Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

The chair of SEEN is being sued.

455 replies

PriOn1 · 19/03/2024 18:07

We can’t post Crowdfunder links here, but there is now a Crowdfunder entitled “Chair of SEEN sued for saying 'only women menstruate'by Elspeth Duemmer Wrigley”

Text from website:

Who are you?
I'm Elspeth Duemmer Wrigley. I work for an arms-length body to a government department (part of the Civil Service) and love my job. I'm also gender critical, and chair of a governmental department SEEN (Sex Equality and Equity Network). SEEN represents those who are gender critical in our workplace.
What can you tell us?
The way I describe the case is restrained by my situation. I am writing this in a personal capacity, but am still employed and must comply with my employer's code of conduct and the Nolan Principles of Public Life. This places certain restrictions on me.
I’ve given as much information as I can, but I hope that what I set out below is sufficient to understand what’s going on.
So what happened?
I work for an arms-length body to the main government department. The case has been brought by a claimant who is an employee of another arms-length body. The claimant is taking their own employer, the government department and me to court.
Among other matters, the claimant is suing the government department for allowing our departmental SEEN network to exist (on the basis that the existence of the network has the effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating and/or offensive environment for the claimant).
What is the SEEN network?
SEEN (the Sex Equality and Equity Network) is an official cross-governmental staff network. We also have networks in three government departments (including the one being taken to court). SEEN is known as the gender critical network and is the only civil service network that clearly treats sex and sexual orientation as concepts defined in the Equality Act, which should never be conflated with or replaced by ‘gender identity’.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
48
ArabellaScott · 21/03/2024 10:08

£39,772 pledged of £40,000 stretch target from 1641 pledges

I love how swiftly women can muster a fighting fund out of thousands of small donations. Bring it on!

Imicola · 21/03/2024 10:09

The first time I've done a bit of gardening but as a SEEN member Im so grateful for all that Elspeth and the others have done, and how they have done it.

SinnerBoy · 21/03/2024 10:11

*99point6 · Today 08:15

These are department wide posts on the main Intranet pages. Helpful for raising awareness of the network. Separately there are SEEN only means of communicating within the network.

Ah thanks, I understand now.

SinnerBoy · 21/03/2024 10:19

PronounssheRa · Today 09:51

They have been community noted though

I commented on it and ticked "Unhelpful" and "False Information."

HagoftheNorth · 21/03/2024 10:30

Beetl…….are you ready?!

HagoftheNorth · 21/03/2024 10:30

Very pleasing that many many men appear to be donating too.

Boiledbeetle · 21/03/2024 10:32

💛☀ £40,000 ☀💛

The chair of SEEN is being sued.
Boiledbeetle · 21/03/2024 10:34

It sat on £39,997 for a while!

JanesLittleGirl · 21/03/2024 10:36

Boiledbeetle · 21/03/2024 10:32

💛☀ £40,000 ☀💛

Must have been fucks 17 and 18 that did it. That's me out.

Boiledbeetle · 21/03/2024 10:39

JanesLittleGirl · 21/03/2024 10:36

Must have been fucks 17 and 18 that did it. That's me out.

A valiant effort! Now you can run round shouting fuck fuck fuck fuck!

The stretch target is still sat at £40,000, so it may be that's all she needs!

In 2 days £40,000 is impressive mind!

porridgecake · 21/03/2024 10:40

It is extremely worrying that the CS seems to have been corrupted into something it was never intended to be which was impartial and committed to serving the government of the day. There have been warning signs (and I am the last person to support this government), but the current organisation is politicised and captured and very much contrary to the ethos of serving the country.

Boiledbeetle · 21/03/2024 10:41

It averages out at about £24 per person

ResisterRex · 21/03/2024 10:48

Boiledbeetle · 21/03/2024 10:41

It averages out at about £24 per person

Boiled!! You know you mustn't do the maths!! It highlights the OUTRAGEOUS LIES about wims being funded by Putin (or whoever the latest name bandied about is).

Go sit on the naughty step and have a good think about what you've done.

