Waitrose delivery driver

So let me get this straight:

KJK orders a Waitrose delivery
The delivery driver is a man
The delivery driver asks KJK about her “adult human female” window stickers
KJK briefly explains them
delivery driver says I am a transwoman and we are women
KJK says I don’t agree*, please don’t use women’s spaces
delivery driver says I will if I want to
KJK says politely “please leave my house”
delivery driver says “I’ll take my time”
KJK says eff off and get off my property

And Waitrose tell HER she’s wrong and they won’t deliver to her?!

SO many things are wrong here:

The delivery driver was deliberately provocative towards a customer
“I will if I want to” = I don’t care about your boundaries or the equality act
The delivery driver refused to leave straight away
”I’ll take my time” is entitled, provocative, rude and intimidating
Waitrose writing to KJK to threaten withdrawal of services

*which is a belief worthy of respect in a democratic society after Forstater

I would agree that hearing somebody state that they did this transgressive act and would continue to do so is the point at which many sensible people would revise their risk assessment of that self-admittedly boundary transgressing person.

I'm sure that there would be several posters upbraiding KJK for not recognising that admission as a red flag, had anything more untoward occurred.

One of the most dispiriting parts of the whole account was that KJK didn't report it initially and I should think a number of us know why. We are so inured to the transgression of our boundaries and disrespectful behaviour, that we couldn't afford to expend our cognitive and emotional resources by following up on all of them.

Further still, did this deliver driver think they were the one to change Kjk's mind?
And then thought being intransigent and argumentative would be the way to change anyones mind, let alone a woman who has started an entire campaign about it?
Truly mind bending stuff.

@EmbarrassingHadrosaurus I know we have to be very careful with this subject. It sits at the heart of KJK complaint. She was polite, up to this point. Her words, no inference or interpretation required.

She is fully justified in how she responded after that, even if her language was what Waitrose probably classifies as abusive from a customer.

I should think a number of us shared the chill of that moment and we also know that a discussion of it is unlikely to stand here.

Yep. I started posting and then deleted it. I would have received a strike for any one of the factual sentences I was typing.

But I've not seen anyone comment on what, for me, was the most chilling aspect of KJK's account.

I'm going to phrase this delicately. I should think a number of us shared the chill of that moment and we also know that a discussion of it is unlikely to stand here.

I'm up for trying even in that knowledge.

We have all met people who delight in transgressing boundaries and do it from a secure position in the power asymmetry. KJK's description of her daughter as quiet and averse to confrontation is probably one that would fit many of the young people in common areas like changing rooms and toilets. And yet, this Waitrose employee (presumably, not a self-employed driver or subcontractor) felt safe to declare it and was confident that Waitrose would act in support of that stance.

Unless Waitrose was given a very partial account of the matter and might respond differently after considering KJK's letter.

I've followed this whole thread, watched the full video and read every comment. Yes - the 'l'll take my time' comment is threatening. But I've not seen anyone comment on what, for me, was the most chilling aspect of KJK's account.

5:44 - 5:55 in the video. "He told me he used womens spaces. I was polite until he said he liked using the spaces my teenage daughter uses, including changing rooms and toilets"

Liked. He likes uses the spaces where teenage girls get undressed. He told her who exactly who he was in that comment.

This a lot of this about. There are a few other threads which have been swamped by trans activist arguments that are very low on logic/material reality/legal basis and very high on brow-beating into submission with walls of text in endless posts. It all looks very same-y. It also involves a great deal of twisting and misrepresentation.

When I look at these trans activist arguments it occurs to me I'm seeing the best they can do, and that makes me think that, ultimately, they're going to lose.

“Please don’t make me watch her video again! She is barely coherent, constantly interrupts herself, rambles and changes her story.”

I watched the video and she was perfectly coherent and didn’t change her story. She’s doing a live video so what if he rambled and interrupts herself.

As for the delivery driver. He is there to do job and that is to deliver what the customer has paid for. He’s not there to get into a debate or pass comment. Quite frankly he sounded rude, unprofessional and should be investigated by the company for trying to intimidate a woman on her property.

