Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing Thread 5

This, and Artichokes excellent post. The thought and clarity from these posters is something I am both grateful for and proud of. Thank you and all posters on this thread that have given up their time to document and discuss it all so clearly.

Allison was brilliant, wasn't she?

In the part I watched, she seemed more in control of the narrative that was coming across than he was. I assume that's not usual in a cross-examination! I guess because she was genuinely passionate and for him it's just Thursday.

This whole issue boils down to Stonewall and the rest of its Trans Lobby saying that women have no legal right to consent, because it views issues of consent as discriminatory.

Women say it is all about our right to consent.

This is an argument about women saying NO to men.

Thanks ickky for the threads (and all the useful info in the first post). And thanks too everyone for all the insightful comments.

Allison, you're amazing. Good Luck!

Place marking. Thanks @ickky

The whole cotton ceiling thing is basically incels on stilts - or do I mean high heels....?

What was the point AH was trying to make with the toilet thing?

Hear, hear, Artichokeleaves! Everything you've just written.

Fwiw, I was a woman who, when I became aware of this debate several years ago, did not initially object to some feminine males in women's loos. I profess no religion and am very lucky not to have been the victim of serious sexual assault. I've always had lovely GNC men in my life. I didn't think about it much, but if I did I sort of thought, "Well, we should be kind."

It is only because male people took that kindness and stomped all over it, metaphorically, by declaring that women had no right to exclude any male person from female spaces and services, that I took a closer look.

Upon reflection, it seems clear to me that no male person, no matter how lovely, has the right to intrude in female spaces. My previous tolerance of some males in female spaces was the result of societal grooming which tells girls basically from birth onward to put male people's needs and wishes before ours. It was internalized misogyny and it was wrong.

This applies to all male people, even the nicest ones. I adore my dad, uncles, etc., and trust them completely, but would never want to share a lavatory or other vulnerable space with them. No woman or girl should be obliged to, either.

Like others I would also like to thank the posters here for keeping us up to date with what is going on and contributing background insights. Very much appreciated.

@ickky "Well, Allison Bailey has been magnificent throughout this hearing but she was on fire today.
What a role model."

Indeed. Hochhauser showed his true colours in his last remarks.

I am sure I do not need to elaborate.

Thanks very much for the new thread and all the helpful comments.

Excellent post.

Well done Allison. You are awesome.

Thank you ickky!

Checking in. Thanks ickky

.

I've not commented yet but have been following the threads daily. I wanted to thank everyone who has commented along with the trial, as I am unable to watch due to being in the office. It is fascinating so far.

Whole lot of worry on outing TW. Anyone seen any equal worry about outing female people needing single sex spaces for highly sensitive reasons?

‘Where is the reminder that no woman has the right to set boundaries for another, and there are women who cannot share with any male, regardless of how lovely they are?’

That’s true. Inclusion excludes people who have a legitimate need for single sex spaces.

Just dropping in to say thank you to everyone who is contributing background info, analysis, links and insight into all these threads. I haven't commented before because it's so fast-moving but I'm enormously grateful to all the sharp minds of FWR for making it so much easier to follow Tribunal Tweets and make sense of what's going on.

Boundless admiration for Allison. She is indomitable.

I can never stand when it gets into the direct question of 'would YOU share a bathroom with...' because the very clear implication is 'are you a good girl?' and so many women rush to say yes, yes of course, in most/x circumstances I would do the right thing and put the male person's needs first! It's a question very definitely setting the moral right answer and challenging the woman to declare herself with risks for the wrong answer. It's not a neutral act.

Where is the reminder that no woman has the right to set boundaries for another, and there are women who cannot share with any male, regardless of how lovely they are? And that those female people should not be excluded from the female facilities for the better freedoms and happiness of male people, and those female people should not be put in the position of having to be afraid to be the one who says sorry, I am not as privileged as these females who can do mixed sex, sorry, this doesn't work for me, sorry, please dont call HR, call me names or try to get me sacked because I can't prioritise this male person's emotional needs unconditionally above my own need to pee sometimes. Please don't tell everyone I was raped/abused/am disabled/have a culture that doesn't fit with ultra liberal fashion, and have them order me to get over it because poor male person with needs.

What on earth is this other than sexism and a massive failure of inclusion and diversity working for anyone other than male people?

I've not been able to log in because of work and just wanted to say thank you for the threads. Alongside Twitter, they've been very helpful for keeping track.

And that includes the metaphorical ‘space’ of being a lesbian.