Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Rachel Meade - it's a win!

692 replies

BreadInCaptivity · 09/01/2024 12:35

x.com/legalfeminist/status/1744697995822526961?s=46&t=88gZvdSnTk70X8b2ZUPZtA

OP posts:
Thread gallery
38
nothingcomestonothing · 09/01/2024 17:29

HellonHeels · 09/01/2024 15:03

Weren't they friends? Seem to recall Rachel's fb was closed to general view and could only be seen by "friends".

Sheer arseholery

Yep, off the top of my head Woolton was Rachel's 'friend' on Facebook and spent some months documenting evidence of Rachel's 'phobia' without raising it with her directly, then presented this 'evidence' to the regulator to investigate. Oh, whilst Woolton was also posting stuff on Woolton's own FB page which, had it been complained about to the regulator, would have potentially attracted greater censure than the wrong think Rachel shared.

I'd like to think Woolton will reflect on Woolton's own behaviour, but I wouldn't put money on it.

BettyFilous · 09/01/2024 17:30

The thing that blows my mind about Rachel’s case is that they’ve attempted to cast out an experienced social worker on the say-so of a disgruntled member of the public. Is the UK so awash with cautious, thoughtful social workers that we can afford to traduce and exclude them in this way? By all accounts social work departments across the country face persistent recruitment challenges. This is not the way to encourage decent candidates into the profession or retain them. 🤦‍♀️

CorruptedCauldron · 09/01/2024 17:33

Here, Rachel explains what happened. She liked and shared gender-critical material on her private Facebook page and a “friend” squealed on her. Sinister as hell. I’m so glad justice has prevailed - Rachel did nothing wrong.

littlbrowndog · 09/01/2024 17:37

Rachel🍻🍻✊✊

ickky · 09/01/2024 17:44

WOO HOO

Such a great start to the year. Well done Rachel, you must be so relieved. I hope they pay lots of compensation, though I am sure it won't be enough for the mental torture they have put you through.

I'm off the read the Judgement.

EasternStandard · 09/01/2024 17:46

CorruptedCauldron · 09/01/2024 17:33

Here, Rachel explains what happened. She liked and shared gender-critical material on her private Facebook page and a “friend” squealed on her. Sinister as hell. I’m so glad justice has prevailed - Rachel did nothing wrong.

Edited

This is modern day McCarthyism

Can’t wait for it to be resigned to history too, and people look back aghast

Rachel helps us get closer

MrsOvertonsWindow · 09/01/2024 17:48

BettyFilous · 09/01/2024 17:30

The thing that blows my mind about Rachel’s case is that they’ve attempted to cast out an experienced social worker on the say-so of a disgruntled member of the public. Is the UK so awash with cautious, thoughtful social workers that we can afford to traduce and exclude them in this way? By all accounts social work departments across the country face persistent recruitment challenges. This is not the way to encourage decent candidates into the profession or retain them. 🤦‍♀️

Think this demonstrates the power of the "sacred caste". Since the motley crew of flashers, porn addicts and others was celebrated by the "Women & Equalities Committee" with nobody noticing (except women) that they were supremely unsuitable to consult about women's rights. Since trans activists with not an iota of qualifications have been allowed to weigh in and influence schools and child healthcare, doing monumental harm to children. Politicians have not only stood by but have funded these people.

And then when these beliefs are tested in the courts, they're found to be against the law - every time.

BoreOfWhabylon · 09/01/2024 17:48

Great news! The judgement is well worth reading.

RoaringtoLangClegintheDark · 09/01/2024 17:50

Wonderful news!

It feels like a significant axe blow against the stranglehold of capture our institutions and regulatory bodies are still held in.

Well done Rachel, and I hope you have a great celebration tonight after all the misery they put you through for all this time.

RethinkingLife · 09/01/2024 17:51

I'd like to think Woolton will reflect on Woolton's own behaviour, but I wouldn't put money on it.

It will be interesting if Woolton, in Woolton's capacity as Head of DEI for Sports England, feels professionally obliged, as well as obligated by Nolan Principles of Public Life, to

  • fully appraise Sports England of the comments about Woolton's actions
  • advise Sports England to be mindful of Woolton's own (misguided) cognitive and emotional biases so as not to lead Sports England down a very wrong path.
Froodwithatowel · 09/01/2024 17:55

Bravo Rachel!

