Allison Bailey v Stonewall - Employment Tribunal hearing

[ickky]

The Tribunal will start on 25th April at 10am. If you would like to view online you need to send a request for access as early as possible.

Send an email to

[email protected]

The subject heading of the email request should read

“MEDIA OR PUBLIC ACCESS REQUEST – Case number 2202172/2020 - Ms A Bailey – 25th April 2022.

Then ask for the pin for the online access.

You will be contacted with instructions on how to observe the hearing.

I have sent a request but haven't had anything back yet. Hopefully nearer the time.

I've a feeling that at one point some of Dawn Butler's (?) staff doxed the women who'd arranged a meeting with her to discuss their concerns.

I think it's probably true that GC beliefs aren't particularly aligned to being female or a lesbian. Men are more likely to indicate that they believe people can't literally change sex. But active GC campaigners probably are more likely to be female because (as Iknowitisheresomewhere) points out, the detriment is more towards females when the beliefs become known, and the sex discrimination involved in gender ideology is not symmetrical (it affects women more than men).

Women are more targeted than men in this issue. Everybody knows it, for obvious reasons. Trying to pretend it's not true doesn't seem like much of a tactic to me.

Dr Williams gave that answer much better than I just did!

AH: Org is called fair play for Women - might that make women more likely to donate? NW: could be AH: Might not be indicative of general population NW: no

This is very strange - AH is using the assumption that a feminist and GC org is more likely to be supported by woman as a way of discrediting the finding that woman are more likely to support GC feminist crowd funders

It looks like AH is about to flourish a yougov poll.

Please tell me they are with Alison.

They are, Ratonastick. They were with Maya and Raquel too.

Of course it is mostly women who are GC, why is this even being questioned? It's like asking her to prove water is wet, she doesn't need to, it's obvious.

He's going to try to suggest that more men than women say they oppose trans rights. Now this might also be true. Men are less likely to 'be kind' and say things they don't really believe, primarily because (when they refuse to do it) they are not doxxed, harassed, threatened, fired or physically attacked.

In general anyone bringing a claim that relies on gc feminists being mostly female, and lesbians being over represented among them, is going to have difficulty showing empirical evidence if this from membership databases etc, because of the nature of the movement. It will rely on the impression of ppl involved in the movement. It's a branch of feminism so it's mostly going to be womem! But hopefully they can amass enough evidence to convince.
The judgement in raquel rosario sanchez' case said that if she had proved the main bits of the case the judge would have accepted it as sex discrimination because most ppl who shared her beliefs are female. They accepted her evidence of this.

Was the "this/these" distinction about the word "data"? If so, that's increasingly becoming a stylistic choice.

This is Allison Bailey's solicitor drwitch:

www.doyleclayton.co.uk/about/our-people/peter-daly/

Amid all this discussion of whether men or women are more numerous in any group, is the barrister defining what he means by "men" or "women"? I would have thought that was fairly fundamental.

Nic Williams has a panoramic photo of the meeting in London where Sharron Davis was speaking. It shows hundreds of women. Row after row after row. Hardly any men.

😁

Too true, Prelate.

We can't assume their gender identity, blah, blah, blah...

These polls fail to ask how much people care. There might be more men who believe in the immutability of biological sex than women, but they don't care enough to campaign on it. There are far more women who care enough to campaign, i.e. have active GC beliefs that might cause them to be discriminated against.

@nauticant well done !
But the issue is that the set of people who both believe that you can't change sex AND who are socially liberal is mostly female

Is anyone else not seeing the cameras? Just a holding screen although I can hear them

In general anyone bringing a claim that relies on gc feminists being mostly female, and lesbians being over represented among them

tbh, I was hacked off that it happened but it's clear from the artistic rendering of photographs of the audience at some events that the overwhelming number of participants are women. E.g., (I'm not going to post an image as they're not helpful with the site update).

womansplaceuk.org/2021/10/27/record-womans-place-uk-meetings/

It is interesting that that is non-verifiable but, as an attendee and someone who can recognise herself in some of these renderings, yes if attendance is a proxy for GC feminism, then overwhelmingly we were GC feminists.

And Dr Williams is of course correct that when it is made clear that a 'transgender woman' hasn't gone through any surgical reassignment, they are less likely to agree that the TW should be treated in all circumstances as female.

But that still doesn't deal with the man/woman belief disparity. The issue here for me is the fact that women are far more likely to engage with the trans debate and be 'out' gender critical campaigners, than men are to do the same.

I knew they had acted for Maya but didn’t realise the others, particularly Alison. I feel hugely reassured, they really are very, very good.

And now NW is making the (excellent) point that supporting 'trans rights' (including respecting someone's 'identity') is not incompatible with being gender critical.

This line of argument is like a TRA gotcha.

Men thinking that other men should not be playing in women's sport is not them being 'gender critical'!