Sandie Peggie: Employment Tribunal, associated legal claims, and related matters - thread #63

There’s a report button, @Lacksie, this thread’s about Sandie Peggie’s current case, not you, your beefy chum Upton, or your big feelings about a mean lady on the internet correctly calling you pompous.

Other threads and other forums are available.

and would have to trot out “ i am being piled upon, etc

This isn't something that people trot out , it demonstrably happens every time. It's impossible to have a respectful , productive conversation based on logic on the topic as the majority of people contributing prefer to entertain themselves insulting, humiliating, demeaning the character of anyone who doesn't tow the gender critical party line, and they feel entirely entitled to do so without restraint. (As also demonstrated by comments above on this thread)

I think it unlikely they will order a rehearing but if they do the evidence such as the complaints lodged on the internal systems, cross examination of witnesses and DrUs witness statement can all be used.

I agree DrU is unlikely to appear as a witness. Although video conference could be used to overcome the fact DrU is abroad.

I’ll do you a deal. You provide logical coherent arguments explaining what trans is and I will engage respectfully. I will debate, question and expect full answers, but I won’t be mean.

I was just thinking that.

Any chance you could do it on a separate thread? 🙏

Poor nauticant - can't we let her have a rest today ?

Don’t worry dear, there’s no problem with my ‘argument’ because I’m not actually arguing. I’m stating facts. You can ignore them or disagree with them but they’re still facts: your use of the term “gender incongruence” shows where your beliefs lie - stereotypes. Stereotypes of any trait is basically harmful as it’s categorising a particular group in a particular way. Racism is rooted in stereotypes, as is ableism and ageism. A belief in gender incongruence is plain old sexism repackaged.

Yes. That’s what was discussed. I don’t want to derail this.

A prig is a self-righteous person who rigidly follows rules of proper behaviour and acts morally superior to others.

Just chucking that in here, for no particular reason.

The term cabal alone should have sufficient negative connotations Pickled, should you wish to preserve witches’ blushes. It was originally coined to describe a group of influential courtiers around Charles II - Clifford, Arlington, Buckingham, Ashleigh and Lauderdale - who sought their own advantage.

One for the etymologists.

On the case side I think the witnesses very clearly show how much the RCN was captured and how it saw GC as wrongthink. Naomi in full force was her usual brilliant self. The one thing I’m a little confused about is the emphasis on the request for RCN representation for the second case. Surely the argument is stronger on their lack of zealous representation for the first one? Did the RCN genuinely think they’d sent Sandie an email offering this but addressed it to her membership number instead of her email address? So that’s why they’re focusing on the second case?

Because it happens to be true?