As a discrimination solicitor, I feel it is incumbent on Ludwig to persuade us on why sex-falsification and safeguarding breaches are justified within equality law and why gender reassignment should be left as a characteristic in its own right. Evidence remains elusive.
As a discrimination solicitor, I feel it is incumbent on Ludwig to persuade us on why sex-falsification and safeguarding breaches are justified within equality law and why gender reassignment should be left as a characteristic in its own right. Evidence remains elusive.
@luceleftred1 No, if you want law change, that is your task. Mine is to advise upon and represent clients based on the current law
@AudreySuffolk @luceleftred1 I feel it is incumbent = do what I tell you. Entitlement isn’t a pleasant sight.
@SCynic1 @AudreySuffolk Neither is supporting men to lie about their sex and breach all safeguarding policies. If you are consistently opposing the call to stop legal sex-falsification, then you should explain why. Not deflect the argument back to those who are endeavouring to present evidence.
@luceleftred1 @AudreySuffolk I don’t. Making demands of people who disagree with you is rude.
@SCynic1 @luceleftred1 The irony is I dont know if I agree or disagree. Without them doing the necessary objective research, legal analysis, equality impact assessment etc, I cannot judge whether any proposed law change is a good idea or not. The absence of it makes me dubious
@AudreySuffolk @SCynic1 @luceleftred1 As a feminist legal expert, you could support or assist the work you say is required. And yet you consistently argue against these proposals using the vague, jargon terms which create these category corruptions in law & public policy. The terms which collapse women's rights.
@toolongdead @AudreySuffolk @SCynic1 @luceleftred1 I find the status quo peeps wilful ignoring of #RepealTheGRA website and Prof @AlessandraAster extensive legal analysis of problem with GRA fascinating.
@lascapigliata8 @AudreySuffolk @SCynic1 @luceleftred1 @AlessandraAster Well, yes. But there's a disquieting deviation today from civilly disagreeing (constructive) or ignoring (everyone is free to ignore, no doubt). To assert women civilly disagreeing are "nasty" or "extremist" and so on - not, in my view, constructive discourse.
@toolongdead @AudreySuffolk @SCynic1 @luceleftred1 @AlessandraAster I agree, although am way too familiar with such tactics, and have nothing but contempt for them.
@lascapigliata8 @AudreySuffolk @SCynic1 @luceleftred1 @AlessandraAster I think we've all become horribly familiar with such tactics. Though I naively thought they would not by employed ... well, by some.