Victory for Maya, for JK Rowling and for all of us!

Belief in the immutability of biological sex is an opinion protected by the European Convention on Human Rights. Maya Forstater and all gender critical feminism are entitled to freely express their thoughts. This ruling is a great victory for justice and women's rights.
Please be aware that the translation of contents, although automatic, has a cost to Feminist Post but is provided to you without any charge. Please consider making a contribution via the "Support us" page if you intend to use our translation service intensively.
The contents of this site are translated using automatic translation systems without the intervention of professional translators.
Translations are provided for the sole purpose of facilitating reading by international visitors.
Share this article

The Court of Appeal of the Employment Tribunal in England issued its judgment in the Forstater case on 10 June today. The Court ruled that belief in the immutability of biological sex is a form of opinion protected by Article 9(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

What had happened, and what will happen now to Maya Forstater?

Let's take a step back. In 2019, Maya, a researcher at the Center for Global Development in London, expressed in a series of tweets some criticism of transgender ideology, and specifically the idea that self-identification is sufficient for legal sex change, and that trans women are women, through and through. For expressing criticism and concerns, colleagues in the centre's US office complained of alleged transphobia.. Maya's employment contract was not renewedas originally planned and Maya initiated litigation in the labour court.

In a preliminary ruling of December 2019 to determine whether so-called 'gender critical' views were protected by the European Convention and the UK Equality Act, Judge James Tayler ruled that such views were 'incompatible with human dignity and human rights'. and branded these views as absolutist. In essence, the judge concluded that gender-critical views must be excluded from the protection of the law in the same way as Nazism, anti-Semitism or racism. Specifically, the judge determined that Forstater's opinions did not meet criterion V of the so-called Grainger test, derived from the Grainger case in the Labour Court. Criterion V states that, in order to qualify for the protection of the law, opinions must be worthy of respect in a democratic society and respect human dignity and the rights of others.

The repercussions of the ruling were considerable. JKR Rowling expressed her support for Maya in a tweet, which triggered a huge negative reaction.

In a general climate where daring to criticise gender ideology can result in death threats or rape, many women expressed solidarity with Maya on social media. The decision to appeal has become a symbol of many women's rebellion against this ideology, and especially against the injunction not to discuss any aspect of it. Since 2019, the number of women who have openly criticised this ideology has increased substantially. The #WomenWontWheesht campaign (women will not shut up) started by a feminist in Scotland has been successful not only outside Scotland, but even outside Great Britain. There have also been many obstacles. Marion Millar herself, who started the campaign, was charged with transphobia and homophobia and now faces a sentence of up to two years.

This brings us to June this year. The case on appeal was aimed solely at determining whether the employment tribunal had erred in law in finding that gender critical views were not protected. In a paragraph that establishes with exemplary clarity what the error consists of, the Court of Appeal held that

[...] the Applicant's views do not even remotely approach views on the lines of Nazism or totalitarianismwhich require the application of Article 17 [of the European Convention, prohibition of abuse of rights]. This is sufficient to establish that criterion V of the Grainger case is satisfied. The Appellant's views are certainly capable of causing offence or being considered abominable; however, the evidence before the Tribunal demonstrates that thehe Applicant sincerely believed that 'there is no incompatibility between recognising that human beings are unable to change sex and protecting the human rights of those who identify as transgender [...] In my opinion, such a statement is not tantamount to expressing an intention to destroy the rights of transgender individuals. It is aopinion that may, in certain circumstances, offend a transgender individual, but that potential does not constitute a valid reason for depriving that opinion of the protection of the law.

What the Court ruled on 10 June is essential to ensure the protection of gender-critical views in the workplace in general. What the Court did not determine, nor should it have, is the substantive issue of whether in expressing her views, Maya engaged in conduct in violation of the Equality Act with respect to discrimination against and abuse of transgender individuals. The case now returns to the Employment Tribunal for a determination of the merits. In the meantime, however many women breathed a sigh of relief. Believing that sex is an objective fact and that women have rights according to their sex is not the same as being a bigot or a Nazi.

Today we celebrate this victory for justice and women's rights. Tomorrow, the struggle begins again. 

Alessandra Asteriti


Much of the news published by Feminist Post you will not read elsewhere. That is why it is important to support us, even with a small contribution: Feminist Post is produced solely by the voluntary work of many people and has no funding.
If you think our work can be useful for your life, we will be grateful for even the smallest contribution.