Again we see that actual law and policy are two totally different things, and much of the policy is not only batshit, it's illegal.

Would the elected government like to extract their thumbs from their bums and do something about this please? Are we really going to have to take them all to court individually?

Ereshkigalangcleg · 09/01/2024 17:57

Congratulations Rachel! Great judgment.

Farmageddon · 09/01/2024 18:00

Congratulations Rachel, I've just donated again to celebrate.

As an aside - do we know when the Jo Phoenix judgement will be out?

Vegemiteandhoneyontoast · 09/01/2024 18:01

Glad you won, Rachel!

LizzieSiddal · 09/01/2024 18:06

Wow congrats to Rachel and her legal team!

My heart bleeds for all the women (and men), who’ve had their lives absolutely shattered by various activists/employers/bodies/institutions. It’s utterly disgraceful.

Froodwithatowel · 09/01/2024 18:06

4. The consequences of the failure of SWE to train its Case Examiners to respect protected beliefs.

I especially like that bit. I can hear the gnashing of teeth from here. Maya, thank God for you.

LadySylviaMcCordle · 09/01/2024 18:17

It's not cricket that she can just spitefully toss the hand grenade, with no proof, etc, upend Rachel's life, reputation and bank account...

RethinkingLife · 09/01/2024 18:26

Signalbox · 09/01/2024 18:07

More about Wolton here. Different spelling but apparently the same person.

Edited to avoid deletion :)

https://gendercriticalwoman.blog/2023/11/05/aedan-wolton/

Edited

Ah, Lord Patel and SWE, eh.

Lord Patel of inviting Jones to tea at the House of Lords infamy.

For those unfamiliar with this incident: these words in your preferred search engine may be enlightening.

mumsnet lord patel karen jones

Helleofabore · 09/01/2024 18:42

RethinkingLife · 09/01/2024 17:51

I'd like to think Woolton will reflect on Woolton's own behaviour, but I wouldn't put money on it.

It will be interesting if Woolton, in Woolton's capacity as Head of DEI for Sports England, feels professionally obliged, as well as obligated by Nolan Principles of Public Life, to

  • fully appraise Sports England of the comments about Woolton's actions
  • advise Sports England to be mindful of Woolton's own (misguided) cognitive and emotional biases so as not to lead Sports England down a very wrong path.

I suspect being so heavily invested personally in ideological thinking about gender themselves will mean that Woolton might be incapable of reflecting on this. I suspect that any less than positive acceptance of that ideological thinking would be taken extremely personally.

Helleofabore · 09/01/2024 18:42

Signalbox · 09/01/2024 18:07

More about Wolton here. Different spelling but apparently the same person.

Edited to avoid deletion :)

https://gendercriticalwoman.blog/2023/11/05/aedan-wolton/

Edited

A picture says a thousand words.

anyolddinosaur · 09/01/2024 18:45

What a great start to the year.

RethinkingLife · 09/01/2024 18:51

I suspect being so heavily invested personally in ideological thinking about gender themselves will mean that Woolton might be incapable of reflecting on this

Do you suspect Sports England knew that they would have to filter themselves or that Woolton assured them during recruitment that Woolton | Wolton is capable of being impartial and policy-making in Sports England's best interests?

donquixotedelamancha · 09/01/2024 18:53

Igmum · 09/01/2024 13:03

Excellent news! Fingers crossed she gets decent compensation and no appeal. I'd like every other government body and professional organisation to learn from this

For her sake, obviously, I hope they don't appeal but it would be good for the cause if they did.

Just finished reading the full judgement and I think it's more broadly applicable than Maya's because it concerns treatment by the employer, not merely a termination. This employer took a lot of actions (in addition to suspending Rachel) that limited her ability to hold private views and that harassed her for her views. It's also notable that the regulator is on the hook and also that the employer is found to need to act fairly, even where the regulator is taking time to reach a decision.

It would be wonderful to have those as binding precident and I think this case is so egregious that its the perfect test case (from our PoV).

OvaHere · 09/01/2024 18:53

Excellent. Well done to Rachel and her team.