Allison Bailey to sue Stonewall -thread 2

[OvaHere]

Previous thread www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3950877-Allison-Bailey-to-sue-Stonewall

Allison's website allisonbailey.co.uk

Statement

First and foremost, I hope that my legal action will bring me justice. I also hope that it can stop Stonewall from policing free speech via its Diversity Champions scheme.

Stonewall have signed up many companies, public bodies, voluntary sector organisations and government departments to their manifesto and their value system regarding trans rights. What is called Stonewall Law. Without most of the public realising it, a large swathe of British employers have signed up to the Stonewall value system. It has done this by trying to silence and vilify women like me who have genuine concerns about how its approach to trans inclusivity conflicts with the protections, safety and dignity of women, girls, children and LGB people.

We cannot achieve a just outcome for everyone while Stonewall are free to threaten women like me with the loss of our livelihoods and reputations. Stonewall must be held to account. I intend to do just that.

Sorry it's not the end of the session. It just the LGBA signing off probably because the back and forth about dates and costs is just detail that might go on for some time.

Ova you have been brilliant

(and it would be nice to not have this thread derailed)

SSA are still tweeting but it's possible there's going to be nothing of significant public interest in the rest of the session.

Replying to
@SafeSchools_UK
#AllisonBailey

Ongoing discussion re disclosures, delays, volume of papers and who is at fault

Hear hear Kit

Like I said, you can post all the what ifs in the world, but this is actually happening. On the grounds stated in court today.

This is really long, but Allison explains it on her site.

Thanks - that explains it really well, and IANAL but surely it's obvious that Stonewall have a relationship with GCC

Replying to
@ALLIANCELGB
Problems with disclosure were on the Respondents' side. Deadlines were missed. No cooperation and Stonewall did not bother to prepare their bundle and share information with Claimant. Instead of cooperating Respondent made unreasonable demands.

I think we just just ignore all the 'what about'-ery which is attempting to derail this thread and just focus on the good news. Thanks Ova and everyone who has been explaining things on this abs the first thread. And thank you to Allison for standing up on behalf of us all.

Replying to
@SafeSchools_UK
#AllisonBailey

Mr Cooper firmly stating that approach of GCC & Stonewall has NOT been co-operative. Characterising some of their previous suggestions as ‘ridiculous’.

(and it would be nice to not have this thread derailed)

Good point, typed a reply to pp but have deleted.

I'm full of admiration for Allison (and for posters here), it's really inspiring!

I thought LGBA were done tweeting but perhaps they just swapped personnel.

Replying to
@ALLIANCELGB
Stonewall asked Claimant to particularise each page of her disclosure instead of working cooperatively to reach a reasonable list of key issues. So Cooper says that cooperation is missing from both Respondents in preparation for this hearing

Thanks for the tweet sharing and explanations!

When is a charity not a charity and when is it a political lobby group?

There are implications about this.

Its called the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Act 2014

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparency_of_Lobbying,_Non-party_Campaigning_and_Trade_Union_Administration_Act_2014

It has ironically got the nickname 'The Gagging Bill' when passing through parliament.

This is why Stonewall will try to avoid saying they are a lobby group rather than a charity...

Replying to
@ALLIANCELGB
Respondents also missed deadline for producing witness statements. First respondent asked for particulars of each of 2000 pages to be considered at this preliminary hearing. Quite unreasonable and does not indicate a cooperative approach

That's interesting, RedToothBrush

What a great thread - thanks for all the effort Ovahere and everyone contributing - the legal stuff is a bit of a rollercoaster as it is hard to tell what they mean sometimes.

It is super chilly outside but I spent a bit of time in the garden - just so glad she’s made it through to the next round. I find it quite astonishing that these people have treated her so badly and are refusing to co operate.

Some of my faith in people is being diminished with all of these events.

Is this legal recognition that SW Champ Scheme is effectively a protection racket?

It has elements of a ponzi scheme too, everyone who buys in has an interest in promoting it to others but what they are purchasing is essentially worthless

Maya's case will be relevent, as will whether she can claim sex discimination on the grounds her views are mostly held by women/lesbians

You mean views which are held by all of humanity, for the entire history of humanity - until last week - when a few people said they didn’t agree with the views, but still seem to be fully able to distinguish the form of human to send rape threats to.

That would first need to be established, and polling suggests otherwise.

Are you suggesting that the concept of biological sex needs to be established and that polling suggests people (who are all created from one egg and one sperm) don’t believe in it?

Even the editor of Penis News can miraculously understand the concept of biological sex - when a surrogate mother is needed.

@MoleSmokes

Trending Now on Mumsnet - sunlight!

• My DP planning to buy his DB a car, I don't want him to, Who is BU?
• Allison Bailey to sue Stonewall -thread 2
• What to say to the childminder
• We cannot cancel life, to preserve every life
• Refused Antenatal Scans - Help

Good! Allison Bailey deserves a groundswell of support.

Thank you Ova and all

Replying to
@ALLIANCELGB
Cooper refers to "radio silence" from Respondents and constant missed deadlines and delays leading up this hearing

It has elements of a ponzi scheme too, everyone who buys in has an interest in promoting it to others but what they are purchasing is essentially worthless

Yes - I hadn’t thought of it like that but you are absolutely correct - protection racket and ponzi scheme.

#AllisonBailey

Mr Cooper: the idea that claimant should pay anyone’s costs is ‘ludicrous’ against this background. We would be looking at counter claims.

Safe Schools Alliance
@SafeSchools_UK
·
4s
#AllisonBailey

Judge Stout: It would be an option to just comply with the tribunals orders

I’m shocked, shocked I tell you, that stonewall have been uncooperative!

Interesting RedToothBrush I have heard some object to the word lobby group yet their website states:

.... We will continue to campaign and lobby governments to change laws that do not ensure equality for LGBT people, or laws that do not go far enough ....