Sibyl Ruth - Gender critical woman wins damages

[fromorbit]

Another important win. The Gender Inquisition are completely losing their grip thanks to Maya's precedent. They folded before even going to tribunal this time.

An editor dropped by a literary consultancy for saying that the idea of someone with “heavy five o’clock shadow” being a woman “blows my mind” has received an apology and substantial damages.

Sibyl Ruth, 63, sued Cornerstones after her work with the consultancy was abruptly stopped in the wake of a post on Twitter in May last year.

Prior to an employment tribunal hearing due to take place later this month, Cornerstones settled the case with an apology and the payment of compensation.

That sum is understood to be substantial.

Ms Ruth told the Telegraph she was relieved her ordeal was over but remained “shell shocked” 15 months after she had been dropped by Cornerstones “out of the blue”...

Cornerstones said it had removed Ms Ruth from its website while it investigated her social media posts over concerns “about the potential for negative reaction towards her comments from the wider publishing industry”.
But Cornerstones also said it acknowledged “that Sibyl holds gender critical feminist beliefs which are worthy of respect in a democratic society”.
The company added: “We acknowledge and accept that the way in which her work was brought to an end could have been handled less abruptly. Cornerstones ought to have more firmly encouraged an open dialogue with her before taking any action. It is a matter of regret to us that we advised a client whose manuscript she had begun to work on that she had become unavailable.
“We regret that we did not encourage the opportunity to subsequently engage in dialogue with her. We accept that our actions must have been distressing to Sibyl. We accept that we were wrong in this regard, and apologise for our actions.”

Telegraph article with full details:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/07/cornerstones-transgender-literary-editor-tribunal/

Archive:
https://archive.ph/fAKeM

This is the original thread on Mumsnet. Congrats to everyone who backed Ruth. You helped move us forward and to the Free Speech Union who gave legal advice:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4843978-gardening-for-et-loss-of-work-in-art-for-gc-views 

Anyone worried about coming out as a person who believes women exist take heart. There is going to be social ostracism, but standing up for women's rights has always meant that. They can't however get you fired anymore in the UK. Even trying means you can sue them and you will win - cash money.

The Green Party should be really scared. They have three cases based on biology denial coming up. They are going to lose.

Brilliant news. Well done to Sibyl.

Alllllll of these cases should be making it crystal clear: you cannot have a witch hunt of women just because they disagree with the assertion that men can be women.

Hopefully more and more women will feel safer at work.

And HR people should take careful note.

I am really hoping and crossing everything that the Green Party will lose these cases. It's a critical message to send to all the political parties, that they cannot discriminate against people (mostly women) or allow their members to harass them for standing up for women's rights.

Well done Sibyl, the Doyle Clayton law firm who have worked so well on several of these cases, and the Free Speech Union.

Well done Sibyl. Though I'm a bit pissed off by Cornerstone's apology, it reads a bit mealy mouthed. A bit 'oops discrimination'. It wasn't an act of God. Someone, or someone's, took decisions and decided to act that way.

Yes, I hope the greens are wetting themselves.

Great news.

Isn't it absurd that these cases are even necessary.

Fantastic.

Fantastic news 💪🏼

The apology is very mealy mouthed and I notice that there's no mention of any action taken against the member(s?) of staff who decided to go on a witch hunt because a woman had the temerity to voice - on her personal account IIRC, not in any connection with her work - that biological reality exists.

You get the sense they've only settled because they have been given legal advice they're going to lose and want to do damage limitation.

Whilst bullies are allowed to trawl people's personal social media and use the slightest utterance of 'saying what you see' (if you're a woman particularly) as an excuse to fire them for wrongthink we are in a very dangerous McCarthyist world. I think it's particularly bad in publishing.

I note there is also no mention of re-hiring SR. Presumably she might not want to work for them again, but the offer would have shown they were truly sorry (which I don't think they are).

One of my main discretionary spends is on books. I never buy from any shop that doesn't have a good JKR HP section in the children's and increasingly check out they have Hannah Barnes' book too but is there any way to avoid buying books which have used Cornerstones?

It's good but I feel it reads as a bit flakey. Saying it's her "belief"

.."that Sibyl holds gender critical feminist beliefs which are worthy of respect in a democratic society”.

Instead of:

"we were denying scientific, biological reality and are idiots"

I'm sorry, I'm just very jaded about all this. I really hope it sends a signal though and you are right.

