From earlier
JR: You refer just here to a concern you had, what was that?
DU: That she would rally colleagues to her cause, that untrue allegations would be made about me
JR: [reads] concern she would oust you from dept?
DU: that she would use my refusal to agree with her harassment as a challenge, to organise moves to get me moved from that ward, the department.
Let us reflect on this tiny exchange as its really quite the reveal, isn't it now?
Upton didn't want ANY woman organising and collectively stating that the presence of a males in the women's changing room was appropriate and they felt harassed and intimitated by it. Sandie just happened to be the one not having any of it, on this particular occasion. And that just wouldn't wash for Dr Upton. He wanted to ensure she was unable to ask too many inconvient questions or check on how other women were also feeling. It was preemptive and preventive. Some might call this 'controlling'.
Instead Upton wants now, to frame women objecting as propagating 'untrue allegations' rather than simply having a problem with feeling like this was potentially vouyerism and an infringment on their privacy and dignity. Because Upton isn't the same sex and one woman wanted same sex facilities to prevent, errrrr any potential for there to be any vouyerism or infringements on her privacy and dignity.
He sought to isolate Sandy from being able to speak to colleagues about how this made her feel vulnerable and instead sort to frame her speaking with other females as 'harassment'. Isolating someone, is hmm, somewhat 'controlling'.
Remember this theorectically includes preventing Sandie being able to talk to, say you or me - we are all women who might agree with Sandie and might wish to talk to about how this makes US feel. God forbid, one woman might agree with her and this might form a consensus amongst other women. Women talking about their own feelings must be verboten. This is about shutting up ALL women who have a concept of feeling uncomfortable and have the sheer audicity to want privacy and dignity at this point.
So yeah, I wanted to point out, how obviously spectatularly well this intention to preemptively stop Sandie from talking to other women is working out for Upton at this stage in preceedings.
We are now what, well over 14,000 posts on MN on this plan, as well as huge amount on other parts of social media and numerous articles in the national press?
Not only this, but Upton has successfully and clearly managed to demonstrate, in the space of those two sentences alone ((never mind all the other comments Upton's made). :
1 Women saying no to men is a hate crime.
2 Women speaking for themselves are exclusionary and selfish.
3 Men are whatever men say they are and women are whatever men say they are.
4 Men always know the “real reasons” for everything women do and say.
-
Women have all the rights they need: The right to remain silent.
-
Men are the default human. Women are strange subhuman others.
-
Everyone owns and controls women’s bodies except the women themselves.
I must applaud the work of Dr Upton in showing the absoluetely incredible power of the Streisand Effect in its full glory and being able to condense those complex sentiments into such a concise format. It really is quite the achievement. Dr Upton's control and command of the English language is quite the spectacle to behold.
Bravo to all and every woman, who keeps finding her own voice and daring to talk to others and centring women's feelings rather than just pandering to those of males and suppressing our own concerns.
How very dare we.
Keep talking: Dr Upton doesn't like women organising and talking amongst themselves.