Help end medical misogyny. Sign our petition.

Help end medical misogyny.
Sign our petition.

Sign the petition

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

The chair of SEEN is being sued.

1000 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
58
Ereshkigalangcleg · 25/06/2026 15:04

biddyboo · 25/06/2026 14:47

Also, it's not just about holding a belief. There will be real world consequences. Presumably if someone objects to a tw in a woman's changing room, then this is a manifestation of their GC beliefs, which ST believes they should be prevented from expressing in the workplace.

Exactly. That’s the endgame of objecting to GC beliefs being able to be expressed.

anyolddinosaur · 25/06/2026 15:07

If Yammer is based on Facebook does it also have the Facebook ability to click on a post, say I dont like it and stop seeing such posts, at least for a while? Is Tempest actively choosing not to block the posts?

CriticalCondition · 25/06/2026 15:10

Do we know if the C is funding this case out of his own pocket? Or are there financial backers?

Tallisker · 25/06/2026 15:10

I wouldn’t be surprised if Tempest and chums actively stalked colleagues known to be GC to find posts to be offended by. They tried very hard to find out who the members of SEEN were.

MyLadyDisdainlsYetLiving · 25/06/2026 15:15

From TT:

[We resume]

[There is at present no sound on the link]

[sound back]
ST - key thing for me, "nobody has right not to be offended", that means to me ppl can go around offending ppl -
AL: We agreed earlier that there is no legal right not to be?
ST: Not legal no

AL: So why is it a problem for guidance docs to say it?
ST: bcs PSED - duty to foster good relations.
AL: ppl with a protected characteristic - why can't they express that?
ST: Bcs not fostering good working environment.

AL: You've said, with very limited exceptions GC belief shd not be expressed in teh workplace.
ST: Yes, not right to express them. And, latest EDI guidance for civil service say, don't discuss divisive things.
AL: Will come back to that.

AL: But GC beliefs are not in themselves "political"?
ST: Disagree, always in the news.
AL: Not every thing in the news is political surely? Just bcs talked about in the news?
ST: DIsagree - political in the workplace

MyLadyDisdainlsYetLiving · 25/06/2026 15:17

From TT:

AL: Can I clarify - you say any expression of GC views in any way is political?
ST: Yes
J: And should not be expressed?
ST: Yes, offensive to trans ppl
J: And political?
ST: In workplace yes

J: Any discussion of trans ID also political then? In workplace?
ST: Not aware that it is discussed.

AL: Back to the principles of communication. Email from Caroline Airs in May, re consultation on the policy, says has feedback from eg trades unions. Clear that DEFRA had consulted inc with unions?
ST: Yes, don't know which unions

biddyboo · 25/06/2026 15:19

anyolddinosaur · 25/06/2026 15:07

If Yammer is based on Facebook does it also have the Facebook ability to click on a post, say I dont like it and stop seeing such posts, at least for a while? Is Tempest actively choosing not to block the posts?

I believe it uses an algorithm so should only show you posts that you've engaged with or from groups that you are a member of.

biddyboo · 25/06/2026 15:19

CriticalCondition · 25/06/2026 15:10

Do we know if the C is funding this case out of his own pocket? Or are there financial backers?

I suspect a union or one of the trans orgs

MyLadyDisdainlsYetLiving · 25/06/2026 15:20

From TT:

AL: And consulted staff networks?
ST: Not clear consulted RPA - only DEFRA
J: Clarify pls?
ST: Some separate RPA networks
AL: These are DEFRA-wide policies
J: Not sure we have heard yet about RPA networks? Was there a SEEN one?
ST: No

ST: The RPA was left out, but other arms-length bodies were included
AL: My point is that there was wide consultation
ST: I wasn't able to be consulted bcs RPA left out

AL: [ref] we see another refresh of the communications principles in May - need not discuss but final version is at p1919

99point6 · 25/06/2026 15:21

Scout2016 · 25/06/2026 15:01

On Yammer, would each group have its own page, like on Facebook. So SEEN has a page, the a:gender group do and so on.
And the claimant is upset because sometimes posts from the SEEN page popped up on his Yammer feed?