"I'll take my time" is a threatening statement regardless of whether it triggers someone specifically.

The driver should be sacked.

I was just mistaken about that.
Just to refresh our memories, you wrote:

Latecomers who have not watched the video are believing the misinformation that the delivery driver was in KJKs home and refused to leave the property. This did not happen. The driver was at all times outside her home on the doorstep…

You're plausibly mistaken about a number of your repeated assertions. However, you've confirmed that accuracy and reality aren't meaningful to you when making assertions about others' actions or engaging in a discussion about that. It may also undermine your credibility with those who thought you had offered an accurate summary of the video.

im going to take this as gospel because I haven’t seen the video

Given that poster's distortions on this thread, even disputing Motorina's words with Motorina, that's an interesting choice.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4565561-waitrose-delivery-driver?page=14&reply=117803699

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4565561-waitrose-delivery-driver?page=14&reply=117806811

Discovereads

Well what can I say. I have a heart. I think the delivery driver was impolite by asking a question about the provocative signs on KJKs window but also think she did not deserve to be deliberately misgendered, have their gender identity denied, given a GC lecture which involved demanding they stay out of spaces they have every right to access, or subjected to “colourful language” which we all know is an euphemism for swearing.

Your perspective is so warped! The signs were not provacative. The driver wasn't impolite (IMO) to ask about them. He was deeply unprofessional, rude and stupid, however, to get into an argument about politics and women's rights with a customer. Giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming that he wasn't deliberately trying to get into an argument (itself a very bold assumption) then the question was fine IMHO - simple small talk. But, if you're on company time and your attempts at small-talk lead to a customer giving a political opinion that you disagree with you need to move onto the weather or how nice the customer's flowers are looking ASAP. You don't argue with a customer in their own home.

I love how TRAs think rape threats with girl dicks are acceptable as a response to asserting women's rights, but telling someone to fuck off and leave your property (as is your legal right after they have refused to do so) is terrible.

Men have no right to destroy women's spaces. No man has ever accessed a woman's space because it is not a woman's space when it has a man in it.

They are live streamed sessions and are supposed to be uncut before making publicly available.

If you only want to watch professionally edited videos, watch something else.

Live streams where the presenter is responding to questions, comments and thanking people for donations will always run like this. And yes, discussing the feed quality is important as, if you noticed, she had someone advising her by text as well as people immediately feeding back via the chat session. (If she couldn’t fix it, for example, she might kick everyone out and start again with a fresh session or cut the session short)

If you don’t like the conversational format, don’t watch it. If you want the content, you acknowledge the format has these quirks and get on with it.

It is very simple.

Depends how much you want to see the content. And there is something quite nice about videos which are more like personal chats than professional documentaries. But, you are right, I think you'd have to be a KJK superfan or very new to the debate to watch her vids start to finish.

DdraigGoch · Yesterday 23:19

It bloody well is (is that colourful language too much?)

"I'll empty these crates first" is fine, it shows that any loitering before leaving has a genuine purpose.

"I'll take my time" is deliberately antagonistic. It shows that he could see that his presence and behaviour was causing the customer distress, and that he was going to drag it out for its own sake.

Imagine a man and a woman are having consensual sex. All of a sudden the woman feels a sharp pain and firmly and loudly says "ow, that really hurts, stop NOW!"

The man has a choice. He can withdraw immediately and say something like "sorry, what happened, are you OK?" or he can reply "I'll take my time".

I suppose the one thing that we can be grateful of is that the delivery man didn't simply stand there, towering over KJK, right in her face saying "no, and whose gonna make me?"

given a GC lecture which involved demanding they stay out of spaces they have every right to access

No. That is not true. Transwomen - as biological men - can be lawfully excluded from women’s single sex spaces.

It’s worrying that you say you participate in legal processes and yet you have such a misunderstanding of the Equalities Act.

