Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Rachel Meade - it's a win!

692 replies

BreadInCaptivity · 09/01/2024 12:35

x.com/legalfeminist/status/1744697995822526961?s=46&t=88gZvdSnTk70X8b2ZUPZtA

OP posts:
Thread gallery
38
Poinsettiasarevile · 09/01/2024 16:24

Will be reading the full judgement later, but the panel really seemed to have their heads screwed on. Someone being upset does not automatically mean there has been wrongdoing. Intent and context matters, as does the level of sensitivity of the complainant. All these things and more need to be considered in the context of what is lawful.

How many more expensive, drawn out and, I am sure for the likes of Rachel and Maya, devastating court cases do there need to be before we have some semblance of a sensible approach in the workplace? .

SigourneyHoward · 09/01/2024 15:58

Excellent news!

Very bland "acknowledgment/we have time to consider decision and our options - no further comment" on SWE website, nothing yet on WCC...

EasternStandard · 09/01/2024 15:54

MrsOvertonsWindow · 09/01/2024 15:18

Thank you Rachel for your courage and bravery in taking on these malicious, malignant individuals so intent on breaking down the social contract. Social workers everywhere are a little safer and able to focus on their clients rather than the demands of these toxic trans lobbyists.

Yes it’s fantastic

My assumption is every person wherever they are employed is safer

And Stonewall should really be defunct as losing money in payouts is not why anyone would use them

Signalbox · 09/01/2024 15:39

I think Terf island just got a wee bit Terfier.

It does feel like that doesn't it.

WarriorN · 09/01/2024 15:38

MrsOvertonsWindow · 09/01/2024 15:18

Thank you Rachel for your courage and bravery in taking on these malicious, malignant individuals so intent on breaking down the social contract. Social workers everywhere are a little safer and able to focus on their clients rather than the demands of these toxic trans lobbyists.

Hear hear!

My friend is a social worker and she'd heard of this case. It's very significant for all social workers AND the children they help.

WarriorN · 09/01/2024 15:37

Wonderful news!

This is huge

Poinsettiasarevile · 09/01/2024 15:21

I think Terf island just got a wee bit Terfier.

Congratulations Rachel, am doing dry January, you can have my drinking money.

MrsOvertonsWindow · 09/01/2024 15:18

Thank you Rachel for your courage and bravery in taking on these malicious, malignant individuals so intent on breaking down the social contract. Social workers everywhere are a little safer and able to focus on their clients rather than the demands of these toxic trans lobbyists.

Ohyoudodoyou · 09/01/2024 15:06

Jolly good! More of this in 2024 - fiesta time!

HellonHeels · 09/01/2024 15:03

ArabellaScott · 09/01/2024 14:44

Ex colleague.

Weren't they friends? Seem to recall Rachel's fb was closed to general view and could only be seen by "friends".

Sheer arseholery

Hoardasurass · 09/01/2024 15:01

That's brilliant news and hopefully puts other regulators on notice (looking at you NMC)

Waitwhat23 · 09/01/2024 15:01

Just shows any organisation stupid enough to continue to take advice from Stonewall on this issue only have themselves to blame.

WallaceinAnderland · 09/01/2024 14:59

Fantastic news. Thank you Rachel, it should never have had to happen in the first place but you have won for all women. What a warrior.

RethinkingLife · 09/01/2024 14:57

Is that judgment as strongly worded as I think it is?

And, in a post-Forstater world, should this constitute quite a strong signal to regulators and employers?

Waitwhat23 · 09/01/2024 14:46

Excellent news!

ArabellaScott · 09/01/2024 14:44

DrBlackbird · 09/01/2024 14:43

What the hell did Mr Aedan Wolton, Sport England's 'Diversity Champion' have to do with Rachel’s FB account? Jesus.

Ex colleague.

DrBlackbird · 09/01/2024 14:43

What the hell did Mr Aedan Wolton, Sport England's 'Diversity Champion' have to do with Rachel’s FB account? Jesus.

Flickersy · 09/01/2024 14:41

Absolutely the right decision, and it's good to see such a solid summary in the judgement.

ArabellaScott · 09/01/2024 14:39

Menstrualcycledisplayteam · 09/01/2024 14:04

The complainant was actually Aedan Wolton, now a DEI lead at Sport England - a transman. Worrying really when you consider the implications for women's sport.

Yes, but the problem lies with the regulator and the council. People need to be able to complain - and there will always be malicious or frivolous complaints. The problem is how the regulator/employer/council responds to them.

Hopefully it should be getting clearer and clearer that you can't treat someone badly just because they believe sex is immutable and that sex matters.

SerotinaPickeler · 09/01/2024 14:37

Signalbox · 09/01/2024 13:16

"This is a landmark decision. It is the first time a Regulator and an Employer have together been found to have been liable for discrimination relating to gender critical beliefs."

👏👏 this is excellent. Well done Rachel and team for taking this on.

EasternStandard · 09/01/2024 14:33

PronounssheRa · 09/01/2024 14:28

Para 274 at the end of the judgement. Following Stonewall law is starting to get very costly

The opinions expressed by the Claimant
could not sensibly be viewed as being transphobic when properly considered in
their full context from an objective perspective, but rather her expressing an
opinion contrary to the interpretation of legislation, or perhaps more accurately
the amendment to existing legislation, advocated for by trans lobbying groups to include, but not limited to, Stonewall

Following Stonewall law is starting to get very costly

Amazing. Their clients should be aware

RocketPanda · 09/01/2024 14:33

The stonewall chickens are starting to come home to roost. The training they provided was full of legal falsehoods.

Karensalright · 09/01/2024 14:30

@SinnerBoy made me spit me coffee out

PronounssheRa · 09/01/2024 14:28

Para 274 at the end of the judgement. Following Stonewall law is starting to get very costly

The opinions expressed by the Claimant
could not sensibly be viewed as being transphobic when properly considered in
their full context from an objective perspective, but rather her expressing an
opinion contrary to the interpretation of legislation, or perhaps more accurately
the amendment to existing legislation, advocated for by trans lobbying groups to include, but not limited to, Stonewall

PurpleSparkledPixie · 09/01/2024 14:27

Brilliant news. Many thanks to Rachel and her team Flowers

Swipe left for the next trending thread