Tobar an Dualchais

Tobarandualchais.co.uk/cog

Going live on Monday!

Thank you for that Primary 2 level of intellectual engagement. You're a credit to your cause.

Are you unable or just unwilling to deal with the actual substance of what he said in his piece? He's a Professor of Law at the University of Oxford. His credentials are impeccable. Why would you assume that everyone is as partisan as you?

'secretly taken'... in public you mean? Where anyone has a right to take a picture, since no-one has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the street. Heavens! What a calamity!

Except he's not employed by them. He's an external member of their advisory group, as a University of Oxford Professor of Law.

Facts matter. I realise that's corrosive to you, but it's true.

Facts not your thing, no?

The elective mastectomy scars suggest otherwise.

They're unlikely to be afraid of another woman.

The appeals will become case law.

Hey! I'll take it! 😂

Mr Jekyll PGDip and Mr Hyde

This is the kind of blatant misrepresentation of the law as Stonewall-wishes-it-were rather than what it actually is. The SC judgement is the law and always has been.

You're right that all charities should be held to the same standards. However, there's no justification for continuing on as before after the unanimous Court ruling. Failing to comply now is unlawful *right now*, regardless of whenever the EHRC gets around to updating its guidance.

If you're right that EHRC was misadvising orgs - and this is the first I've heard of it - they have a lot to answer for. I do thing there's a substantive difference in a mandated org like EHRC giving guidance and chairities like Stonewall behaving like legal advisors.

Thanks for the input. I'll read it when I have time. On the issue of enforcement - the Court judgement clarifies what the law has always been, so if the EHRC guidance (and guidance is not the same as law) misled orgs, then that is also to blame.

And this is from 2011? Do you have a link to the full document? I'd like to see the context.

Does this apply to people with a GRC or any trans-identifying person, based solely on their say so?

And what does it say about permitting men in women's single sex spaces?

If you have evidence that the EHRC was explicitly advising orgs to admit trans people to opposite sex spaces before the Supreme Court judgement, I'd appreciate your sharing it.

'Opinion' doing all the heavy lifting in that sentence.

The EHRC hasn't been telling employers to discriminate against anyone - they've been ensuring compliance with the law *as it has always been*. Stonewall and the DEI lanyard class, on the other hand, wilfully misled orgs into unlawful behaviour.

And ultimately, the onus is on activists to produce and accurately describe proper science, not polemic masquerading as incontrovertible fact.

The reviews of Cass I've read which are highly negative lack sound critical appraisal - they instead double down by relying on the masses of poor quality studies Cass found in her metastudy. You can't criticise Cass for upholding scientific standards - that was the point of the study.

That's who Badenoch was referring to in her tweet - the one you posted a screenshot of.

States what? That an eminently qualified and thorough doctor produced a seminal report, the conclusions of which don't fit your narrative? Do you even hear yourself?

The spate of employment tribunals brought by women against their employers for sanctioning their staff who believe in biological sex would seem to contradict your assertion.

Those hyperspecific AIs should be orders of magnitude more reliable and accurate than general purpose LLMs.

As I understand it that's precisely what's being proposed - different companies train their own base AIs on specific sets of data, e.g. particular areas of medicine, or types/jurisdictions of law, etc, using a large body of training data. Then the company leases the AI API to law firms etc...

You'll have to point to where I said anything of the sort. And by 'assigned female', what do you mean exactly? If you mean you're a woman, then I have to say you speak for precisely one more woman than I do, since I don't speak for any. I care about the women in my life and women I general.