As Tesco v USDAW begins in the Supreme Court today, the Bogg and Brodie dream team wrote on the fascinating issues at stake here douglas brodie -

academic.oup.com/ilj/article-ab…

Huge thanks to @michaelforan for a stimulating discussion on equality before the law & for sharing excellent advice with our UlsterUniSchoolofLaw PhD researchers to help them in their academic careers. Looking forward to continuing conversations and even more exotic locations 📚✈️

The best part about my job is being able to travel to exotic places to talk about ideas with brilliant people. Beyond thrilled to be meeting Prof Gráinne McKeever today to discuss my book and chat about the PhD journey!

ulster.ac.uk/faculties/arts…

A thread from one of the UKs leading experts on statutory interpretation about deeming provisions - when legislation deems X to be true regardless of whether it is actually true 👇

Worth emphasising for anyone who thinks that the use of a single-sex exception requires a case-by-case assessment. That’s incorrect. The Supreme Court has held several times that general rules suffice and can be proportionate as general rules.

True (subject to schedule 9 - eg Stonewall could probably get away with not hiring a gender-critical person in a policy role).

Good thread addressing some of the concerns, and in some cases wilful misrepresentation, about the evidence base for Dr Cass’ review 👇🏻

Did @TheCassReview - the review of NHS gender identity services for under-18s in England - throw out 98% of the available research?

That claim was spreading online before the report was even published.

It is “completely incorrect” says Hilary Cass

A More or Less thread.🧵1/8

You have to hand it (again) to BBC More or Less - they do journalism, fact based and truthful not neutral

For those of you not quite au fait with UK equality law, this is the equivalent of saying - out loud, in public - that you look people up and screen out CVs from:
Black people
Muslim people
Disabled people
Women
Gay people
Trans people

(non-exhaustive list)

Scott Wortley It used to be a standard that you do not call into question another professionals integrity without evidence. Many professions have rules about it. For government ministers to do it is reprehensible, and an abuse of their platform.

Imagine doing this the day after the Cass interview in the times and the BBC more or less programme on the rigour of the study. What a profoundly unserious figure. His presence in government demeans it.

It’s worrying to see how science denialism has become more and more embedded into the political establishment. This contributes to the spread of misinformation, just bc Harvie would rather trust activists on Twitter over the independent experts who spent four years examining this

Daniel Dennett (28th March 1942 - 19th April 2024)

RIP

Dennett on how to criticise wisely