User:Trinkt der Bauer und fährt Traktor/sandbox2

Maya Forstater v Centre for Global Development (2019) is a case brought by Mayer Forstater against her former employer, the Centre for Global Development (CGD). Her consulting contract for CGD was not renewed due to a series of social media messages describing transgender women as men, which led to a complaint by staff and an internal investigation. She challenged her contract not being renewed at the Central London Employment Tribunal where Judge James Tayler ruled that her 'gender critical' views were “incompatible with human dignity and fundamental rights of others” and that they did “not have the protected characteristic of philosophical belief” under the UK Equality Act 2010.

Cause of non renewal of contract
Forstater began working at Centre for Global Development in January 2015 as a visiting fellow. In September 2018 Forstater shared a series of messages on her personal Twitter account and the organisations Slack channels describing transgender women as men. These messages caused staff members at CGD to file a complaint to management which lead to an investigation. In December 2018 her contract expired and CGD decided not to renew it due to her views. In March 2019 Forstater sued CDG at the Central London Employment Tribunal.

Tribunal claims
On 15 March 2019 Fostater challenged her contract not being renewed at the Central London Employment Tribunal. The respondents in the case were CGD Europe, Centre for Global Development and Masood Ahmed. Fostater payed for the tribunal through a crowdsourced fundraiser, raising over £120,000. She claimed her "gender critical views are a philosophical belief" protected by section 10 of the 2010 Equality Act. As part of her complaint she stated:

"No change of clothes or hairstyle, no plastic surgery, no accident or illness, no course of hormones, no force of will or social conditioning, no declaration can turn a female person into a male, or a male person into a female."

Evidence used in the tribunal
Forstaters tweets, Slack messages and other writings including a letter to Anne Main MP were later were presented as evidence and in the findings of the tribunal as examples of her 'gender critical' opinion that trans women (including those with a Gender Recognition Certificate) are not women.

Twitter
On the 2nd September 2018 Forstater shared a series of messages on her personal Twitter account where she shared her opposition to proposed changes to the U.K.'s Gender Recognition Act. In the tweets she desribed transgender women as 'males' which the judge in the case later found not to be protected speech under the Equality Act 2010.

"#I share the concerns of @fairplaywomen that radically expanding the legal definition of 'women' so that it can include both males and females makes it a meaningless concept, and will undermine women’s rights & protections for vulnerable women & girls.
 * 1) Some transgender people have cosmetic surgery. But most retain their birth genitals. Everyone's equality and safety should be protected, but women and girls lose out on privacy, safety and fairness if males are allowed into changing rooms, dormitories, prisons, sports teams."

Later in September 2018 Forstater also published tweets (which were used as evidence in the tribunal) which misgendered Credit Suisse senior director Pips Bunce, referring to her as "a man who likes to express himself part of the week by wearing a dress,” "a part-time cross dresser" and "a white man who likes to dress in women’s clothes.” She continued to share her views on trans people including that 'the use of proper pronouns was equivalent to the use of the date rape drug rohypnol' during and after CGDs investigation which led to her contract not being renewed.

Slack messages
Forstater was later challenged by staff on Slack about her tweets about Pips Bunce, she responded "there is a dark side to some of the people making a political career out of arguing that males should be allowed into women's spaces" and "if people find the basic biological truths that 'women are adult human females' or 'transwomen are male' offensive, then they will be offended".

Letter to Anne Main MP
On 30 September 2018 Forstater wrote a letter to then Member of Parliament Anne Main which was used as evidence in the tribunal requesting; "Please stand up for the truth that it is not possible for someone who is male to become female. Transwomen are men"

Tribunal judgement
On the 19 December 2019 Judge James Tayler published a 26-page judgement which found that the non renewal of her contract was fair and that her view was “incompatible with human dignity and fundamental rights of others”.

Judge Tayler found that she was not entitled to ignore the trangender people's legal rights and the “enormous pain that can be caused by misgendering a person”. He concluded "Ms Forstater’s position is that even if a trans woman has a GRC (Gender Recognition Certificate), she cannot honestly describe herself as a woman. That belief is not worthy of respect in a democratic society." and that "people cannot expect to be protected if their core belief involves violating others’ dignity and creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment for them."

Judge Tayler found that Forstater 'absolutist' beliefs satisfied the first four limbs of the Grainger v Nicholson (2009) with some reservations about its 'cogency and coherence’. He found it failed the fifth limb, that it was 'worthy of respect in a democratic society'.

Reaction to the tribunal judgement
Upon losing the case Forstater stated that the judgment ‘removes women’s rights and the right to freedom of belief and speech'.

Louise Rea, a solicitor with Bates Wells which advised CGD stated that Judge Talyer had "observed that the claimant was not entitled to ignore the legal rights of ,a person who has transitioned from male to female or vice versa" and that "it is the fact that her belief necessarily involves violating the dignity of others which means it is not protected under the Equality Act 2010."

After the ruling author J. K. Rowling shared a message on Twitter supporting Forstater, incorrectly summarising the question the tribunal asked as 'sex is real'. The tweet received widespread criticism from trans people and trans allies, while trans-exclusionary people described her as a “defender of women.”:

"Dress however you please... call yourself whatever you like. Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you. Live your best life in peace and security. But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real? #IStandWithMaya #ThisIsNotADrill" Dr Veronica Ivy, a philosophy professor, competitive cyclist, and transgender rights activist and trans woman published an opinion piece on NBC News about the case entitled 'J.K. Rowling's Maya Forstater tweets support hostile work environments, not free speech'. In the piece she used the case and the reaction to it by J.K Rowling to explore how transgender rights relate to hate speech, free speech and hostile work environments.