Prof Jo Phoenix vs The OU - Employment Tribunal Thread 5

[ickky]

Started on 2nd October at Watford Employment Tribunal (Radius House, 51 Clarendon Rd, Watford WD17 1HP 01923 281750)

You may attend in person or remote viewing has been quite limited but you can request log in details from

Email [email protected]

Header should read

URGENT CURRENT CASE - Public Access Request - J Phoenix - The Open University - 3322700/2021

Ask for access link and pin and please give your name and address in the email as they check when you connect to the tribunal.

The clerk will ask you (in a private remote room) to put your camera on to verify, this involves looking at you, but no ID is needed. You may turn off your camera after this pointless and unnecessary process.

Abbreviations

JP - Jo Phoenix, Claimant (C)
OU - The Open University, Respondent (R)
J - Regional Employment Judge Young
P - Panel or panel member
BC - Ben Cooper KC, Counsel for C
JM - Jane Mulcahy KC, Counsel for R

OU Departments & Networks:

HWSRA - Health & Wellbeing Strategic Research Area
FASS - Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
SPC - Dept of Social Policy & Criminology
KMi - Knowledge Media Institute
GCRN - Gender Critical Research Network

OU witnesses

PB - Dr Paraskevi Boukli, Former Senior Lecturer Criminology, Deputy Head SPC 2021-22
IF - Prof Ian Fribbance Dean of FASS
MW - Prof Marcia Wilson, Dean EDI, 2020-23
CM - Caragh Molloy, Group People Director 2019-23
LD - Dr Leigh Downes, Senior Lecturer in Criminology (in SPC), Academic Lead for EDI FASS 2019-21
PK - Peter Keogh, Professor Health & Society, Member RSSH
DD - Dr Deborah Drake, Senior Lecturer Criminology, Head of SPC 2018-21
CT - Catherine Tomlinson, Senior Student Advisor
LW - Louise Westmarland, Prof of Criminology, Co-Deputy Head SPC, 2018-21, Current Head SPC
JD - John Domingue, Prof of Computing Science, Director KMi, 2015-22
CW - Dr Christopher Williams, Senior Lecturer History
SD - Shaun Daley, Head OU’s Resourcing Hub. Head Strategic Resources, Co-Chair OU’s LGBT+ Staff Network
HBC - Helen Bowes-Catton, Lecturer Social Research Methods
NS - Nicola Snarey, Assoc Lecturer Eng Language
NatS - Natalie Starkey, Outreach & Public Engagement Officer Sch Physical Sciences, 2019-22
CT - Cath Tomlinson, Senior Student Advisor
SJ - Samantha Jacobson, Employee Relations Case Manager
RH - Richard Holliman, Prof Engaged Research, Head School Environment, Earth & Ecosystem Sciences, 2019-22. Member of Investigation Panel investigating the C’s grievance

Witness for JP:

SE - Sarah Earle, Professor Modern History Uni of Oxford, Founding member GCRN

Tribunal Tweets - https://twitter.com/tribunaltweets

TT coverage so far - tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/professor-jo-phoenix-v-the-open-university

Prof Jo Phoenix Witness Statement (scroll to bottom of page and download)

https://jophoenix.substack.com/p/phoenix-v-open-university?sd=pf

Thread 1 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4905118-jo-phoenix-vs-the-ou-employment-tribunal-2nd-october-whispers-ben-cooper?page=1

Thread 2 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4913946-prof-jo-phoenix-vs-the-ou-employment-tribunal-thread-2?page=1

Thread 3 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4917480-prof-jo-phoenix-vs-the-ou-employment-tribunal-thread-3

Thread 4 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4918479-prof-jo-phoenix-vs-the-ou-employment-tribunal-thread-4

I'm starting to feel ashamed of my own lack of talent - this is wonderful!

I strongly suspect that she may be being very careful not to give them any fuel for complaints ("The judge was biased" "The judge was obviously a term" "The judge wouldn't let me waffle on, uncontrolled for several hours, shaping the narrative the way I wanted to").

I think she's trying to keep to time whilst at the same time "indulging" them as much as she can - that way, no (genuine) grounds for complaint.

