The chair of SEEN is being sued.

[PriOn1]

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’.

As you say, it all depends on the content of the posts. If the GC ones didn’t cross the line and the GI ones did, it might be completely reasonable.

Happy to be proven wrong but I expect the removed posts were not appropriate and that DEFRA/RPA or SEEN have the receipts.

C is being argumentative rather than just answering the questions:
'Yes but I didn't agree they were offensive'
Yes but sometimes ....'

If it was on a TV programme, they'd be told to just answer yes or no, wouldn't they?

My comment was a general one, at the consistent failure across the board to recognise that GI beliefs are sexist and offensive to many women.

The idea that this employer was a hostile place for GI people is honestly laughable.

Sorry I can't expand on that. It seems the issue is that GC views were allowed to be expressed at all. We will have to see what the tribunal makes of the evidence.

No wonder it takes DEFRA so long to do anything; it sounds as if they are all sat reading/posting on/complaining about/ writing communication guidelines for/moderating Yammer!!

I mean it is lovely that they have a gardening club/drama society whatever…..

How on earth did this get to Tribunal!

I hope AL has managed to find a nice cold drink with electrolytes in it.

Yes, for sure, and I hope they do have the receipts.

This isn’t “proof” that there was a hostile atmosphere for GI people, but the fact that only or mostly GI content was removed by the moderation panel isn’t inconsistent with that, either.

There is a clear implication that the J is going beyond fairness in his treatment of ST, he is making him special with the discussion re pronouns etc and then this. I get that J's often make sure to take care re witnesses as it is a tough gig but this seems a bit extraordinary.

This is quite a common 'trope' [I don't often get to use that word] -
e.g. that the media is pro-GC and is totally biased against transpeople.
I was going to quote an example, but all you have to do is enter the words
'transphobic media', as I did, it's an embarrassment of riches of examples: claims of funded, organised, targeted transphobic campaigns in the media, prioritisation of the views of transphobes etc.

That seems to us like a completely unrealistic alt.universe, but I can see the same being said with equal conviction about DEFRA/RPA.

Some people do have problems with their vocal chords - singers have this sometimes. Part of the advice given on vocal care is not to whisper.......

Yes the judge is falling over backwards for him.

Perhaps this is an inevitable outcome of GI workshops and updates to the bench book?
Have the judiciary been trained in only one side of the debate?

If this runs to the normal pattern the deleted posts will be suggestions to kill or rape anyone GC. I expect some will get read out in court.

Yes judges were "trained" by trans activists and the bench book written by them. However there were some revisions.

It’s being laid on a bit thick though. So traumatised at reality. Likkle voice. How difficult it must be for this lad (sorry lady, as the note says) to give evidence. Feels a bit performative. Unfortunately, (and this is just my opinion) the court not appearing to be quite as neutral as one would like in this little vignette. Maybe there’ll be a suggestion yet of fetching smelling salts for the fragile ‘lady’. Maybe NC will be told to ease up on the ‘dainty Mrs’.

Whereas an actual woman (as in the biological kind) would probably be told to buckle up. Like NC’s client is being sort of strong armed to refer to a man as a woman. Because a man demands it, and so another man is ordering it be so. Irrespective of the absolute disdain for rights of an actual woman (the biological kind). How disrespectful is that? Tell a woman that a woman is nothing more than a man with a bit of paper.

NC and her client are sort of being told to ‘shut up’. In different words, but with a little bit of menace as it may have repercussions if they don’t.

I don’t think that is too bald. I may be wrong (and I’m sure it will be explained to me if I am and why), but isn’t it the gist of it if you say plainly what happened?

We still live in a patriarchy, yes. However, let's not be despondent: the winds have been blowing increasingly in our favour in this field, at long last, lately, and NC can cope, I'm sure :-)

Yes, remember when Ben Cooper read some out?

They could be doxxing, they could be threats, they could be extremely verbally abusive. There are lots of reasons those posts could potentially have been deleted. Content is entirely the issue and I imagine that can be provided. Also surely moderators are allowed the odd mistake in a heated situation, I think the C will need to establish a clear pattern of unfairness.

Do need to remember that Samantha is the claimant in this case, and tribunals do tend to give them the benefit of the doubt in going up against employers.

However cross-examination on the claimed harassment will be interesting.

To be fair to the judge - he said it was hard enough for "this witness" already not "this lady" .

Pretty obvious already that Tempest doent think that SEEN should be allowed to say anything.

Yes, there will be many people working for organisations such as DEFRA who believe that GC views are literal genocide (as per the Lemkin Institute 🙄).And this will include things like believing that only women have periods. .

The judge in the Darlington Nurses cases was the same towards Rose when he was giving evidence, but still produced a sensible judgement.

Yes, the claimant said he didn’t think SEEN should be using Yammer at all.

during the bundle discussions there was mention of an email from Andreas Mueller with lots of screenshots, which I presume are receipts.

Please bear with me, there will be a short delay in TT cut and paste while I have to do something. Back in half an hour.

I think ST sincerely believes that ST is the ultimate victim in all this. This will come from years and years of being told that ST is part of the most marginalised community ever (see also, Dr Upton).

Look at what the trans Reddit is like - a total echo chamber. If anyone has the temerity to suggest why women in particular might have issues with self ID/GI, they are immediately shut down and have their posts removed. Existing in an echo chamber like this, and surrounding yourself with fellow TRAs who only affirm and not question, must make it very difficult for people like ST when they do encounter reality. And they are unable to entertain the idea that their behaviour might be questionable. That they might be the harasser.

The judge doesn’t want to give ST any grounds to appeal. Giving evidence at ET is stressful and judges want to be fair to claimants and witnesses. I expect he will take a similar approach with EW.