The Stand U turns on the cancellation of Joanna Cherry's show.

Presumably this is in the light of so many emotionally and physically incontinent advocates of trans ideology believing that threats and violence are legitimate ways of enforcing their beliefs on the rest of society?
It shouldn't be happening but given the level of threat these people pose to women, it's probably necessary.

Are they just trying to be pissy and awkward with the whole "we need to close the bar" so that they can do the extra security?? Would other events that book the venue have to tolerate a sub standard service due to factors outside of their control? I doubt it.

Having to have extra security including bag searches, shameful

https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2023/aug/06/edinburgh-venue-to-tighten-security-for-gender-critical-snp-mp-joanna-cherry

The Stand are currently advertising for Fringe staff so they have no excuse at all to not have staff in place in time for the event.

And despite the insistence of a poster on another thread that only the current staff could possibly understand how to work the venue, I'm fairly sure that The Stand will be able to find experienced venue staff who can do such tasks as 'remind audience members not to move chairs'.

Yes, they're not positioning transw as the source of violence, the transw and their extremist chums are doing that. It's certainly not women being the source of any violence.

How dishonest of the Guardian not to have made that clear.

GailBlancheViola · Yesterday 13:03

Cabaret Against the Hate, which describes itself as an ally and LGBTQ+ group and called on Lindsay’s venue to explain why it was hosting her event, said debate must involve everyone:

Now, this is an easy one: because cancelling her event would have breached her rights, under the Equality Act 2010. Now stop wanging on about it, you know this.

If that genuine concern is about women’s safety, then why not include trans women who experience so much violence themselves rather than consistently trying to position trans women as the source of that violence?”

As for this bit, evidence is quite clear where the source of violence comes from when women are to be silenced, films cancelled, etc.

From that Guardian article:

Cabaret Against the Hate, which describes itself as an ally and LGBTQ+ group and called on Lindsay’s venue to explain why it was hosting her event, said debate must involve everyone: “If that genuine concern is about women’s safety, then why not include trans women who experience so much violence themselves rather than consistently trying to position trans women as the source of that violence?”

Ah so they do want debate, I thought debate was akin to genocide/deny existence.

I actually think venues will be cheered by this generally as it means they can’t be held hostage by their own staff. It was farcical last year and getting out of hand.
It swings the balance of power away from staff which is fair. Individual members of Staff can of course withdraw their labour but it means events can go ahead.

yes wonder where they got first legal advice from as it was clearly wrong!

That would require a policy not to book GC speakers though (which would itself be discriminatory). Perhaps GC speakers should try to book out the venue themselves ..?

I’d really like to go along to this event. I sincerely hope it is well policed because there will undoubtedly be protests against it. I hope The Stand take reasonable measures to counter the inevitable ‘sickies’ that will be called in on the day by members of staff. I’d have the number of an agency on standby to avoid having to cancel the event ‘due to staff shortages’ or ‘Health and Safety’ because the toilet cleaner is ‘off sick’.

The Stand have also got plenty of time to audit their current staff on whether they have any ideological objections to working that night - if they ascertain that some do, then they can put contingencies in place NOW can’t they. There is ample time to do this. And if their staff feel ‘unsafe’ they can liaise with the Police to ensure everyone is made safe as I’m sure Cherry will be seeking similar assurances from the Police given that she’s received several, actual death threats. So absolutely no excuse for this event not going ahead for any of those reasons. Good.

The Guardian mentioned this in an article yesterday. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/may/12/edinburgh-university-tries-to-defuse-row-after-trans-rights-protests-over-film

They also indirectly describe the Adult Human Female film as 'unscientific '.

To be fair, back when this first hit the news Humza Yousaf said that Joanna should be allowed to speak and be heard, and he hoped and trusted that the issue would be worked out so that she could and would. Which I read as his actually understanding what had occurred - that one of his MPs (Tommy Shepard) had arranged for another (Joanna Cherry) to speak and then it all blew up, but he trusted them to work it out. Perhaps not perfect, but significantly better than his predecessor who typically (at least over the past 2 years) slammed both hands over her ears and chanted "na na na na I can't hear you" to avoid acknowledging the deteriorating climate re women's rights in Scotland.

Humza's comments, I thought, had an interesting contrast in those of Holyrood Culture Secretary Angus Robertson, who rushed to the front to say that he couldn't comment and no sensible person would comment because it was some big tricky complicated legal stuffs and look a squirrel! What happened to supporting your Leader, Angus? Is Humza not a sensible person?

As is the way gail. As is the way!

I hope that this climbdown, along with their admission that they were legally wrong all along, will help to deter other venues from similar behaviour.

The TEZ side have been getting away with this sort of thing, until some of the recent cases; they've lost every time. I'm thinking of Maya Forstater, Alison Bailey and JC's previous case.

Oh absolutely Helleofabore they were so damn sure they were right and crowing about it and now radio silence.

Only a very entrenched ideologue would say this was not discrimination. I know some people tried to make out it was not; but it was a very simple open and shut case of discrimination.

So far so good, but I can't help worrying about what the opposition will do in response to this. There could be a mass walkout by the entire staff (and who'll know how many of them would be doing it under duress from colleagues or outsiders) and there may be attempts at sabotage, bomb threats--the owners here may have exchanged one hazard for another.

Excellent news.

Slowly but surely women like Joanna, Julie Bindle etc are politely but firmly demanding their legal rights and the message is getting through that it is discrimination.

That is very heartening to read.

Any idea when the tickets go on sale?

They've probably had an early night.

Weren't there an awful lot of people on here and social media pontificating that cancelling this event was not discrimination? Looking forward to hearing their comments now.

Sounds like she had a case legally

A legal professor likened it to a gay couple being refused a Bnb room

Good on her