So his issue is (including but not limited to...)
They shouldn't be allowed to express that they have these views in the workplace,
They shouldn't be allowed to have group,
The group shouldn't be allowed to communicate via Yammer (even though Yammer is the forum used by groups to communicate,)
Because sometimes I see their posts in my Yammer feed and it upsets me.

There is no means of communication he would have found acceptable given he thinks no one should admit to having GC views, let alone try to communicate about them.

I think this was covered this morning, prior to the 2023 changes to make there be only groups that you could opt to join, there was an All Company feed that anyone could post on and everyone could see. I doubt it had sophisticated algorithms a la X or TicTic.

MyLadyDisdainlsYetLiving · 25/06/2026 15:26

From TT:

AL: p1018 email from [] Manning, July 2023, talks about Yammer having been tested without storylines enables but live version had it enabled - they had not meant to enable them. Then 7/7 - explains what 'storylines' are and says, Yammer shd share in subject-matter groups not all-org

AL: Goes on to say how this had meant some outside-the-group posts had been happening, but this was corrected in July 2023, agree?
ST: I didn't ever use storylines

AL: p1013 says that from 1/8, moderation responsibility will be the group Information Asset Owners (IAOs) - this doc describes mod process - to IAO, then if escalation to ModPanel, who will also undertake regular reviews of IAOs. Clear that there was an escalation level?

ST: Agree modPanel exists, not clear what they would do, as I say it seemed like a feedback mechanism.
AL: This process in place 1/8, you accept?
ST: Yes looks likely

MyLadyDisdainlsYetLiving · 25/06/2026 15:30

From TT:

AL: p1177 email from Carly Manning (CM) 16/10/23, says have written to SEEN to say that as a [checking] Community of Interest they must be a private group and mentions a "3 strikes" rule.

AL: Point is that post Apr 2023 some groups - not only SEEN but including them - had stayed public groups, but by 16/10 that was realised and they were told to go private?
ST: Yes

AL: If we look at EDM WS - para 118 - she is talking about this October email, says she doesn't know how the mistake happened and it wasn't inentional, and that she had switched it to private same day and there were no more concerns raised.

ST: Yes AFAIK it remained private

MyLadyDisdainlsYetLiving · 25/06/2026 15:34

From TT:

AL: p2360
AL: Another comms principles policy refresh - p2365 [I think 2024] - introduces new policy that ppl should not get into discussion about discrimination law etc. Clear direction?
ST: Not sure that reduced conflict

AL: Wd reduce conflict re law itself eg re Forstater case?
ST: yes
[missed a comment from ST]

AL: Last step in this section of Qs. p1866 - email from you ST and John Calvert June 2024. You are asking about right of appeal from "the intranet moderation" - that does not mean Yammer, this is separate?
ST: yes

Signalbox · 25/06/2026 15:35

The claimant can’t possibly win this can he? He’s batshit and an extremist.

MyLadyDisdainlsYetLiving · 25/06/2026 15:38

From TT:

AL: And events you are talking about were March 2024?
ST: Yes

AL: p1495 - response to a request for information, again re intranet moderation panel, says established 2023 and refreshed March 2024, and that up to Dec 2024 had been 10 issues raised re hostile environment for T&NB staff and that 7 upheld;

AL: And that in same period 10 re hostile for GC staff and 9 upheld. Sounds even-handed?
ST: Disagree, by this time T&NB staff had stopped bothering to complain, also, cd be multiple coplaints re 1 post

AL: The writer is is Lara Brown, you would describe as an ally?
ST: Yes
AL: She is telling you effectively that moderation is even-handed?
ST: Disagree, the things they were saying were awful, and T&NB already knew DEFRA not supportive.

