Maya Forstater

We're back for resumed closing submissions. #MayaForstatersCase2019 Still with Csl for Claimant. C's evidence on how she would regard someone would not necessarily affect how she addressed them.

Looking at para 201 in Mackereth - clearly a conclusion on the facts in that case, clients with MH problems, dr in a customer facing role, and he would refuse to address them according to their preference. No evidence that C had any trans colleagues much less that

she would refuse to address them according to their preference. No comparison. C is plainly speaking the truth here, and what is suggested is you're not allowed to do that.

Going through what was said in xx specifically about Dolezal. Not a comparator of dissembling, but a comparator of internal feeling.

Re Bunce: no evidence anywhere in the bundle about preferred pronouns, how can R have the nerve to say failure on Grainger 5 on Bunce's pronouns when there is no evidence of what those might be?

Understandable anger that someone who doesn't maintain that he IS a woman chooses to accept an award in a female category. Wrong to say she cannot have protection because of that.

Witnesses for R: one has behaved poorly, referring to women as terfs and cunts (Csl for C avoided the actual word in court). Astonishing that R relies on them.