Jacobhtml's Categories

Jacobhtml's Authors

Latest Saves

Hi @Census2021 @ons @IanDiamond11 @_datasmith @PhilippaBonay @EHRC @EHRCChair @KishwerFalkner @RJHilsenrath @trussliz @GEOgovuk

The 'Diversity' section of your job application states you promote 'not discriminating under the Equality Act 2010'.

However...

1/11


However, you then ask for the 'Gender' of the applicant with options:

Man
Woman
Prefer to self describe.

2/11

'Gender' is not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 and is not defined in the Act.

https://t.co/qisFhCiV1u

3/11


Sex is the protected characteristic & the only two possible options for sex are 'Female' &'Male' as defined in the Act & consistent with biology, but you don't ask for that. 'Self-describe' is not a valid option

https://t.co/CEJ0gkr6nF

'Gender' is not a synonym for sex.

4/11


Asking about a personal characteristic such as 'gender' that is not a protected characteristic under the Act, may be in breach of the GDPR by processing personal - and potentially Special Category - data without a lawful basis.

5/11
TW: suicidal ideation.

At the darkest days of the abuse I was being subjected to I decided to attend a conference for women in Los Angeles. I convinced my mother in law to pay for it because I couldnā€™t afford it. @ChristineCaine was preaching. I was desperate...
1/


I wanted to die, I didnā€™t see a way out and I had tried everything. I imagined many ways to die daily. The most recurring one was throwing my car down a bridge I had to drive over every day. I never did it because my kids were in the car and I was afraid one of them would...

2/

survive or Iā€™d kill someone on the way down.

Christine spoke about honoring your pastors even when they werenā€™t great, she spoke of us expecting too much of pastors and how wrong that was. She said God would use our testimony if we submitted to our pastors.

3/

She said ā€œhonor your pastors, God will honor you.ā€ She said more about having disagreed with her pastors but she submitted and God honored her and now sheā€™s blessed. How if they are faithfully serving God, we need to support them and not forfeit what God has for us.

4/

I felt my heart drop into my stomach. I got up and went to the bathroom because I couldnā€™t breath and I felt like I was going to faint if I didnā€™t scream. I now know I was having a panic attack. I sat on the toilet w/my head between my legs, breathed and wept..
5/
Typically excellent piece from @dsquareddigest The exponential insight is especially neat. Think of it a little like fishing...today you canā€™t export oysters to the EU (because you simply arenā€™t allowed to), tomorrow you donā€™t have a fish exporting business (to the EU).


The extremely small minority of people who known anything about this who think that Brexit will be good for the City make a number of arguments which I shall address in turn...

1. They need us more than we need them. This is a variant of the German carmakers argument. And we know how that went...Business will follow the profit opportunity and if that has moved then so will the business...

And what do we mean by us / we. Weā€™re not talking about massed ranks of Euro investing / trading etc blue blooded British institutions.

Au contraire. Weā€™re talking about the London based subs of US, Asian and indeed European capital markets players...As soon as they think the profit opportunity has moved then so will they...itā€™s a market innit...
There is a now-relevant parallel here to the difference here between matters before a judge & matters before a jury. Judges are far more reluctant to strike testimony or evidence if they are the only recipients of it, with the theory being that they are really smart about ...


law stuff & will know what they can & can't consider. For instance, there is a long-held rule that a fact witness can't make legal arguments, only a lawyer. So what will happen in a motion for summary judgment, where the entire proceeding is on paper, will play out like this:

1) Defendant makes a motion for summary judgment. It includes a sworn declaration from some fact witness.

2) The declaration includes all sorts of legal arguments about why the defendant should win. Often the declaration includes arguments the brief didn't even make.

Defendants (especially DOJ-represented ones) often do this to get around the word or page-limits placed on briefs.

3) Plaintiff moves to strike the declaration for its inclusion of inadmissible legal arguments.

4) Judge denies the motion to strike, on the grounds that a ...

judge is a sophisticated consumer of evidence & can choose what to consider & what to ignore, unlike a jury.

The legal fiction behind this impeachment exception is that Senators are also smart enough to know what to listen to & what to ignore. Now, that may not be ACCURATE, ...