Julie Bindel & venue for MVAW talk in Nottingham

[ifIwerenotanandroid]

twitter.com/bindelj/status/1540377548387131392

Doesn't freedom of speech also mean Councils have the right to refuse a speech booking on their premises under certain grounds?

"Doesn't freedom of speech also mean the prevention of freedom of speech?" Classic Marg.

"Certain grounds" would include banning speech that breaks the law, is libellous or whatever. What part of talking about MVAWG would break the law?

Looks like the thread has gone Poof :(
Please say there's an archive somewhere…

Good grief, sigh.

UKHomosexual tweets that libs of tiktok and Gays Against Groomers are motivated by a right wing agenda and although there is a need for safeguarding children, UK Homosexual thinks both accounts are homophobic. Gays Against Groomers respond with "stay mad, groomer".

Are you stirring or did you genuinely misunderstand?

Toomie the thread is still up on Twitter, its archiving atm.

Very funny thread.

Humour is one of our best weapons imo; comedy and a sense of good humour helps sustain a community when times are tough.

If the special interest group° which originally gave sign off to the library was an official group which looks at the policy then its a bigger problem than poorly written policy.

°I am assuming that it was an official part of the organisation with delegated authority, otherwise the organisation is allowing individual staff to form lobby groups and circumvent the official decision making process. So either they got it wrong and all need to be replaced or senior management decided that they did not have to follow the policy.

The groups function was to look at the policy and make a professional judgement. They signed off.
Someone did not like the outcome and involved senior management. David Mellen appears to have decided that Council policy allows them the right to create a banned person list if Julie Bindel or myself went into the library to talk to each other we would be “barred from entering”.

If the council decide that 'guilt by opinion' and 'guilt by association' is enough to remove the right to enter a public library's what other services can this banned person list be used for? No practicing Roman Catholic can support same sex marraige or the wrong soul ideology can they be banned from the public housing list? Islamic pratice would result in both boys and girls objecting to mixed sex toilets can they be banned from schools?

Reading the article in The Critic it mentions the LGBT Network being asked for their views. Based on the article, they adopted a neutral position - neither endorsing JB nor recommending cancellation of the booking. They handed the decision back to the actual decision makers.

It does raise the question of why the LGBT Network was asked. Possibly the decision makers wanted to avoid being responsible for making a decision themselves. Or possibly they felt insufficiently informed to make a decision.

I did wonder whether the LGBT Network was an internal staff network or an external stakeholder network.

Based on the article, they adopted a neutral position - neither endorsing JB nor recommending cancellation of the booking. They handed the decision back to the actual decision makers.

Perhaps they foresaw an Allison Bailey style scenario occurring where they might be sued alongside the council? Hardly surprising as one of their staff was cross examined for the respondents in that case.

There was no decision necessary, surely? Room was hired out for a group booking. Standard occurrence.

Whoever chose to listen to the alarmist, panic mongering 'evil terfs coming to commit literal violence' advice needs training on critical thinking.

Just on the subject of TRA fact checking

I'm curious to know how activists found out Julie was speaking, and think she should do an FOI request to ask the library and council for the correspondence.
If it was through the bookings page then surely they wouldn't have got the wrong person?

Reviving this thread in case anyone is up for gardening. I believe the gate is now open.

mobile.twitter.com/bindelj/status/1543203879764086784

The gate for Julie's garden is open. Helen Joyce has tweeted the details.

Let's get digging, Wimmin 🤗!

JB has stressed that if you can’t afford to give please do not feel in anyway obligated to chip in. Only donate if you can afford it.

Thanks, donated

Dug. And I'm digging enthusiastically now, so I don't have to bloody re-landscape the entire garden later.

Let's get this message out to misogynists everywhere.

You cannot stop women talking.

Excellent. In glad there is a crowdfunder. Like most I can't afford a lot, but lots of us planting a small area will help the garden bloom.

They messed with the wrong one. So many women have had to face this unwarranted discrimination, even after Forstatater, and it's about time Nottingham Council learned they are not above the law.

They clearly have no remorse. Their statement is still up!

Dug. Target stretched from 15,000 to 20,000 as I was planting...

...we took the decision to cancel the booking. Nottingham is an inclusive city and as a council we support our LGBT community and have committed to supporting trans rights as human rights through Stonewall. We did not want the use of one of our library buildings for this event, taking place during Pride month, to be seen as implicit support for views held by the speaker which fly in the face of our position on transgender rights.”

Totally banged to rights, and their decision appears to have been informed by stonewall.

Surely, Stonewall can't possibly have been giving people the wrong legal advice. Again.

Are they legally subject to FOI requests? I suspect Julie's initial letter will bring forth a retraction, but I hope she gets to see how this decision arose. Who made it, and why.