Rachel Meade, Social Worker, being suspended for 'transphobic' Facebook postss

[MidCenturyClegs]

A social worker, Rachel Meade, is in the process of challenging Social Work England - their professional regulatory body - as she believes she may have discriminated against her due to gender critical beliefs.

This is because during the GRA consultation, she shared posts on her private FB page, from FPFW, WPUK & Standing for Women, among others. These were being secretly screenshot by an ex colleague who then sent these to Social Work England, claiming that the posts were from groups who were discriminatory in nature, transphobic and who wanted to remove trans rights.

SWE decided that this was the case and sanctioned her, leading her employer to investigate her for gross misconduct. They placed a public Fitness to practice warning sanction on her record for a year. She has been suspended by her employer as a result of Social Work England's decision and will be facing a disciplinary process which she has been told may end in her dismissal.

She is taking both Social Work England and her employer to a tribunal; this is a really important case as if she wins, it will clarify in law that not only are employers bound to protect gender critical beliefs under EA2010, but Regulatory bodies are bound by it too.

This will mean that all regulatory bodies will have to recognise that the gender critical beliefs of their registrants/members are protected in law. This will cover social work, healthcare & law as well as any other areas covered by regulatory bodies so will have far reaching effects.

I have heard that she may be setting up a crowdfunder but obviously this is not the place to advertise that, but if people wish to donate should be easy to find.
Just saw that the Times have covered this too.

twitter.com/EmilieCCole/status/1481638709724270593?s=20

[jellyfrizz]

You mean like the surveillance of the trans guide leader accused of being a safeguarding risk all over the internet including here after people trawled her social media and found a picture of her in a leather dress?

I imagine it was the posing with guns and whips rather than the leather dress.

[MidCenturyClegs]

@jellyfrizz

You mean like the surveillance of the trans guide leader accused of being a safeguarding risk all over the internet including here after people trawled her social media and found a picture of her in a leather dress?

I imagine it was the posing with guns and whips rather than the leather dress.

Was this the one you meant?

[jellyfrizz]

www.girlguiding.org.uk/making-guiding-happen/programme-and-activities/guidance-on-activities/prohibited-activities/

Girlguiding does not allow games where weapons of any form are fired at human- or animal-shaped targets. This activity is prohibited because it does not fit with the aims and objectives of guiding. However, paintball guns and laser guns are permitted if fired at other objects, for example, in a coconut shy activity. (My bold)

[barleybadminton]

So many of my DD's teen friends are autistic, trans/non-binary, have EDs.. SWs need to feel empowered to see the right treatment for all of these, not fear challenging gender stuff.

Probably best social workers don't post things on social media which attempt to link trans people with paedophilia then eh?

That goes way beyond Forstater, and I doubt she'll be the last to find herself in this mess. If you are in a professional role and are posting conspiracy theories about 'queers' or queer theory being a paedophile plot, or the simple existence of trans people being a safeguarding risk then you are placing your job at risk, just as you would be if you were posting similar comments about gay people or people of colour or any other protected group.

Incidentally it seems Reade has changed her views and previously blamed gender critical feminists for the trouble she got into. As such it seems unlikely she will be held as a credible witness by the courts. Changing your story every five minutes is not a good luck.

The social worker has reflected on their learning and has provided the regulator
with evidence of their continued professional development. The social worker has
given some thought to the gaps in their knowledge base, they state “I have always
felt that I embraced LGBT issues but this training has enabled me to reflect on my
reduced understanding on gender diverse and trans people. I have always been a
feminist and on reflection I feel that I may have been swayed by the mistaken view
of other prominent feminists who felt that promoting transgender rights would
impede on women’s rights. This was a gap in my knowledge base and this training
has shown me how to work in a much more inclusive way”

www.socialworkengland.org.uk/media/4061/20210610-meade-r-final-250821_.pdf

[barleybadminton]

@jellyfrizz

www.girlguiding.org.uk/making-guiding-happen/programme-and-activities/guidance-on-activities/prohibited-activities/

Girlguiding does not allow games where weapons of any form are fired at human- or animal-shaped targets. This activity is prohibited because it does not fit with the aims and objectives of guiding. However, paintball guns and laser guns are permitted if fired at other objects, for example, in a coconut shy activity. (My bold)

www.messengernewspapers.co.uk/news/14134583.rangers-from-urmston-girl-guides-take-aim-at-altrincham-target-sports-centre/

[jellyfrizz]

So many of my DD's teen friends are autistic, trans/non-binary, have EDs.. SWs need to feel empowered to see the right treatment for all of these, not fear challenging gender stuff.

Trans/non-binary people should of course be treated right. You'd be wrong to say they challenge gender though, you can't be trans/non-binary without gender.

[Needmoresleep]

This is huge. The Government carries out a consultation on reform of the GRA. Stonewall lobbies in favour of reform, enlisting organisations including public sector bodies, to support them. Legitimate feminist groups campaign against reform.

The Government is surprised that lots of ordinary people from all over the country complete the consultation, expressing their concerns about self ID.

Now a professional loses her job because she has circulated privately material from those feminist groups, and from mainstream media.

Undemocratic, censorship…you name it. Obviously some on this thread will see it as justified. Silencing women is fine as long as they achieve their agenda.

