I backed the funding campaign to support people's right to express their views about gender self-ID. I don't have set views on the issue, + don't know the details of the case. But working through the pros+cons requires space for reasoned debate https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/lost-job-speaking-out … @MForstater
-
Again this seems an unusual test of "harm". I wrote an article not a PhD. I made the case that the impacts of overriding provisions for women & girls as a sex, w provisions based on 'gender identity' or 'expression' are underexplored and that that there should be evidenced debate
I gave my opinion carefully & backed it up w reasons & references, & expressly called for open debate. No I didn't try to represent every opinion: this is not usually the test of "harm" or of acceptable writing. Expressing a thought-thru opinion is not usually "harming the topic"
