Darlington nurses win their employment tribunal

Some people may be inclusive in theory, but I bet Rose in his holey pants in a confined space, asking them why they're not getting changed yet, would make them change their views pretty damn quickly.

"...most people are inclusive, and cases like this are quite rare"....

They might be "rare" but they were bloody non-existent till a bunch of sexist nitwits decided a man who feels like "a woman", whatever that is, is welcome to get his kit off with female people rather than male!

Going from never to "rare" is not going in the right direction.

ISWYDT 😂

Well some of us did

There were many men impotently railing on Reddit this morning that “transphobes” should be made to pay for this.

The reason I would have liked Rose to be deemed to have harassed the nurses is for this reason. I believe he did, like I believe Upton harassed Sandie Peggie.

Absolutely, both of you.

You got in first, Ophelia
It's important to emphasise that single-sex spaces are single SEX spaces, not single gendered spaces, and the Supreme Court has clarified that sex means biological sex.

People can have any flavour of gender ID they like, but they can only have one sex, and that will be male, so use the men's, or female, so use the women's.

edited to add that the configuration of women's, men's and accessible toilets caters for 90-point-something% of the population. The demand to change that configuration, or add fourth spaces to it, comes from a very tiny minority of people.

Yes, they don't want single, individual spaces or mixed sex spaces (where all the signatories could go to support them) they want to use unconsenting women. That's the point of trans identifying men wanting to get into single sex spaces. They're not interested in the space itself.

I note that not all trans identified men do this, some don't want to use unconsenting women or in other words aren't abusive males. They use mixed sex / gender neutral or the mens.

So anyone saying they're an 'inclusive ally' is basically saying 'yes, I agree men should be able to use unconsenting working class women' (because let's face it the class dynamic is undeniable) either as part of their fetish or as validation or simply as part of a thrill of abuse and power in forcing someone you see as lesser to do something they don't want to do.

These people don't care how scared, or upset or traumatised or hurt these working class women are. They don't care if the presence of a male excludes these women from the workplace. They're not seen as fully human.

Even after Karen Danson has revealed she was abused as a child and the man Rose's presence in an enclosed space labelled single sex made her retraumatised, these people will sign away her rights.

I suppose we should feel lucky that witch burning is no longer a thing.....

What irritates me most about that stupid NION letter is that, actually:

a) They have no way of knowing how many people have signed it
b) They have no way of knowing how many of those people are actual women

All they know is how many times it has been signed.

For instance, I could have signed it four times, with my four different email accounts. And I could be a man.

Just a reminder that the nurses are apparently still £25k (!) short of the funds they need for their legal costs if anyone can do any gardening. We are all in their debt...

Exactly that @MrsOvertonsWindow it takes a very strong woman to stand up for their rights in this way, knowing that they'll be torn apart all over the media and SM, and the subject of so much aggression and animosity. If I'm being totally honest, unless I had a very determined and supportive group of women going through the process and courts with me every step of the way, I'd probably just keep quiet and keep well away from the bloke in question in order to protect myself and my family- and I am so angry with myself for feeling that way. Quite how Sandy Peggie did it on her own I don't know.

I noticed Translucent being quoted in the BBC article linked just above:
"...most people are inclusive, and cases like this are quite rare"....

All part of their gaslighting that people welcome the male penis in spaces where girls and women undress. Cases like this are "rare" as transactivists have been threatening, intimidating and coercing others into complying with their demands from the get go. Employers have followed their instructions as evidenced in the Darlington case🙄

It takes a lot of courage to risk your career and wellbeing to take on the trans mob and stand up for the safety of women and girls. That's why the nurses have accomplished so much with this case

Did antibody else see Benedict Spence on Sky News' press preview last night? He was magnificent on this subject. Interestingly, the Sky catch up video of the press preview doesn't include it. How odd.

Dito on why Fifes Board / legal department signed off on a big ole Fuck You to the Information Commissioner in the middle of their ET 😬

Nearly all, if not all NHS trusts have their own legal departments. So there is no way they would do this, it would be conceding that either your legal dept was rubbish or senior leaders ignored or didnt seek their advice.

On that point. I would love to have seen the risk register the legal dept held and what it said about this case.

Yes it would be great but we have the unhinged leading the incompetent by the nose so.... 'but they won't'. 🙄

Because the higher-ups are open to further claims as they signed off on the policy.

And if staff have been lying to female patients about men on what should be women only wards

Or staff have been bullying patients or not allowed same sex care.

There is a whole can of cash on the table when this ruling is applied across their medical provision.

Yet, perversely, it’s precisely the compulsion element of forcing women and girls to undress in front of them that gives many of them that special tingly feeling. 🤢

Wouldn't it be great if the trust came back and said yes, we completely support the ruling. We were given incorrect advice by many organisations, including Stonewall and the BBC, that it was correct and legal to give men access to women's spaces if they claimed to identify as women. They were wrong. We will now rewrite all our policies regarding this.

But they won't......

Agreed. They should be properly advised on the meaning and implications of the judgement. I don't actually want a public body rushing out to make a more substantive statement for the sake of being prompt, especially as that raises the possibility they dig themselves a bigger hole (helllooooo Fife!). Sometimes it's better to take the weekend.

I think it is a ok response. They wouldn’t have argued in court if they didn’t think they were in the right. So reading and considering the judgement before responding would be expected.