you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]artetolife 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

I really wish Susie Green and Mermaids were allowed to submit evidence at the trial, it would have been fun to see the court tear them a new one.

[–]MarkTwainiac 12 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Mermaids - and Stonewall - did submit material to the court to be used as evidence at the trial, but the high court rejected their submissions on the basis that they did contain any information/arguments not already made by others or that were germane to the case. Apparently the submissions were just full of the usual mumbo jumbo about born in the wrong body, going through the wrong puberty, puberty being torture and a human rights violation, misgendering, bullying, phony hate crimes, claims of oppression and of course all the made-up suicide stats.

By rejecting Mermaids' and Stonewall's submissions as not containing anything any evidence or info worth entering into the official account taking into account in their deliberations, the court in essence already tore them a new one. Albeit in an understated, polite British way.

[–]artetolife 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah I know they were rejected. Wouldn't surprise me if they only sent in their "are you a Barbie or a GI Joe" presentation, lol.

[–]MarkTwainiac 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I figured you personally were probably aware the Mermaids & Stonewall submissions were rejected. But I wanted to elaborate for other posters and lurkers who might not know the details. TRAs are promulgating the lie that Mermaids & Stonewall weren't given a chance to submit evidence. I'm trying to correct that impression. They were given the chance, and they blew it.