42

So I've been reading everything posted on the Maya ruling, and it seems to me GC folks need to be thinking about next steps and what those would be.

For example, the ruling talks about how DEI training that takes only a Gender Ideology-accepting approach might open an employer up to litigation for creating a hostile workplace for GC people. So should Sex Matters or another organization create a Gender Critical training that employers could give to protect themselves from such litigation? Could such a GC training actually help re-take some of these captured organizations?

And are there other things that come to mind that could be used to ensure the Maya ruling actually changes things? What are your thoughts?

So I've been reading everything posted on the Maya ruling, and it seems to me GC folks need to be thinking about next steps and what those would be. For example, the ruling talks about how DEI training that takes only a Gender Ideology-accepting approach might open an employer up to litigation for creating a hostile workplace for GC people. So should Sex Matters or another organization create a Gender Critical training that employers could give to protect themselves from such litigation? Could such a GC training actually help re-take some of these captured organizations? And are there other things that come to mind that could be used to ensure the Maya ruling actually changes things? What are your thoughts?

26 comments

[–] mil-bil 4 points (+4|-0)

I'm so happy about the outcome of Maya's appeal! It gives me hope, but also fear that here, in the US, we have a long way to go.

I'm incredibly impressed by and infinitely grateful to those in Britain thanks to whose work I've been able to understand the issues better. I don't even know how we can move things in the US. No offense to Women's Liberation Front who are doing fantastic work but... I hate to say it... we'd need an organization without the words "liberation front" in the name to bring the debate into the mainstream. Our political system is painfully and detrimentally divided.

[–] VeggieAnnie 1 points (+1|-0)

I agree. But the areas where I see hope are instances of bi-partisan work around specific issues. For example, women's sports acts. I think in the US we aren't going to topple the house of cards at the bottom (with a wide-sweeping and coherent argument against ideology). I think we are going to have to pick apart each issue. And as each issue comes to the fore (like women's sports these days), then people will ask the big questions for themselves: What makes these boys say they are girls? What does hormone treatment involve? Is that really safe? etc. It will be slow work, but...one. bipartisan. issue-based. argument at a time.

[–] mil-bil 0 points (+0|-0)

I agree with you. I think the sports issue appears to be the one with the most potential at this point. I don't yet know what to make of that... I really, really hope it can be the beginning of a larger serious conversation. I feel like I've woken up to a reality where several laws have been quietly rewritten without any consultation. I'm still struggling to grasp how it happened.

[–] VeggieAnnie 1 points (+1|-0)

"Just woken up ... how did it happen?" Well. I have three words that are going to change your life. The Denton's Document.

Now, I haven't actually read it, because I'm a little afraid to. I'm afraid it will make me too angry. But from what everyone says, it is a document produced by a legal firm to outline lobbying/policy-writing techniques to get gender woo woo policies passed quickly and quietly.