Katelyn Burns explains the Maya Forstater ruling for readers of The New Republic:
But a closer look at the case reveals that it doesn’t have much to do with a belief that “there are only two sexes in human beings … male and female,” as Forstater claims (and growing bodies of science dispute). In practice, Forstater was seeking legal cover to disregard the already established rights of trans people in the U.K.
What rights? What rights of trans people was Maya “seeking legal cover to disregard”?
Hers was a familiar argument—one that for too long has dominated mainstream coverage of trans rights.
What rights are those though?
… Read the restA passage from employment judge James Tayler’s ruling explained it perfectly: “The claimant