(Plus, she may just be totally dumbfounded at what she sees before her and be thinking "Wha-? How? Uh???", whilst tentatively exploring the depths of their stupidity.)

Thankfully, although it was still in the minority when I retired, this idle, entitled cohort seemed to get bigger every year. I was glad to leave.

This SHOULD have read

"Thankfully, though, it was still . . . . but this idle, entitled cohort . . glad to leave"

I was not in any way rejoicing that the numbers were growing.

Too much gin, too little sleep - apologies.

@SoundTheSirens
@TwoDrifters2
@Awiltu

Amazing. 😂

When I first found Mumsnet, I was so impressed and pleased to find such a bunch of intelligent, funny and witty Women. Many threads had me crying with laughter. You do us all proud.

@Boiledbeetle These need to go in the next book and @BenCoopersSupportWren Periodic Table Song too. I have the first volume, but it looks lonely and it needs a friend. 😀

when I saw people calling themselves trans exclu and also GC - they are the two same groups of people
Liar.

My sincere thanks to all who enabled the publication of the workings of the Tribunal over this last week. After following today's proceedings and a little reading around the topic I am angry.
I am so angry with these men who will endanger and bully women who are going about there ordinary lives without being a threat to anyone.

So So Angry.
Please, as I think of my late mother and my late sister. How do I contribute to the fund for Prof Jo?
I wish I was younger so that I could join in and support in a physical way.

Not allowed links @DavidChecker but it's on crowd justice

Harassed, silenced & compared to a racist for my gender critical views

Thank you @mcduffy .

Just caught up. Spent the last few pages collecting a mental list of people to thank, or say how much I agree with, or who just put something perfectly - but the list got too long and I forgot you all by the time I reached this point!

Then I tried poet-ing...

To the lyricists and analysts and fab Mumsnet comedians,
You're really quite amazing for alleviating all the tedium
Of hearing such strange arguments that sense is at a premium!

...But realised it was just too hard - the poems above are amazing - &, anyway, "tedium"'s no good when it's all more compelling, farcical and downright disturbing than anything my bookshelf or Netflix has to offer.

Thanks again, and best wishes to all involved, whether directly, if you're reading, or as patient viewers & commentators. The more I follow, the more desperately important all this feels. Will garden tomorrow.

(Edited for tired typos and dodgy spelling).

In the TV drama of all these amazing tribunals, is the OU showing of witnesses the ones best suited to being set to cello testimony (as per Boston Legal)?

https://www.imdb.com/video/vi2870582553/

It's wonderful. Keep it up and in ten years' time we'll be able to laugh at a time when society (almost) collectively lost its mind.

By the way, does anyone remember a brilliant terf parody of the Screwtape Letters from a few years ago? It was great, and now I can't find it. It might have been on Twitter.

I’ve been struggling to keep up today. Thanks everyone.

For the whole trans people not existing thing, I reckon you just need to replace “exist” with “special”.

If people don’t people in magic genders, then it’s not really that they don’t exist, it’s that it means they’re not special.

I agree the shaft of sunlight is narrow. But it is bright, and falling in a useful place. Judges talk to each other, lawyers read judgements from other cases, and this is providing some excellent material for 'You won't believe ...' anecdotes.

I'm FUCKING DEAD ALREADY😂😂😂

Reading these posts in one go, it was very striking that these witnesses seem to see the OU allowing any kind of GC network being set up as the OU actually taking a side. I mean how many lgbT networks are there? How many “trans and non binary”?

And all the disingenuous “I know I signed a letter asking for the university to do something, but I didn’t really mean it” statements are equally bizarre.

The reality is that as soon as anything is set up by women, a signal goes out on the internet and there’s a massive pile-on.

As for the witness who said it was mostly GC voices that were heard and (even more insane) everyone always talks about the harm to GC people? That is utterly batshit. They are literally in court, saying that they hadn’t given a single thought to the potential distress they were causing.

I haven't been able to log in for Jo's tribunal, just wanted to thank everyone for the wonderful threads, knowledge, wit and general sanity.

If Jo reads this, I think you are amazing, I couldn't have coped with this level of batshittery and bad faith.