You can give us your contribution by clicking here: Patreon - Feminist Post
You might also be interested in
25 February 2024
The 'milk' of men
The English National Health Service ensures that the milk produced by a male body -stimulated with ad hoc drug therapy- is as good for the newborn as that of its mother, who is wiped out. Minimising the risks to the child's health largely offset by the ideological and symbolic benefits. It is the transhuman, my beauties!
Men's 'milk' is a perfect example of what we call transhuman. Women's milk, on the other hand, is human, all too human, it is the perfect model of the enduring human, and therefore natural breastfeeding should be degraded, mocked, stigmatised as something to be ashamed of and kept hidden. In fact, it is even a useless and unethical act. On the contrary, promoting and magnifying male 'breastfeeding' shows plastically the way forward. According to the prestigious journal Pediatrics, organ of the American Academy of Pediatrics, it is 'risky' to define [...]
Read now
15 February 2024
How to convince progressives to give up gender
Terrified of transactivists and worried about sounding 'right-wing', left-wingers support the transition of minors even in the absence of studies showing that 'affirmative therapy' works and promotes the well-being of gender non-conforming girls and boys. "But everyone has a right to evidence-based medicine," argue some liberals determined to "break the spell". And they start DIAG -Democrats for an Informed Approach to Gender- to convince democrats in the US and around the world that continuing on this path is wrong and dangerous. For children and for the left. An article by Bernard Lane
A new movement of US Democrats wants to find out how to break the spell of gender ideology and bring the party back to the liberal values of science and reason. Democrats for an Informed Approach to Gender (DIAG) launched a project yesterday on X Space (Twitter) to commission research on how to more effectively reach out to left-wing voters who believe that science is now in favour of 'gender-affirming' medicalisation of gender non-conforming youth. "The only way to end this [...]
Read now
6 February 2024
New York Times: Strong doubts about hormones for children with gender dysphoria
The world's leading woke newspaper has always unhesitatingly supported transactivist demands, starting with the indecent treatment of JK Rowling. Today the paper changes course and in a very long article criticises the 'affirmative therapy' (puberty blockers, hormones and surgery) for trans minors, giving a voice to some hitherto censored and ostracised detransitioners. Because by now even many Democratic voters have strong doubts. And there is a risk of losing many readers: "get woke, go broke".
For years, the New York Times has been the world's leading woke newspaper and has always unhesitatingly supported transactivist demands, jubilating critical voices. The treatment of JK Rowling is exemplary. In 2022 a very violent subscription campaign invited people to imagine Harry Potter without its creator: the ultimate in cancel culture (see here) A misogynistic and aggressive gesture - the initiative turned out to be a boomerang and many female subscribers threatened to cancel -. A few months ago The Daily published [...].
Read now
22 January 2024
Men IntintA and other wonders
The health of 'Marco', a trans FtM who is five months pregnant with testosterone, and that of her baby are the least of the problems. What matters to the liberal press talking about an 'anthropological revolution' is whether 'Marco' is to be called mother or father. But only a woman can give birth even if at the registry office her name is male. In this nothing has changed since the dawn of time. In the meantime, the trans front is losing ground: in one year, the number of members of WPATH, the largest transgender health organisation, has fallen by 60 per cent.
La Repubblica online headlines with a triple somersault about the 'young man who got pregnant': pregnant is not dared even at the transphilic GEDI group. The story is that of 'Marco', a girl undergoing testosterone therapy to look more like a man: beard, graver voice -not to 'become male' because sex cannot be changed and every single cell will remain damned XX-. 'Marco' had retained his uterus and ovaries and following a hetero sexual relationship (a [...]
Read now
11 January 2024
Child rapists: shock report in UK
In Great Britain, 18 rapes a day are committed by minors on their peers: in 2022 these cases numbered 15,000, almost always by very young males. A British police report shows how free access to violent pornography online is normalising criminal sexual behaviour in England and all other Western countries
For years, we have been reporting on the psychological and material damage produced on an entire generation by free access to violent online pornography, consumed by boys and girls from the age of 7 but also much earlier: gang rapes committed by minors are just the tip of the iceberg of this dramatic phenomenon, which has now been analysed and quantified by a study by the British police. On this topic you can find previous articles here, here, here and here. We were almost only [...]
Read now
7 January 2024
New Hampshire: No more 'sex change' surgery on minors
The US state has passed a bill banning surgeons from performing operations on under-18 year olds such as the removal of ovaries and breasts for females and penises and testicles for males. The bill states that these operations violate the patient's 'informed consent' and points out that studies have not shown a decrease in the suicide risk of minors after the operations. On the contrary: the danger increases
New Hampshire is preparing to ban under-18s from undergoing sex-change operations. Last Thursday, the New Hampshire House of Representatives passed a bill to this effect, also with the help of some Democratic members. House Bill 619 prohibits doctors from performing 'any genital gender reassignment surgery', i.e. the removal of the uterus, ovaries and breasts in the case of women; testicles and penis for men, to anyone in the [...]
Read now
1 2 3 43