Rachel Meade is clearly a brave and strong woman. There will be lots of digging in her garden, and the plants will flourish.

[jellyfrizz]

"www.messengernewspapers.co.uk/news/14134583.rangers-from-urmston-girl-guides-take-aim-at-altrincham-target-sports-centre/"

I guess they were firing at 'objects' rather than people shaped targets then as per the guidance. Sulley captioned her pictures with talk of punishing people.

[jellyfrizz]

Sorry for guiding derail.

[Politics4me]

Surely @Wreath21 the difference is that sex is a a fact (see science). Any professional person should be judged on the way they process known facts rather than anything else.

[barleybadminton]

@MidCenturyClegs

Barely "Reades facebook page was not private according to the findings of Social Work England. Any of the families she worked with could have found these posts quite easily."

Can you prove that? It's my mis-understanding that these were on her private facebook page and it was a 'friend' that took screenshots of everything she shared. Please prove otherwise?

Facebook pages are not private. There is no evidence anywhere I can see that the posts could not have been seen by the general public and Social Work England's findings were based on the fact that had these posts been seen by both trans people and other members of the public they would be seens as derogatory and discriminatory.

[JDaytona]

@Wreath21

Unfortunately a lot of bigots and wingnuts won't do this because they are raging attention seekers and it's important to them to bellow across multiple platforms about how 'silenced' they are.

By bigots and wingnuts do you mean people that state scientific fact?

[CloseYourEyesAndSee]

@Clarice99

I find the idea of social workers buying into gender ideology terrifying. They are often dealing with vulnerable people and to hold views that are not based on fact fills me with horror.

I sincerely hope that Rachel Meade's case is ruled in her favour.

Most of us don't
Anyone I speak to about it is either full on GC or politely pretending whilst also raising concerns about abused girls and autistics teens.
There are a small number of vocal evangelical TRAs in social work but they aren't the majority

[Clarice99]

@Wreath21

Unfortunately a lot of bigots and wingnuts won't do this because they are raging attention seekers and it's important to them to bellow across multiple platforms about how 'silenced' they are.

Bigots and wingnuts?

It's so predictable (boringly so) that the gender ideologists always have to stoop to name calling

[Goatsaregreat]

That's reassuring CloseYourEyesAndSee
I suspect it's just like numerous other professions where all the sane responsible people try to navigate their way through protecting children while ducking the male supremacists and blinkered ideologues who fail to understand the contradictions between ideological demands for conformity of expression versus the need to protect vulnerable children.

[MidCenturyClegs]

Echo Goats in that that is very reassuring allCloseYourEyesAndSee. Do you have a Union? Can you support Rachel via that?

[Clarice99]

Most of us don't
Anyone I speak to about it is either full on GC or politely pretending whilst also raising concerns about abused girls and autistics teens.
There are a small number of vocal evangelical TRAs in social work but they aren't the majority


That is reassuring to hear @CloseYourEyesAndSee

TRA's have no place in social work. It's not part of a social worker's job to push their 'non fact based' views onto anyone, let alone the vulnerable people they are meant to be supporting.

[Soontobe60]

@Wreath21

If someone can't keep their bigotry to themselves they have no business working with vulnerable people. If, for instance, someone's religious belief is that homosexuality is wrong, their right to believe that might be a protected characteristic, but it doesn't protect them against disciplinary action if there is a likelhood - or even evidence - that they will be unable to shut the fuck up about their bigotry should they have to deal with a member of the group they are bigoted against.

Maya Forstetter was essentially penalised because she demanded the right to be rude to other people with no consequences ie the right to describe them as male/female according to her perspective rather than theirs, with impunity.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
The very fact that you think that telling the truth about someone’s sex is ‘rude’ and is bigotry is hilarious.
You clearly have not read the Maya judgement as you’re talking complete and utter rubbish.
HTH x

[CloseYourEyesAndSee]

@MidCenturyClegs

Echo Goats in that that is very reassuring allCloseYourEyesAndSee. Do you have a Union? Can you support Rachel via that?

Unison are genderwoo. EBSWA are a collective of GC social workers and I would hope they are supporting Rachel

[Omicrone]

You mean like the surveillance of the trans guide leader accused of being a safeguarding risk all over the internet including here after people trawled her social media and found a picture of her in a leather dress?

Jesus, are you really going to bring that one up again as an example?!

[Helleofabore]

Err. Of course people’s Facebook posts and stories can be set to Private.

We discussed this on the GG thread.

And Sulley should have had their posts set to limited to friends rather than public with their BDSM accessories and their poses with guns. Now their profile photo of them in the bath Imposed over a line up of small girls in party dresses… that tends to be always public.

There is a difference.

[anon12345678901]

@Wreath21

Unfortunately a lot of bigots and wingnuts won't do this because they are raging attention seekers and it's important to them to bellow across multiple platforms about how 'silenced' they are.

You mean people who believe in science? Name calling is so predictable and it also means you have nothing of importance to say.

[Signalbox]

This is SUCH an important case as it will set a precedent for all regulatory bodies if she wins.

Would it though? It is an important case but I'm not sure that an employment tribunal would set a precedent unless it was appealed.

[FFSFFSFFS]

What annoys me is that this is even presented as a beliefs issue. Human biology is a material fact. If basic biologt is considered a belief …