"NHS Fife nurse allowed to call trans doctor a man during employment tribunal"

[AnotherAngryAcademic]

I've not read the decision yet - but this seems promising!

I actually think that the Dr Upton's request to be called "Dr Upton" if pronouns can't be agreed on is reasonable, although if the judge had simply decided that titles should be used it would have been a bit ambiguous as "Dr" is both sex and gender neutral. For example, if it had been another nurse asking to be called "Miss Upton" it would not be as straightforward - so it is useful that the claimant can say "he" if necessary.

(Use of "Dr Upton" also emphasises the hierarchal element of the relationship between the parties, which may well be relevant in the case.)

I also think it is no bad thing to specify that the tribunal will intervene if male pronouns are “used gratuitously and offensively on a repeated basis with no good reason to do so” - I can't imagine that this would be done deliberately, but it will be interesting to see what, if any, use will be considered "offensive" by the tribunal as this is something that is often discussed.

Link: https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/politics/scottish-politics/5169032/nurse-nhs-fife-trans-doctor-tribunal/

I come from a Fife, pro home rule, Socialist, coalmining family…and my favourite politician is a Tory Baroness.

I was going to say that my ancestors will be birling…but, actually, they’d agree with her.

How do you refer to a biological male as he in an offensive manner?
The fucking tiptoeing we’re expected to do is beyond all reason.

Fabulous, fabulous woman.

Love her!

It shows again, too, that "living as a woman" comes at the expense of women who have to take part in the charade to make it valid, at their own expense.

From the Telegraph article: "Mr Kemp acknowledged that “misgendering” of Dr Upton is likely to prove “painful and distressing”

But as pp said, the distress for the other women is apparently not a problem.

I think that institutions like the NHS haven't really thought this through before adopting advice from Stonewall & Co.: NHS said in 2021, that three quarters of NHS staff are women (of 1,3 million people).
Why would you want to risk losing or antagonizing this kind of workforce?
https://www.england.nhs.uk/2021/03/nhs-celebrates-the-vital-role-hundreds-of-thousands-of-women-have-played-in-the-pandemic/

Because somehow, no matter how many women, it’s always the women who have to budge up and be nice.

IIRC, during the first Trump presidency, the use of the term "my truth" spiked considerably, due to their affluent use of it. Case in point was Kellyanne Conway's use of the term "alternative facts".
This administration certainly launched both these terms to fame, and I saw them quickly adopted into gender-mainstream argumentation.

From the Telegraph article: "Mr Kemp acknowledged that “misgendering” of Dr Upton is likely to prove “painful and distressing”

That's because the truth often hurts, and the only person doing any misgendering is the man who calls himself a women.

From the Telegraph article: "Mr Kemp acknowledged that “misgendering” of Dr Upton is likely to prove “painful and distressing”

Did he acknowledge how painful and distressing it is for women to have to change with a man in their changing room? Or how painful and distressing it might be for them to have to observe him exposing himself in their changing room?

Or how painful and distressing it is to be forced, against your will, to use wrong sex pronouns? I personally find it very painful and very distressing to even contemplate being forced to lie about the reality I see.

I think perhaps in part it's because I recognise the underlying assumption beneath this that - as a woman - I am 'less than' any man's wants. It's being treated as less deserving of equal human rights. And a court is a place where truth should matter. But apparently, if you're female maybe not because male feelings matter more than females' right to safety and their own truthful, honest speech.

I think in part with wrong-sex pronouns it's because I see it as a potentially serious safeguarding failure. As it is in this case. Sex is important for safeguarding and lying about it undermines safeguarding. This is important for adults, but even more so it's important for children. No-one seems to care about children though.

"Kemp added that the bar for harassment could be met if male pronouns were used for Dr Upton “gratuitously and offensively on a repeated basis”. He added that Peggie and her lawyers “may wish to reflect” on whether it was “necessary or appropriate” to misgender Dr Upton, even though they are legally permitted to do so. "

Now imagine a different scenario:

"Kemp added that the bar for harassment could be met if female spaces were used by Dr Upton “gratuitously and offensively on a repeated basis”. He added that Dr upton and his lawyers “may wish to reflect” on whether it was “necessary or appropriate” for Dr Upton to use the rooms, even though they are legally permitted to do so. "

Hmm

Double edged sword.

