simplest terms, cyberbullying, and falls under the legal definition of harassment. From your own words, it is clear that you consider the harassment of trans women to be acceptable on the basis that you feel that you are entitled to do so as a cisgender woman. You couldn't be more wrong. This is clearly criminal intent and criminal behaviour.

 That's your opinion of what I consider. It would be for the police to decide, and then a court.

Cyber bullies are easily spotted, when a victim complains about their behaviour, typically they reply with a meme, say a woman spraying her keyboard with tea because she is laughing so hard, or just replying 'Lol', indicating that they are admitting enjoying causing distress. It is an admission of guilt.

I would be amazed if posting 'lol' constituted harassment (cyberbulling isn't an actual offence in its own right) or an admission of guilt. I suppose you know best though.

Cyberbullying on social media is at contagion level. Cyber bullies tend to think that either the state does not have the means to identify (invariably it does), however a consideration is interstate bullying. In the UK it is much more difficult to seek remedy against a bully in say the USA because international law to tackle the problem is not established.

However you are from what you seem to say resident in the UK bullying on what I think is a UK based website. There are obligations on the site owner to protect people from bullying on the site. I believe the site owner is aware since they ask posters to hide behind avatars.

Sounds a bit like you're making an address to the site owner there, in my opinion.

Will the police take action against you? I will say it is unlikely. First there needs to be a complaint made to UK police, and secondly because of the lack of resources (including court time) means that their interest will only be piqued by a higher level of harm. However a person taking their own life or self-harming following on-line interactions with you and citing your avatar would lead to an investigation into your behaviour with possible consequences.

The ability to hide from the authorities does not make the behaviour less criminal.

The point of your huge post is to try to stop people commenting on this thread. I doubt it is only meant for my ears.

It's the next step on from when you used to post 'My lawyer cousin is watching this thread'. In my opinion it's threatening both the site owner and posters. It's an attempt to intimidate because all else has failed.

I doubt a thorough investigation of this thread and it's posters would result in the outcome you desire. They'd look at your own behaviour and the claims you have made for a start.

 

[monkers]

The quote was from an employment law ruling.
It's irrelevant to behaviour on an internet forum. It was made simply to intimidate.

N here

You think that reminding a criminal of the law on social media is tantamount to intimidation? A very strange viewpoint indeed.

The Forstater case was chosen by Monkers because it is a ruling with which you have familiarity. It details the Judge making plain that the discrimation of trans people and harassment of them is not lawful in the workplace. You have chosen an interpretation that therefore discrimination and harassment are lawful elsewhere. There are not lawful elsewhere; they are criminal, and may (or may not) be of interest to UK police

 

[monkers]

It would be for the police to decide, and then a court.

Or more correctly, the police, the CPS and then a court.

 

[monkers]

cyberbulling isn't an actual offence in its own right

I said

in simplest terms, cyberbullying,

However if you think this provides legal defence, you are mistaken. Cyberbullying pertains to any offence of a range of offences contained within criminal law through the use of electronic media - harassment being one of them.

 

[monkers]

I suppose you know best though.

I can reasonably argue that I know better than you, but less well than a judge.

 

[monkers]

Sounds a bit like you're making an address to the site owner there, in my opinion.

A remarkable claim, in one sentence you attempt to disallow what I say on the basis of 'sounds like', but then go on to justify your position with your own ''sounds like''. Extraordinary lengths of self-justification for criminal behaviour.

 

[monkers]

The point of your huge post is to try to stop people commenting on this thread.

No it isn't. The point is to warn others that your claimed expertise on matters legal, political, medical, etc are entirely bogus. You write as if you are a person with knowledge, expertise, and legitimate authority. You are not, you are a con artist, a sham persona, a criminal.

It is dangerous for other people, and not only people who wish to lawfully authenticate their gender identity. This is how grooming and incitement are known to work using the inculcation of a fear. You intend to manipulate people using manipulation of facts.

 

[monkers]

It's the next step on from when you used to post 'My lawyer cousin is watching this thread'.

You are currently addressing N. I have never posted this.

If you thought you were addressing Monkers, then that may turn out to be the case. As monkers has told you, she has three family members who are lawyers. She claims no legal expertise herself. One of the three family members is her cousin who as far as I am aware does not follow this site, but was formerly a watcher of the sister site.

You are sounding (to borrow from you) increasingly desperate to discredit posters rather than tackle the arguments with facts.