Another one heading to tribunal.

It's the female equivalent of a male putting a Union or St George flag in their name or bio and is taken by other users that the person's opinions will likely be pretty rancid.

"other users" doing some heavy lifting these

Some people do get mighty tetchy when women spend their money in an unapproved fashion 😂

I’ll be doing some more gardening if required.

I always enjoy the periodic outrage over “waaah! GCs have stolen one of our billionty FLEGS the non-binary pride flag!” because the cultural imperialism levels are off the scale. 🙄
I really cannot understand how anyone committed to decolonisation (as TRAs generally claim to be) can be so fond of flags. Massively problematic, that. Especially places failing to change out the pride flag for the disability pride flag…

Anyway, were one to in fact evaluate the use of group markers/identifiers on Twitter + the content of each group’s tweets doubtless there would be “rancid” views - but you’d need to look elsewhere for those @Maitai72. You see some truly shocking things from Hindus who want India to be a theocracy, for example - but an Indian flag doesn’t always signal membership of said group. Perfect example of a massive + muddled grouping is of course people with the Ukrainian flag: looking at that would be really interesting, but hard work. There are TRAs with dinosaurs & GCs with dinosaurs, so you will see dinosaurs arguing with each other. Crucially, however, it’s not the 💜🤍💚 users who send threats of violence (including commonplace use of a notorious meme featuring a gun); who are [routinely] profane; who post pictures of their genitalia at women they consider to be transphobes; nor who [deliberately] misrepresent anything & everything to try to bend the arc of the moral universe not towards justice but rather into whatever mangled corkscrew shape might be required to prop up their ideology. Indeed, the 💜🤍💚 views are, by law, worthy of respect.

(If anyone missed the Dino Wars, there’s an explainer here. Of course, the “Dino Emojis Are Trans!” stories tend to leave out that they were the work of many. Probably because Courtney Milan tried to claim that she made them up so she knew they were trans. Her website now just talks about helping create them…)

Just to repeat, Employment Tribunals work on the basis that neither side will have to pay the other's costs if they lose. This is to ensure that ordinary people don't lose their savings/ homes if they lose a tribunal. So anyone thinking Allison lost because she didn't get her costs covered needs to think again.

Yeah, personally paying 20 quid to have discrimination against gender critical women enshrined as illegal is pretty good value.

A hell of a lot better than the hundreds or thousands Allison's employer spent on getting bad advice from Stonewall! In addition to the smallish sum awarded to her, they will also have had large legal costs (and lost time of their own staff) and suffered reputational damage. And they couldn't even pass the buck.

I think anyone who regards allegiance to the Suffragette cause as “rancid” is telling us quite a lot about themselves.

yes. The lack of self awareness with that post is remarkable.

Re the derailer: I really think some people should have been praised a lot less as kids. I wonder if he thought he was being smart!

I’m glad to see someone taking a University to ET.

Employment tribunals don't award costs or damages normally because if that were the case it would deter individuals from bringing cases. That Allison got a penny back was a bonus and an indication of how very badly she'd been treated. Everyone who contributed understood that it was a sunk cost. But you're right in one way — none of us should have to be paying to ensure that employers adhere to the law and don't implement bad advice from lobby groups like Stonewall.

Yeah, personally paying 20 quid to have discrimination against gender critical women enshrined as illegal is pretty good value.

Although, given that we had to do in the first place, I can totally understand how some people are bitter.

You're not aware of Jo Phoenix v Open University, of Raquel Rosario Sanchez v Bristol?

Crikey, things never change do they?

Personally I find my contributions to Maya and Allison’s causes to be outstanding value. I was part, in a tiny way, of challenging Stonewall’s vile grip on institutions to the detriment of women and of LGB people.

I think anyone who regards allegiance to the Suffragette cause as “rancid” is telling us quite a lot about themselves.

That’s an odd interpretation. All the posts seemed very reasonable to me.

Ah, of course, I knew it looked familiar! Thanks.

I don't know when the penny is going to drop for the TRAs (never, probably given their pitiful social skills), you telling us not to do something just results in women doing the opposite now.

I'll be digging in honour of you. 😘

Suffragette colours

Just looking through the twitter thread, there’s a lot of purple white and green flags/hearts - what do they represent?
(genuine question - please excuse my ignorance).

Especially when Stonewall puts forward an employee who needs their mum, another adult and a dog in the room just to cope with giving evidence. It doesn't get more entertaining than that.

I read quixote9's comment as not being a win for Stonewall in the real world.

Stonewall got off on what amounts to a free speech defence, the judgement said the employer did not have to act on their guidelines which produce discrimination when acted on.

Eh? That's a MASSIVE win. Just read the second part of that sentence to yourself: SW's guidelines were discriminatory.

How many employers in their right mind would now follow SW's guidelines?

Exactly! Money well spent

I do love how there is a group of people who are so focused on how women spend their money. Really amazing to see them pop up on threads to use our personal fiscal policies as some kind of gotcha!

I mean, trying to make out that raising 500k and getting a 22k return was all it was about. I guess the denial of the value of what that funding actually achieved is the aim.

Nothing to see here…. Just a waste of money…

oh? What was that? That a lesbian even had to take Stonewall to court for their actions against her is being ignored? That a woman now has exposed what Stonewall’s actions were and their weak defence is being conveniently forgotten?

No… keep focus on the money raised!!!

oh? What? The money organisations are paying to Stonewall for a supposedly high standard of advice?

That money?

As a gotcha, this one is not quite working out in my view.