The waitrose delivery driver has given no indication that she thinks she can’t be misgendered without literally dying. So, no I’m not defending such a person because they are a figment of your imagination.

Yeah! That's why that phrase was in italics - denotes hyperbole in this instance. Seeing as you have felt free to add bits and bobs to the tale I was doing the same and referring to the usual daft diatribe, complaints we hear from transwomen when a woman points out their maleness.

He said quite clearly that he would be using female spaces, that he would do so as he pleased, when he pleased. Seems to conform to the general stereotype. The one you are defending!

Please don’t make me watch her video again! She is barely coherent, constantly interrupts herself, rambles and changes her story.

I’d rather just allow that the delivery driver could have entered her home instead of staying on the doorstep as all my Waitrose delivery drivers do. I wasn’t aware they could come in again, they’ve not said anything so I was just mistaken about that.

I don’t have any solutions. I don’t think you are pathetic at all.

I have done over a decade of therapy CBT, trauma counselling, EMDR, etc. I also take medication. In suffering from cPTSD I am hyper vigilant and so often when I’m highly uncomfortable or triggered by something it’s being caused by me and my trauma memories (both physical and mental) and not actually caused by the actions or presence of anyone around me. So I don’t hold those others responsible for triggering me, if you know what I mean by that? I don’t therefore think that they’ve done anything unacceptable or threatening or intimidating just because by cPTSD is triggered. It’s literally me doing it to myself.

So in thinking further on how my thick skin seems to operate it’s not that I don’t feel the feelings of fear and uncertainty, it’s simply that Im able to mentally sit with it, let it flow through me and sort of compartmentalise so I can assess why I am feeling those feelings. Is it because I’m hyper vigilant and therefore can dismiss the environment as not truly threatening, or is there a clear and present threat? I do these mental calculations. Because I can’t show weakness- it’s how I survived a lot of incidents and so I’m not saying you should be like me or anything. Just that I am the way I am because I had to be to survive.

Of course, that all flies out the window if something happens that triggers a flashback. In a flashback I’m back then and no longer in the real world so anything can happen. So thoughts about what triggered the flashback and what can I do in future have to wait until I’m properly back in reality and fully conscious again.

First, she had signs up in her window she said they said “woman: adult human female” so on. The delivery driver who was a trans woman asked: what are the signs in her window? and KJK explained she fought for womens rights. The driver responded, so that includes transwomen then? And KJK said no. The driver said, well I’m not a man. And KJK said yes you are a man and I don’t care what you think you are but don’t use womens spaces (btw deliberately misgendering a trans person is not only rude but a hate crime in Canada). The driver responded well I don’t feel comfortable in the mens. KJK said it’s not womens responsibility to make him comfortable and that more women are uncomfortable than just him if he uses the womens room. The diver said well I’m not going to stop using the womens room because it’s where I belong and I like to. KJK said get off my property. Driver said I’ll take my time. KJK said in “colourful language” to get off her property

im going to take this as gospel because I haven’t seen the video

i think the driver was ok to ask the question about the signs

depending on the signs he may have been goady to ask if it included transwomen….ive no idea

he was very stupid and obviously looking for a rise, or for KJK to back down, to say im not a man (i never back down)

i think its fair enough to have a to and fro about changing rooms, sounds like KJK mentioned it first though if the driver had any sense they’d have realised that their customer service record was shot by this time

i think its fair enough for KJK to say get off my property

and I definitely think its fair enough for KJK to say fuck off in response to ‘I’ll take my time’

its fair enough for waitrose to say we don’t want to deliver to you any more

stay out of spaces they have every right to access

What spaces do they have the right to access? Sorry I've not watched the video...

Also familiar with Waitrose deliveries and yes they do deliver to your kitchen and even unpack.

See above poster who confirms this - however, you can indicate where KJK says doorstep on the video. It should be straightforward as you've asserted it many times and it would clarify matters.

Wow those Reddit boards are something else…many referring to gender gp. Have they not been stopped from prescribing?

And the minimising cycle goes around again.

Fuckssake Waitrose, this is totally unacceptable