Currently fantasising to myself a drama trilogy called 'Three Women' that examined Allison's, Maya's and Jo's tribunals. Maybe JK Rowling could finance it. I so want the general public to be aware of what is happening to women.

Yes @PriOn1 , it’s as if all the witnesses who said “of course GC views are legitimate under academic freedom” were actually just paying lip service to that statement because that was in the brief and they don’t accept the fundamental biological, reality based beliefs that are at the core of GC thinking. And that they are not acceptable as WORIADS at all. After all, if Stonewall can act according to the law as they would like it, and not as it is, why can’t they ignore Forstater? It’s plain they all think GC is a synonym for actual transphobia (as we would think of it), and the GCRN statements about research into sexed bodies and gender is all code and dogwhistle for - well I’m not sure but some of their asides make me think they think we want to literally eradicate all trans people.

It’s approaching QAnon and pizzagate levels of batshittery really, and that’s shocking when it’s in a group of academics where critical thinking is supposed to be a fundamental skill. I quoted the thing yesterday that you can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into. Today I’m thinking that reason isn’t even in the same county as them.

https://www.oustudents.com/news/article/6013/Support-for-students-during-the-Jo-Phoenix-Employment-Tribunal/

.

Bullshit re inclusive and supportive cultures. They have aptly demonstrated that they care only about a minority of students and staff and will take no care for those who don't conform to their rigid prejudices. This is a very clear example of virtue signalling.

I saw that up eywhyzed. Must accommodate the hurty feels eh? Only the right kind of complaint allowed. They ignore the others.

Cynical me thinks that they are trying to whip up complaints to somehow justify their shocking treatment of a staff member. An academic Woman, greatly respected, whom they allowed to be harassed and bullied into resignation.
It's an arse covering exercise.

Nothing about if you are a Woman member of staff/student being driven out of the OU because you have GC beliefs.

Nothing about being a person with disability feeling hijacked into their agenda - when there's nowt genuinely being done around disability.

Nothing about being a Woman being constantly bullied and harassed because you are same sex attracted ONLY.

Their idea of inclusion is only for those in their alternative universe. imo.

I wonder what they would do if a GC student contacted them. The fact they have Gender Identity champions (🙄) on tap makes me think it's not set up for them. Be interesting to try though.

Re the 'you're so vain' comments up thread. Here is Carly live and she is joyous.

”well I’m not sure but some of their asides make me think they think we want to literally eradicate all trans people.”

I agree they must be telling themselves this kind of story on a ruminative loop to build up to the level of paranoia that we’re seeing.

And wtf with that Students Association article? What will happen to these fragile students if the court upholds Jo’s claim? Will they evaporate when the sunlight hits them? If there is no sunlight now because there’s no clear sign of journalists following (though I have no doubt some will be, this is a hot topic now) the sunlight will come, one way or another. These students don’t need journalists to tell them. If Jo wins, the furore will be broadcast loud and clear. And at what point, and how many court cases in, do you start accept that just maybe, you are not on the right side of history after all?

”Contact your Student Support Team; they, along with the Gender Identity Champions, are available to provide support and guidance during your studies”

”Gender Identity Champions”? What are they? Some kind of cheerleaders who chant mantras? Neo-priests for this neo-religion?

And what of the probable 90% of students who are non-believers? Presumably they’re not allowed to set up their own support group to protect themselves. That would be the university taking a side.

The university has already taken a side and it’s the craven action of a previously respected institution giving in to what is probably a relatively small group of bullies because they weren’t courageous enough or insightful enough to see where that would lead. Which is why they are now in court. I wonder whether, if they lose, they will appeal. How deep does this go?

Anyway, thanks all for the thread. A small question to those who’ve been online listening to the case: I keep seeing people say they’re thankful the judge listened to the podcast. I know she said she wanted to hear it, but is there concrete evidence that she actually did? Was it played in court or did she say she had done? Because I wouldn’t definitively assume she had done so, just because of a passing comment that she’d like to. I hope she did, but is it certain?

Thanks to everyone on these threads. It’s absolutely fascinating to follow.