Another GC employment tribunal. Adam's vs Edinburgh Rape Crsis

[Rainbowshit]

x.com/tribunaltweets/status/1746830866020442400?s=46&t=AjtjSItRj-kgZwRzL-pdyQ

Claiming constructive dismissal for GC beliefs.

ERC CEO is a well known transwoman know for controversial "reframe your trauma" remarks.

Yes, that's a big part. But I guess also for the peace and security of RA. The longer in the public domain, the more time for the trolls to find her IRL.

My prediction on the strategy of the defence:

1. You knew when you joined that they all thought TWAW and you went in courting confrontation.
2. Hoping to get fired.
3. Court case financed by a shadowy third party.....make your guesses
4. Had a new job lined up all the time
5. It was all a set up to bring ERCC into disrepute

If there was a gambling board on here I would take bets.

Have abandoned thought of doing things and I'm snuggled under many layers watching live. That's some noisy typing going on there!

It seems to be a tactic occurring more often - shouting “Transphobia” as a magic word no longer works (because of how the TRAs have overused it), so they add in accusations of racism/white feminism too to silence the Hags - see Laura Pascal for example.

@Boiledbeetle me too

His current line of questioning - you knew what the policies were and you were prepared to violate them. His problem is that she didn't actually do it. She tried to open a discussion internally by asking question.

They appear to be going for a DPA/GDPR breach for asking to reveal AB was NB. They could argue RA wanted to do this and should have known it was a breach but as she was bottom of the hierarchy asking if she could do this was not a breach.

@Justabaker I agree but they were also an “inclusive” organisation which is much wider than TW.

I expect it's for saying they were female rather than NB. Who knows what is "allowed" by TRAs though.

I thought being NB was nothing to do with sexual orientation (the clause R’s barrister seems to be relying on).

If it’s a breach to tell a user a NB was AFAB, why is it not a breach to tell users there are no men working at ERCC (the party line).

Mridul Wadhwa is male. He has no GRC. My belief in biological sex is a protected belief that is worthy of respect in a democratic society. Posts should not be deleted just for using the correct pronoun for sex.

I came to the same conclusion after realising Wadhwa repeatedly expressed an interest in women orgasming during their sexual assault.

I can't really see how she breached anything, she was just trying to ensure a service users query was answered in a satisfactory way for everyone surely?

I was wondering what they'd deleted. Bloody hell!

Precisely, Beetle. I hope she manages to get this aspect in. She didn't disclose anything; she asked for advice from her superiors.

Absolutely - she was recognising it as a sensitive subject for both service user and colleague and so sought guidance in how to respond. Asking for guidance from appropriate sources within the organisation cannot be interpreted as a breach, surely?

Technically she did breach AB privacy and data but, she could not get a sensible answer on how to respond to the victims query, as there was no policy on service users wanting a same sex counsellor, because the org denied the issue of biology existed

Wadhwa is not marking essays on academic feminism. Wadhwa is allegedly providing a service for women who have suffered rape and sexual assault, and to the layperson that comment comes across as aggressively excluding any feminist/woman who happens to be white. You can't hear the capital letters in spoken language, and most women are probably not thinking of obscure academic theories when they're trying to deal with trauma responses.

That's my post with the pronoun replaced with name. What in there merited deletion?

I understand that MN are careful to be respectful and I agree with that and do my best to respect it.

Which seems going above and beyond, and requiring unequal deference from women, when this entire thread is about hearing evidence of how the individual requiring such respectful treatment had so little respect for raped women.

It an expression of a policy rather than disclosure about an identifiable individual. So acceptable.

OMG women orgasms whilst being raped said by a biological male how utterly gross

"They are female" could refer to one individual or all staff, though!

ArabellaScott · Today 10:05

I agree. I've come to believe that Wadhwa enjoys seeing women suffer.

I have concluded that Wadhwah enjoys bullying women and making them suffer and that them has been given confidence in this behaviour, because of Scottish Government behaviour. The whole "TWAW in all scenarios" batshittery comes from the top down and appears to have infected every level of every organisation.

(Not saying that is what RA stated. But to show how mangling of language leads to people not being able to understand statements)