That's publishing for you. Disappointed in Cornerstones.

But that's exactly why they lost.

Beliefs are protected.

Some people 'believe' in gravity.
Some people 'believe' the world is flat.

It's a properly scientific approach (in my own limited understanding) to say there are not really unassailable truths ('reality'); only hypotheses that can be tested and evidenced.

It's so bizarre because as scientific truth and evidence go, two sexes in humans (and all mammals) has to be one of the scientific facts with the strongest evidence.

Is there any example of two men or two women (or males or females in other mammals) making a baby without IVF / other people being involved? No, there isn't.

Any evidence of a third gamete? Again, no.

Transwomen being surrogates? Again, no.

It really is like the entire world has suddenly started to stay the earth is flat (or even carried through space on the back of a turtle) and women are being FIRED, their lives made a misery and often facing financial and personal ruin (as well as death and rape threats) for saying 'um, the evidence really does suggest otherwise'. This is really where we're at. It's so unbelievable.

Sometimes I think we're going to have another dark ages where scientific progress goes backwards.

A good result for Sybil and it's good that they settled and she doesn't have to go through a court case.

But the apology leaves a lot to be desired ‐ it doesn't clearly acknowledge they discriminated. It just apologises for 'processes'. They didn't have a dialogue with her but the point is there was no cause for that dialogue.

How would that dialogue have gone:

Cornerstones thought policer: 'we've noticed that you've said you find it difficult to think people with obviously male characteristics that you can see with your own eyes are women. You can't say that anymore, we might lose money! TRAs have lots of money! They might make a fuss on twitter. Please stop saying things you see and believe'
SR: 'It was on my own personal account and has nothing to do with work, are you saying I have to run every single thing I think and might want to share with other people past you first?'
Thought policer: 'only when it comes to men and women'
SR: 'I think you'll find that I'm allowed to do that under the law'
Thought policer:'Well, we'll have to fire you if you carry on'

I mean really, what other dialogue could there have been? It could only have been intimidation to make SR shut up.

I read that apology as 'we probably should have handled getting rid of her a bit less obviously'

but well done Sibyl, every time this happens (and involves payout) the insurers are being pushed towards clearer lines and people are being made to realise, other people exist and there are limits on how shit you can be to them in the name of making them obey you. Even though you fully believe you are righteous and they are infidel.

Good for her.

"The Green Party should be really scared. They have three cases based on biology denial coming up. They are going to lose."

I certainly hope so. I was reading the thread from Sarah (IamSarah) who was denied all rape support in Brighton because she knows the difference between a man and a woman and wanted to send the thread to Caroline Lucas. Caroline is a bigot and so is everyone else in the Green party who are happy to throw women under the bus like this. Anyone who supports what happened and is happening to Sarah has no place in civilised society, let alone political office.

I read that apology as 'we probably should have handled getting rid of her a bit less obviously'
Me too. It definitely suggests "Ah fuck it, we left ourselves wide open there" rather than an acknowledgment that they were wrong to do it in the first place.

Biological reality and fact are fighting back against ideological beliefs - thank goodness common sense is making a little bit of a comeback.

It’s all welcome sunlight. Good news for Sybil, and good news for anyone else facing persecution and/or cancellation for their perfectly legal GC views.

The Earth is round.

Another well done for Sibyl. I hope the damages were exemplary.
Can't wait for someone to discipline / prosecute those who vexatiously trawl through other's online accounts, whinge to the police who then waste everybody's time following up because of their levels of capture by the trans mob.

Beliefs are protected.

Some people 'believe' in gravity.
Some people 'believe' the world is flat.

I wonder if the belief that the world is flat would meet the Grainger criteria?

I wonder if the belief that the world is flat would meet the Grainger criteria?

Good question.

Is "some women are male" WORIADS? I'd love to see that tested!

Excellent news! Well done Ruth (and Maya, whose work has made all women a little safer). Ruth, I hope your well-earned compensation covers very much more than this has cost you and buys you a super relaxing holiday.

Yes, sorry, I should have said 'some beliefs are protected' if they are considered WORIADS.

It would be really interesting to see more on the scope and limits of those beliefs.

Actually seems to me to be a potentially very very difficult part of the EA. How on earth do we decide which beliefs are WORIADS? It's so nebulous and vague for legislation to be based on.

That's a non-apology. 'We should have brought her work to an end less abruptly. We should have re-educated her, then sacked her if she didn't change her opinion to ours'.