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

NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #19

1000 replies

nauticant · 14/02/2025 18:06

Sandie Peggie, a nurse at Victoria Hospital in Kirkcaldy (VH), has brought claims in the employment tribunal against her employer; Fife Health Board (the Board) and another employee, Dr B Upton. Ms Peggie’s claims are of sexual harassment, harassment related to a protected belief, indirect discrimination and victimisation. Dr Upton claims to be a transwoman, that is observed as male at birth but asserting a female gender identity.

The Employment Tribunal hearing started on Monday 3 February 2025 and was expected to continue for 2 weeks. However, after 2 weeks it was not complete and it adjourned part-heard. It seems that it will resume on 16 July and the last day of evidence will be 28 July but it wasn't completely clear whether it might end a day or two later.

The hearing commenced with Sandie Peggie giving evidence. Dr Beth Upton gave evidence from Thursday 6 February to Wednesday 12 February.

Access to view the hearing remotely was obtainable by sending an email request to [email protected] headed Public Access Request (Peggie v Fife Health Board) 4104864/2024 and requesting access.

However, as a result of problems with the livestreaming, apparently caused by a very large number of observers, remote public access to the hearing was suspended on Tuesday 11 February. It was suggested that it might be reinstated at some point but don't count on it.

The hearing is being live tweeted by https://x.com/tribunaltweets and there's additional information here: https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr. This also has threadreaderapp archives of live-tweeting of the sessions of the hearing for those who can't follow on Twitter, for example: archive.is/xkSxy.

An alternative to Twitter is to use Nitter: https://nitter.poast.org/tribunaltweets

Thread 1: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5186317-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse
Thread 2: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5267591-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-thread-2
Thread 3: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5268347-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-3
Thread 4: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5268942-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-4
Thread 5: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5269149-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-5
Thread 6: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5269635-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-6
Thread 7: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5270365-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-7
Thread 8: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271511-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-8
Thread 9: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271596-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-9
Thread 10: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271723-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-10
Thread 11: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272046-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-11
Thread 12: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272276-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-12
Thread 13: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272398-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-13
Thread 14: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272939-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-14
Thread 15: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5273119-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-15
Thread 16: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5273636-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-16
Thread 17: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5273827-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-17
Thread 18: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5274332-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-18

OP posts:
Thread gallery
15
UnhappyAndYouKnowIt · 15/02/2025 09:33

Peregrina · 15/02/2025 09:06

To signal that DEI is important

In which case let's have fully qualified people in the jobs who know the Equalities legislation inside out and know that it's not just opinions about a person's "gender", which is covered.

As it stands they are making a mockery of it.

It upsets me that the whole of DEI has been consumed by gender ideology, when it's a much needed resource. People from some cultures are at a much greater risk of some illnesses and are much less likely to be able to access support. If we can raise awareness within those communities, we can reduce the risk of disease or offer support before conditions become severe. That's what DEI is supposed to be about--getting the best outcomes for everyone.

In the same way that a great deal of medical research is focused on symptoms and outcomes for men, to the detriment of women, medical advice is also geared very much towards Western culture. Information is only available in English, and assumes that everyone can read. Specialised diet information is in English and based entirely on a Western diet.

We can't reduce the levels of diabetes (and subsequent dementia) in communities of South Asian descent by advising substitutions that only fit within a Western diet. Cooking and eating together is a key part of the culture, so you have to work within the culture to find solutions.

Sorry, I know that's a sidetrack. I just feel worried that backlash against DEI as a whole because of gender ideology, could mean people from disadvantaged groups will be worse off.

guinnessguzzler · 15/02/2025 09:38

Agree completely @UnhappyAndYouKnowIt

Theeyeballsinthesky · 15/02/2025 09:38

Eliminating DEI just to stop men who pretend to be women from having access to female spaces is baby out with bath water stuff

we know women’s health problems are still not well understood or managed by the NHS because so much research is still done on the male body as default, we know black women have worse maternity outcomes than white women, we know ppl with learning disabilities take up of screening is magnitudes lower than those without

what we need is DEI that is fit for purpose and doing what is meant too, helping the genuinely disadvantaged access services rather than flag waving for the articulate middle class who claim oppression because they’re NB

thenosiesttermagant · 15/02/2025 09:40

DeanElderberry · 15/02/2025 08:28

I get the impression that Sandie Peggie committed three crimes, one: claiming her legal right to a female-only changing space, two: declining to play 'let's pretend' with a little emperor and the imperial entourage, three: possibly worst, putting making sure the hospital's work was done properly according to protocols.

DU needing to be the centre of everyone's attention was the most important thing for some of those involved.

Yes I think the thing that's missing from Jonathan Brown's analysis upthread (perhaps because it can't be proven but seems obvious to me) is that NHS fife actively CHOSE to put Upton's wants and desire for dominance over the law, privacy/dignity/safety of women, over patient care/health and a functioning workplace.

They CHOSE to create an atmosphere where someone not looking at a trans person the way the trans person wants was considered a more urgent concern, that should take up more staff time and resources, than patient safety. This is a massive failure of governance and appropriate professional behaviour across the whole department at least if not the whole hospital. They are simply not fit for purpose if this is how they are running things. How many patients have been harmed as a result?

