Maya Forstater wasn't "fired" for "denying basic biology", and this is all entirely civil law (an argument between two parties settled by the courts) and has no

Maya Forstater wasn't "fired" for "denying basic biology", and this is all entirely civil law (an argument between two parties settled by the courts) and has nothing at all to do with criminal law (an argument between the state and an individual). 1) she wasn't fired, her contract was not renewed. 2) This had nothing to do with biology (which she got wrong), but was to do with her choice to harass people in the workplace, and to harass people on social media using an account tied to her workplace. I wish people would read the Maya Forstater tribunal case notes, because it's clear that there's a lot of misinformation. She tried to make the case that she held a philosophical belief and that her belief was thus protected. She failed because her belief was incoherent and because her absolutionist approach requires her to cause harm to other people. > However, I consider that the Claimant's view, in its absolutist nature, is incompatible with human dignity and fundamental rights of others. [...] > I conclude from this, and the totality of the evidence, that the Claimant is absolutist in her view of sex and it is a core component of her belief that she will refer to a person by the sex she considered appropriate even if it violates their dignity and/or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. The approach is not worthy of respect in a democratic society.