CriticalCondition · 25/06/2026 15:38

biddyboo · 25/06/2026 15:19

I suspect a union or one of the trans orgs

It will be interesting to see who C's other witnesses are. So far the head of the a: Gender group has been mentioned. Perhaps there'll also be someone from a union or trans org.

borntobequiet · 25/06/2026 15:39

terffert · 25/06/2026 14:29

From TT:

J: Your view is, it's appropriate to limit even the mere expression of holding a belief, for good relations?
AL: Yes that is what I'm trying to ask.
J: Distinction is between articulating the belief, and simply saying you hold it?

ST: I still say, negative effect in the workplace - should not be mentioned, stay away from it in the workplace.
J: Your proposition is that the mere articulation of GC belief is discrimintory?
ST: Yes, it erases transgender ppl

[My comment: omfg]

Goodness me.

anyolddinosaur · 25/06/2026 15:42

I wonder if any alphabet groups have to be private, perhaps that will come out later.

I've said before that I dont see how this version of gender belief can be WORIADS because it conflicts with the rights of others.

He seems batshit to us but he is far from the only one to hold show views. Getting a misogynist vibe from this judge. Naomi wanted to speak earlier and didnt have the opportunity and he's had to apologise for implying she was late with disclosure.

MyLadyDisdainlsYetLiving · 25/06/2026 15:43

From TT:

ST: So that's why complaints low.
AL: You are speculating?
ST: Am saying that info request doesn't clarify things enough IMO.

AL: If we look at July 2022 - SEEN didn't exist?
ST: Not formally

AL: p144
AL: Email from LB that month - notifying EDM of complaint about a post of hers?
ST: Yes

AL: Post date seems to be 18th-19th July? Can you say which?
ST: 19th
AL: p136 - email from EDM 20/7/22, she raised objection to removal of post, asks why removed, emphasises that removal cd be discriminatory bcs protected belief?
ST: Yes

biddyboo · 25/06/2026 15:43

There is a thread on here about Laura Brown and her FOI requests...

MyLadyDisdainlsYetLiving · 25/06/2026 15:46

From TT:

AL: p134 another 20/7 email - EDM says removal disappointing, had based hers on a post from 'the humanists' that had not been removed, says she has revised post and now no longer invites discussion, is only stating her protected belief.

AL: And here is her proposed text - which she did post 21/7 - she starts "this is a personal post re being GC, a protected belief that I hold". Not objectionable? Just saying?
ST: Yes
AL: You might not like her belief but all she is doing is saying she believes it?

ST: Yes, agree, but, following up with everyting else she says is then unwanted conduct, erases TG ppl.

CriticalCondition · 25/06/2026 15:46

Signalbox · 25/06/2026 15:35

The claimant can’t possibly win this can he? He’s batshit and an extremist.

Yes. Which makes me wonder who is funding this. Maybe some equally batshit fundamentalist like the Good Laugh Project is willing to spaff funds on a total loser of a case but they generally like to tell everyone about it.

MyLadyDisdainlsYetLiving · 25/06/2026 15:49

From TT:

AL: What she says is, many beliefs held - religion, veganism, then - then some gender ideology ones, and that all are protected. Then she says a few GC beliefs and those also protected. This is very neutral way to put things?

ST: Not neutral. Those beliefs - eg sex binary and immutable and gender identity not real, that is saying trans ppl are parodying opposite sex, that's erasing and harassing. Yes she includes eg links to LGBT networks, but also to eg transgendertrend who are very negative. Not neutral at all.

J: Please give us time to take notes, fed up of saying so, please take care.

biddyboo · 25/06/2026 15:49

CriticalCondition · 25/06/2026 15:46

Yes. Which makes me wonder who is funding this. Maybe some equally batshit fundamentalist like the Good Laugh Project is willing to spaff funds on a total loser of a case but they generally like to tell everyone about it.

Do we know why Robin Moira White is no longer involved? Because if even RMW has walked away, it's not a good sign.

ArabellaScott · 25/06/2026 15:50

Those beliefs - eg sex binary and immutable and gender identity not real, that is saying trans ppl are parodying opposite sex, that's erasing and harassing

😶

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread