Waitrose delivery driver

I have emailed Waitrose
[email protected]
with my concerns.

We have been quiet too long.
Time to make our voices heard.

I am a bit torn about this to be honest, I read the thread yesterday but didn’t post as I wanted to have a think about it first.
While I agree that the delivery driver behaved badly and should have left the property immediately when asked Posie was probably spoiling for a fight as soon as she realised that this person was a Transwoman . This person did not need to be told about women’s spaces, I am sure they knew and were also looking for a reaction as soon as they realised what Posies stickers etc mean.
I do not want male bodied people using women’s spaces and am horrified at the aggressive way some Transwomen (who I believe to be biologically Male still) are demanding access. However, Posie inflamed a situation unnecessarily. A simple “I don’t agree with you and I would like you to drop the food off and leave as soon as possible “ would have been adequate
Still, it gave her material for her podcast didn’t it?

Totally agree.

Take note. The poster that chairs tribunals has acknowledged that the delivery driver has an arguable case for harrassment against KJK.

Please don’t misrepresent what I’ve said.

I reckon 50-90% of male people that that offensive TRAs would call cishet or some other obnoxious term would be quite happy to say "trans women are women". They would say this to be kind and because they assume that the person asking the question is asking it metaphorically. If you asked the follow up question "would you ever sleep with a TW, a person who is by definition biologically male" they would say "of course not, I am straight not gay, lol! How outrageous that you should seek to deny sexual orientation."

You know, I discovered that YouTube has a tool that generates a transcript of videos. Which is handy as I can read a transcript quicker than listening to the video. The reason KJ goes off topic is because she was live streaming, and responding in realtime to people posting comments and questions. She was also obviously talking without a script. The video hasn't been edited subsequently. But I still found it easy to follow what she was saying.

At no point does she say she wants the driver sacked, or even disciplined. She in fact states she understands that Waitrose may not want to deliver to her any more and she accepts that and they will lose her custom. That's at 9:39 on the video btw.

This is all just interpretations. Nobody knows but the 2 people involved. It's like watching fantasy fiction being written here...

At the end of the day, the driver seemingly made a female customer (you know, the very person who paid some of his wages that day) very uncomfortable in her own home, and instigated a conversation that should just have been avoided. Full responsibility for that lies with the driver, and only the driver. If he hadn't asked, he wouldn't have got an answer he didn't like.

Had the driver not complained to their employer, none of this would be being discussed publicly. It would just be an awkward conversation that the driver had with a customer that they forgot to be professional with. If I were Waitrose, I'd be reminding my employee of the professional standards I expect them to work to. I'd say this one fell short on this occasion.

Yougov carried out the survey so PinkNews could not have influenced who responded to the survey or how they responded. YouGov is an international research data and analytics group. A study by the Pew Research Center concluded that YouGov “consistently outperforms competitors on accuracy”

So, it’s not obfuscation to claim that “normal people” are too stupid to fill out a You.gov survey correctly because the results don’t support your claim as to what the majority view is in Britain? And it’s not a lie to to say “when this is corrected the stats revert” when you know no such “correction” was needed or exists on You.gov?

How is posting an actual You.gov survey supporting my assertion being dishonest?

I (and others) have mentioned that we don’t have the delivery drivers side of the story, which no one has objected to. I have said her video is barely coherent. If you listen to it she interrupts herself constantly to go on about completely unrelated things. So it makes it challenging to piece together her side of the story. But I don’t think she is an unreliable narrator as a whole as I think she is being honest with only one questionable piece which is when she appears to materially change her story in her response letter to Waitrose.

You know that this is because normal people are confused by the names, so think a trans woman is a natal female. When this is corrected the stats of course revert to what you’d expect.

You really are demonstrating all of the standard TRA lies and obfuscations here. It’s strange, have none of you actually got enough education and intelligence to try to firm a valid, honest argument?

It’s as though you all got your degrees from Bournemouth.

That survey was commissioned by Pink News... A targeted audience, don't you think?!

@CanaryWharf2
On gender critical beliefs you said:
”It’s the majority view, and accords with the facts. No matter how much it upsets you that people won’t play along, it’s not going to happen.”

You can think that, but then there are the facts. Every year YouGov publish a report on the attitudes of the British public to transgendered people. It asks very straight questions such as:

(1) Is a transgender woman a woman, (marginally most people think so).
(2) Is a transgender man a man, (again the majority of people think so).
(3) Should trans women be able to use a Ladies loo, (the vast majority of people think so).

And of course, there are many more questions too. A link to the survey is below. In the main, people appear to be more "trans-friendly" if they are young, left-wing or liberal. The survey shows one other very significant point, though. Women are more trans-friendly than men.

yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2020/07/16/where-does-british-public-stand-transgender-rights

Hopefully the next woman he intimidates gives him a kick in the balls.

I have to say that you are one of the most eloquent TRAs I have ever seen on this board.

I'll second that. It's actually like a real debate.

Debating GC people is probably a bit transphobic, tbh. You shouldn't be coplatforming with us. 😁

Can folks maybe cut down on the crappy Mumsnet quote function though? Just had to scroll past two screenfuls of a single six-layer-nested quote.

I can't be arsed reading the last few pages but I hope that the driver is sacked.

@Discovereads can you tell us the time in the video where she says that, thanks.

Sorry, “gender critical” is the (fringe) philosophical/religious view
Oh, you wish... But wishing won't make it so. thank Christ

@Discovereads I have to say that you are one of the most eloquent TRAs I have ever seen on this board. If you were to actually make a valid point I'd be dead impressed

KJK related tit for tat what was said to its conclusion of get off my property and the driver leaving.

I'm confused. I thought your earlier stance was that KJK was an unreliable narrator and you were emphatic that nobody knew the driver's version of the event? It seems that you're now relying upon her version of events but insisting upon your own interpretation and editorialisation as a Received Truth.

It is not a fringe view that a man in a dress claiming to be a woman is still male.

It’s the majority view, and accords with the facts. No matter how much it upsets you that people won’t play along, it’s not going to happen.

Telling a trans male that they are a woman is identical to telling an anorexic that they are obese.

I watched her video. That’s how I know.

Sorry, “gender critical” is the (fringe) philosophical/religious view

“Are gender critical views capable of amounting to a philosophical belief? Yes, decided the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in Forstater v CGD Europe UKEAT/0105/20. Religion or belief is a protected characteristic, in accordance with Section 10 of the Equality Act 2010”
www.rcn.org.uk/magazines/advice/2021/september/legal-update-gender-critical-views-and-belief-protection

Yes, they collect data on other religious beliefs too. You know this though, so why the disingenuity?

I recall when they started doing this, it was rather controversial, and somewhat mocked.

Hence the push to get lots of people to put "Jedi" in there to get it "officially recognised".