SqueakyDinosaur · 21/03/2024 10:48

That has to be the fastest fundraiser to date! I guess it just shows how incredibly pissed off women are. And it's a glorious riposte to the ridiculous claims that GC is somehow funded by shadowy far-right sources and no real people support it.

SqueakyDinosaur · 21/03/2024 10:49

Ha snap, @ResisterRex !

borntobequiet · 21/03/2024 10:49

That’s good to see!

Boiledbeetle · 21/03/2024 10:54

ResisterRex · 21/03/2024 10:48

Boiled!! You know you mustn't do the maths!! It highlights the OUTRAGEOUS LIES about wims being funded by Putin (or whoever the latest name bandied about is).

Go sit on the naughty step and have a good think about what you've done.

Tom And Jerry Reaction GIF

Sorrrrrrrrrry!

Honestly!

Please don't make me sit on the naughty step, I'll be good I promise!

ResisterRex · 21/03/2024 11:00
Grin
SidewaysOtter · 21/03/2024 11:03

ResisterRex · 21/03/2024 10:48

Boiled!! You know you mustn't do the maths!! It highlights the OUTRAGEOUS LIES about wims being funded by Putin (or whoever the latest name bandied about is).

Go sit on the naughty step and have a good think about what you've done.

We ALL KNOW that this is just the Far Right funding this, they've just been canny enough to set themselves up with 1,653 different bank accounts and email addresses.

We know it can't be gender critical women as there's only six of us, or so I'm told.

duc748 · 21/03/2024 11:12

It's brilliant. But it shouldn't be bloody necessary. But perhaps they're starting to learn; they can't get away with this any more. Every newspaper article in the Times, or piece on the BBC, spreading the word wider. It's no longer "Just the Mail and Torygraph saying it" (not that that made it untrue).

stickygotstuck · 21/03/2024 11:35

Can I ask an extremely naïve question please?

How are cases such as this getting to court at all?

Should there not be some sort of first gatekeeping step where a panel of people who know their stuff about the law and have some common sense go, "Nope, this one is too ridiculous and not grounded in reality, matey. You are not getting this to Court/Tribunal and waste everybody's time and money. Wer'e off to deal with actually Serious Stuff"?

Seriously, can someone explain the reasons to me as if I was 10? Ty.

Janie143 · 21/03/2024 11:39

stickygotstuck · 21/03/2024 11:35

Can I ask an extremely naïve question please?

How are cases such as this getting to court at all?

Should there not be some sort of first gatekeeping step where a panel of people who know their stuff about the law and have some common sense go, "Nope, this one is too ridiculous and not grounded in reality, matey. You are not getting this to Court/Tribunal and waste everybody's time and money. Wer'e off to deal with actually Serious Stuff"?

Seriously, can someone explain the reasons to me as if I was 10? Ty.

Getting deckchair and coco while we wait for an answer on this one

ArrestHer · 21/03/2024 11:55

Say uou went to a solicitor tomorrow and wanted to sue me for something which wasn’t a breach of law. Your advice you receive would be (assuming reputable representation) that you wouldn’t get far and not to do so.

so where someone in this instance is seeking to sue someone / an organisation for a legally held belief you can consider a couple of options

  1. they are a litigant in person and know very little. This may lead to the case being thrown out early on if there is no case to answer, but there would still be costs involved in getting to that point.

  2. they have disreputable or captured (or both) representation who are happy to push this to court as far as they can and take the money for that, even if it is likely to get thrown out.

  3. they have been advised properly that there is no case and are proceeding despite that advice and so forcing costs to be incurred by all whatever happens.

  4. the advice is that they do actually have a legal leg to stand on and so it is fair to proceed.

Essentially, the gatekeeping relies on the legal professionals behaving ethically and advising properly, and the client listening to that advice even when they don’t like it. The legal professional has very high ethical and moral standards in general. However, We all know that listening to points of view that differ to theirs is not a strong point of very many people, particularly captured people. Qualified or otherwise!

Apollo441 · 21/03/2024 11:57

I hope it does get to court and like Jo Phoenix and Rachel Meade trials, they are shown up and humiliated. But I think they'll cave.