It has not yet been established that Dr Upton had any right to be in female spaces without the consent of those present.

so I'll amend that to

"Kemp added that Dr upton and his lawyers “may wish to reflect” on whether it was “necessary or appropriate” for Dr Upton to use female pronouns, even though they are legally permitted to do so. He added that "Dr Upton should consider if it is gratuitously offensively and harassment to do so on a repeated basis”.

Or how painful and distressing it is to be forced, against your will, to use wrong sex pronouns? I personally find it very painful and very distressing to even contemplate being forced to lie about the reality I see.

I think this is a significant aspect of the on-going conflict. There are many people who don't care about using words/terms that conflict with their beliefs/views or care about males being in female single sex spaces. I believe that they are entitled to hold these views, whether I agree with them or not. However, I do think they should recognise that others feel differently and, like them, are entitled to hold these different views.

In a liberal, democratic society, we should adopt the position whereby we recognise that there are deeply held conflicting views and beliefs about pronouns and some people experience distress when their preferences aren't followed. We can also recognise that it isn't reasonable to expect others to preside over whose preferences should be adopted/rejected and enforced. Instead, we need people to learn to tolerate the choices of others

While I agree that any constraint on using same sex pronouns naturally is a chilling power imbalance, I think we've heard examples of genderists using 'preferred' pronouns gratuitously and sometimes offensively. Even quite bland tv shows can have that gratingly twinkly overemphasis on they when referring to 'non-binary' characters.

How do you rule on tone of voice though?!

I would say that preferred pronouns are always used gratuitously. Their main purpose is to compel the speech of others, which means there is also an element of coercion involved. Their other use is to obfuscate. They serve no useful purpose.

He added that Peggie and her lawyers “may wish to reflect” on whether it was “necessary or appropriate” to misgender Dr Upton, even though they are legally permitted to do so

Reflected. It is. Next.

I’d agree with this. I think it’s also particularly important to recognise that difference in belief in a court setting where people are under oath, or owe professional duties to the court, and so must tell the truth. It would be particularly distressing in that setting to ask someone to use wrong sex pronouns.

THIS

I was once talking to a mother and her trans-identified child. She was bending over backwards for this child all the time, paying vast sums of money (and they weren't rich) for all sorts of support but she would occasionally accidentally misgender and then immediately correct herself. This was a woman who had unimaginable financial, personal pressures and was also going through menopause and just occasionally used the standard English she'd been using for 50 years or so. Of course he'd been told by online wankers that her accidental 'misgendering' was equivalent to a Nazi war crime further undermining his already poor mental health and weaking the relationship between this boy and the one person in the world who actually loved him unconditionally and would do anything for him.

The system and the state didn't really care, nor do anything, for that child.

It's so bloody evil.

I hope I'm never in this position but if I'm ever compelled to use wrong sex pronouns in court I will say that I'm lying every single time. Because it will be lying.

The obfuscation purpose is anti-safeguarding. It is very much one of the points along with the compulsion and positioning the special pronoun person as more important than the person being compelled. In a court, positioning one side of the argument as superior is biased.

In the Miller case where a trans identified male abucted a female child the judge said his dressing as a woman likely affected the child's decision to get in the car with him. Wrong sex pronouns attempt sex deception, which undermines safeguarding.

And this is especially important in a healthcare setting. If a patient who has a history of male violence, is Muslim or a myriad of other reasons and who needs single sex HCPs is in a meeting with others describing Upton as 'she' they won't realise they are talking about a man. They won't realise until they're in a room with him. It's deception about his sex, which is really quite important in his job.

Deceiving patients about the sex of their potential HCPs is lying, manipulation and a safeguarding failure. And will stop women seeking appropriate healthcare because once you've lost trust on something like that, it's difficult to regain it.

It's a complete failure of professional ethical standards in the NHS.

And the courts are so bloody misogynist not noticing this obvious fact, it's so depressing.

This is what I've alwayd had an issue with.
You swear that you are going to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, apart from the bits where the defendant might get hurty feelz when you are compelled to lie.

If I'm ever in court under these circs, I really hope I'll have the ovaries to say OK, so you want me to swear the oath, or lie as commanded? Pick one.

What do you think our chances are of observing remotely next week?

She is absolutely right. Thank you Baroness.