Legal action against Eventbrite for unlawful discrimination

I think for easy reference it is worth re-posting the Eventbrite Community Guidelines referenced in section 16 of the T&Cs. As this might answer a few of the questions about “disparagement.”

We know what disparagement is. We can read words. Some of us even own our own dictionaries. Bought with money we earnt in professional jobs that we hold down all on our own.

The problem lies in thinking that calling a man a man is disparagement. It isn't. Any more than calling anything the thing it is using the agreed words in the language of choice to describe the thing we are describing. Honestly.

Stating you don’t believe in something is not disparagement. Otherwise Eventbrite could never hold an event for atheists. Would they refuse an event for Richard Dawkins?
So not believing in gender identity is not likely to be sufficient grounds.

I think for easy reference it is worth re-posting the Eventbrite Community Guidelines referenced in section 16 of the T&Cs. As this might answer a few of the questions about “disparagement.”

*Hateful, Dangerous, or Violent Content or Events
Don’t Post Hateful or Dangerous Content or Events That Discriminate Against or Threaten Any Societal Group, or Encourages Violence. This includes:

-Hate speech, hateful ideologies and hateful activities that incite, encourage or engage in violence, intimidation, disparagement, harassment, or threats targeting an individual or group based on their actual or perceived race, ethnicity, religion, national origin, immigration status, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, age or veteran status

-Terrorist symbols, activities and organisations or organised criminal activity*

Surely the question is not whether they can ban an event for someone being disparaging but whether they apply this equally.

indeed. If they're going to use the term disparaging it needs to be applied equally.

I can't wait to see their definition of the term disparaging. And then watch all the other events they allow where it's happening.

Surely the question is not whether they can ban an event for someone being disparaging but whether they apply this equally.

So, if they ban events for people saying things which trans people don't like then they have to ban events that someone (anyone) might think are misogynist or against any other protected characteristic (at least) also. If they don't apply the rule equally then it's discrimination.

Since trans people since people speaking about biological reality is disparaging and women think self ID is disparaging (not to mention dangerous) to women and children then I think you could argue someone from either side would not be able to have an event through event brite. Also biologists wanting to host a book launch about a biology presumably. You can then expand it to other issues and they have no business left.

Dadjoke have Eventbrite ever cancelled an event because of perceived misogyny?

They said they were banning the event because of the speakers previous anti-trangender statements.

Their T&Cs ban disparaging comments. So, if banning legal but disparaging speech is legal under English law (and I think it is) and a single speaker can be said to have disparaged transgender people, then you have no case.

Should Eventbrite be forced to host all events, as long as the speech is literally not illegal? That's clearly nonsensical.

So, if disapragement is sufficient, the question is, has Graham Linehan or any other speaker has ever been disparaging to transgender people?

That's an interesting take. Let their own purity spiral tie them up in knots.

And yes, whatever basis they will eventually claim was the one they used, is proven to have been used elsewhere, with absolutely no effect, then surely that would constitute a form of discrimination.

This seems very important.

I wonder if they can show equal treatment. I suspect I know the answer to this, but look forward to seeing the evidence.

Surely in the emails uncovered by the data access request, there are many examples of libel? You can't just accuse someone of being 'anti-trans' or 'transphobic' just because they believe in the evidenced biological reality of two sexes for humans and the importance of this fact for women's rights. That's defamatory isn't it?

Donated. Might be worth making the link to the donation site more prominent e.g. on the substack article, especially as it's on democracythree rather than the more commonly-used crowdjustice? (It is on the front page of democracythree, though, in case that helps anyone!)

Thanks for update. As parts of the investigation misspell your name ("Philmore") I was wondering if further instances of this would even have been picked up in the usual FOI searches?

(Wank move, I'll be donating again).

Me too

I just wonder if it is worth looking at other people hosting events with Eventbrite and seeing if they have ever been 'disparaging' about anyone or anything else.

If they think they should be not hosting events unless all speakers are pure of heart and never 'disparaging' then I'd really question why they exists because many, many events host speakers that are at some point 'disparaging' about something at some time in their life. And if they do cancel all events where someone is disparaging they will have history to show it in court right?

That's very interesting Spero. They're watching very closely who's interested, aren't they. And how much money you're raising. That would indicate a sense that instead of relying on the actual law, they're hoping a show of power and might will do the trick. (Wank move, I'll be donating again).

They haven't taken into account that it's not only about the law though, it's also about the surrounding publicity and getting all this info out into the public domain.

The absolutely 'determined to be wrong' interpretation of the Maya precedent, what constitutes hate speech, the NCHI scandal, all of it.

Thanks for the update.

What is a “hate tag”?
How can saying a male is a male be “hate”?
Sometimes I feel like I can’t breathe, when confronted like this with such utter fantasy and denial of reality.

Thank you for your update Spero.

Happy New Year @Spero

Very interesting indeed!

Sorry, meant to add screen shot of the bit from your link so it’s easier to find what I quoted.

Thank you for the update.

As I suspected and posted in this thread, the basis for the deletion hinges on the T&Cs:
The event creator——gender critical ideology and social media
post/videos meets our definition of "disparagement" within our hate speech policy,

I do recall saying they only have to show disparagement not full on hate speech according to the T&Cs to then refuse service. I suppose you’d have to show that this is unenforceable and that depends on which rule of law applies…U.K. or State of California in regards to whether illegal discrimination happened.

I don’t see a need to rehash the discussion already had on that, suffice to say it’s ultimately up to the courts.

Did you file the suit yet? I recall you saying your legal counsel said they could file in a U.K. court, may I ask which one? Have you had any other hopeful news on this? A lot of money has been donated for the legal costs so I do hope it’s been enough to start the process.

Excellent news Sarah! And fabulous post Flirts.

More power to your elbow, Sarah

Good news Sarah, thanks for the update!