In the actual Guardian! "The law is now clear: you can’t be punished for having gender-critical views. So why does it keep happening?"

Nice to see you comparing GC beliefs to a laundry list of bigoted or irrational beliefs.

You could equally say that it is protected in the same way that holding socialist beliefs are. Or being vegan due to animal welfare concerns.

Insulting a trans colleague using transphobic slurs would still be punishable under workplace policy. As would a socialist telling the boss they would be first up against the wall in the revolution. Or a vegan throwing away non-vegan food brought in by colleagues.

You can't however fire the socialist for saying they believe in redistribution of wealth through taxation. Or the vegan for saying they believe farming animals is morally wrong.

Or the feminist for saying biological sex is real and matters in some circumstances.

Not only did the tribunal find that Jo was not transphobic but they said that comparing her to a racist was an act of discrimination and harassment.

OK fair(ish) point, but obscures things like the ET finding Jo Phoenix not transphobic.

Resulting in the hard of thinking Zoe Williams throwing a strop because they have 'anti trans' people on Woman's Hour - and people no doubt believing her.

😂

The tactic of always putting gender critical beliefs in the same sentence as being against gay marriage has really become too obvious, Dadjoke. We all get it: you don't believe in women's sex based rights.

Thankfully the tide is changing everywhere. Even the country where I live, a left wing newspaper did a poll and oh dear, people are not in favour of replacing the word that means sex with the definition of gender.

Are you completely sure you want to say that believing that people have a sex and that cannot be changed is like racism, Jokers?

So glad this has a separate thread. Justin Webb doing the paper review on Today was astounded - quite a long and surprised mention c 7.40am. This is news indeed!

As I often say on here, write in to letters editor/editor, share and reread or indeed the shero that Susanna Rustin is (Guardian emails are pretty intuitive). She has written a few very good articles over the past five years, but paucity I would guess suggests the struggles she may have had to be allowed to write on the subject when others have a free rein.
As a retailer, the Guardian will want to know that an article that makes its points rationally, elegantly and doesn't bleat is appreciated and well read - clicks count as does time spent reading and how often something is shared.
Is the tide on the turn when Susanna Rustin writes this:
"Whatever their views on sex and gender, liberals should be curious about why women are being ostracised and punished for their conviction that sex differences are important. So should trade unionists, whose job it is to protect people’s rights at work."
I'd say a definite yes. And it is important as the liberals and trade unionists are less likely to dismiss Guardian columnists/writers than her colleagues who have had to find new homes on other papers

Holding a gender critical belief is protected, as are the belief that gay people are sinful, that marriage equality is wrong, and that there are differences in intelligence between races, as, I suspect, is climate change denial. However, there are many circumstances in which expressing or acting on those beliefs are discriminatory and grounds for dismissal - for example, misgendering or deadnaming transgender employees or clients.

Employers are going to have to be a lot more careful in future.

This is such an improvement over their previous comment piece, which included the following egregious quote from a lawyer:

“Above all, in a pluralistic society, which is what we want, you have to accept that people are going to have different views and some people are going to find their colleagues’ views completely obnoxious – but nevertheless protected because freedom of speech is something that … has been really promoted and underlined."

completely overlooking the fact that ETs keep finding these views to be not obnoxious.

• https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/19/a-politically-toxic-issue-the-legal-battles-over-gender-critical-beliefs*

With a caveat...

It's in the Opinion section . It's not an editorial.

Still, at least the Graun has published an opinion markedly different from its own bias. Even if only in a "look we 're balanced, we publish stuff from the wrong side" way

Here are some of Susanna's other great pieces over the years:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/28/erase-biological-definition-sex-gender-self-identification-trans-transgender-feminist-case (in the Guardian proper)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/apr/06/labour-policies-trans-women-rights-gender-recognition-act (also in the Guardian)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/13/discussion-women-trans-rights-feminists (also in the Guardian)

Still, stark how few pro-women articles there are and how unbalanced the paper is. Hopefully all of the ETs will open eyes via wallets if not consciences

Susanna Rustin has always been great on this issue. The only reversing ferret is the guardian - which still has other ferrets wending in their original direction for 'balance' (the balance between factual reporting and 'progressive' virtue signalling, presumably).
Still, the guardian can't have looked at the ERCC tribunal without having an 'Are we the baddies?' moment.

Well they should all be grateful they haven't ended up in an ET. I suspect they might have lost too.

Susanna has always been immensely supportive of gender-critical views - the interesting thing is that she managed to get this past her senior editors. Thank goodness.

Great article and good to see it in the Guardian (finally) I do hope Susanna is OK.
We've seen how many women have been hounded out of that comic for "wrongthink" by other employees. It must be a scary place for women with opinions to work.

A fantastic article, so glad to see it in the Guardian of all places. Well done to Susanna Rustin.

Owen Jones now has a column in The National, the Scottish newspaper which cheers on the SNP and the Scottish Greens.

Maybe he saw that the Guardian was about to fall into a teeny tiny puddle of rationality and jumped ship in time (I'm sure he'll be back to give us a good scolding any moment now).

I just saw this, and came here to see if you'd all noticed it. Can't believe it is in the Guardian - reverse ferret ahoy

Am I dreaming? What is happening here????

What noise does a reversing ferret make? Is it a beep beep beep like a lorry?

I imagine the money would not be so good.

But of course this is good news. I've been a Guardian reader for much of my life (not now, though), and it's good to see some small steps back to sanity.

I felt the need to check in on oj, I think he's okay. He's hiding over on twitter, resolutely ignoring the story by focussing on suffering in Palestine.

Absolutely excellent. Thank you Susannah.

'Whatever their views on sex and gender, liberals should be curious about why women are being ostracised and punished for their conviction that sex differences are important. So should trade unionists, whose job it is to protect people’s rights at work.'

Kinda ironic it's in the guardian given what happened to some of its female columnists.

I'd say Owen and Zoe are exchanging furious texts as we type.

What a good article! Bet Owen Jones is fumming!