But really, lets face it, 'trans' status is just the thing Upton is using as a tool to abuse, exercise dominance and coercively control. And senior, well paid management in the NHS fell for it hook line and sinker and the entire NHS management structure went along with that coercive control.

As many PP have said, normal transsexuals aren't like this. Many (most?) recognise their immutable sex as a fact - that's why they're 'trans' - otherwise what are they transitioning from? It's the new gender ideology which is inherently disrespectful and abusive, where kindness and respect only goes one way and where everyone else has to pretend they don't see the world as they do (ignoring their own 'lived experience') and bow down before the fantasies of men like Upton. Where only one point of view matters and everyone else has to comply or be harmed - preferably destroyed as they tried to do to Sandie Peggie.

Bunpea · 15/02/2025 09:43

Yes, it is a mystery how IB got the job. She wasn’t qualified for it. Fife need to look at this.

in large private sector companies I know, the DEI function is part of, and kept within, HR. I think this is helpful.

RedToothBrush · 15/02/2025 09:44

I'm going to quote this as it's such an important point and it's the one that locks into British politics over the last decade or so in multiple ways.

The employment tribunal, which will continue into the summer because of NHS Fife’s inability to produce essential documents in time, has not only exposed the nebulous nature of gender identity theory – that a human being can change their sex through sheer will – but the ingrained class divide at the heart of the NHS that also characterises the debate around gender.

Gender identity theory is largely a middle-class pursuit, a fake radicalism which doesn't bother its pretty little head with tackling the material causes of poverty and inequality. Instead, as feminist writer Sheila Jeffries argued in 2014, it is a social construct designed to maintain male dominance. And since its inception, the National Health Service has put the demands of the doctor class first before the needs of the largely working-class nursing and support staff.

Middle-class arrogance
Former Labour MSP Jenny Marra, who attended the tribunal over several days, said the evidence reeked of class and entitlement. She observed: "Middle-class arrogant male doctor breaches nurse's boundaries is not a new story. But this time the doctor is facing down the nurse with the backing of politicians and illegal guidelines drawn up by public sector officials who have been hoodwinked into betraying reality and the many working-class women at the frontline of our public services.”

It is not surprising that middle-class professionals, whether doctors, HR managers or even politicians, have found comfort in the simplistic politics of identity. How much easier it is to pin a trans ally badge on a set of scrubs or business suit than begin to tackle the centuries’ old structural issues that trap millions of women in low-paid jobs, poor housing and ill-health, often at risk of sexual violence and abuse.

Sandie didn't go to her union for support at a key moment. Why? Because she knew her union wouldn't support her on this issue.

Time and again we see this pattern of those with power and influence denying an issue and saying there's no evince of an issue.

But they also get to gate keep and decide what constitutes evidence and what doesn't - like Upton did.

I've said this on various themes over the years in various ways: absence of evidence does not indicate an absence of a problem. It might mean you just aren't quantifying something that might be starring you in the face and there's the temptation for those in power to be dismissive as a result. But it doesn't stop a problem if you deny it.

Some examples of this: my classic MN one - Bounty. The NHS denied there was an issue because they didn't have complaints even though if you looked in here there were hundreds. They were blind to the problem and didn't want to acknowledge it and they had a conflict of interest over it. They didn't want to acknowledge the inappropriateness of facilitating high pressure sales tactics in a ward setting nor how this raised questions over dubious consent through undue pressure.

Ditto maternity care across the board.

Then we have Brexit - and one of the things the leave campaign tapped into was this sense of public sector waste and this middle class prioritisation and punching down. Dominic Cummings had it firmly in his sights long before Elon has come along in the US to try to do the same. I think people are forgetting what happened here, has hugely influenced what has subsequently happened in the US not the other way round. Now that is starting to reverse some what. But the seeds of this, didn't come from the likes of Trump leading the way. There was a huge amount of public dissatisfaction and concern that the Leave campaign recognised could be tapped into and collectively become an anti status quo / anti establishment vote rather than actual being anything to the European Union as such.

Now despite having left the EU, many of the actual issues that led to people voting for Brexit have not even been looked at. That's why support for the Tories to 'deliver Brexit' has collapsed. Cos it never really was about leaving the EU in so many respects. And these underlying issues of discontent remain.

Labour isn't doing a great job of identifying this.

Gender identity or more correctly, EDI stuff was one of these issues. When you look at polling of world views for voters from the referendum a few of the startling things is how polarised views were between pro-brexit and anti-brexit voters on subjects relating to anything which falls broadly under the umbrella of progressive activism.

It's widely been put down to, by middle class types, as regressive and bigoted views.

In reality I think it's more complex than that - it's been a concern about virtue signalling and performative issues being prioritised to the neglect of practical everyday boring functional concerns with a hell of a lot of money spent on looking good rather than dealing with systematic problems people face daily but have been neglected.

And that's what has allowed the rise of Trump and the re-emergance of Farage.

And that's not going to go away.

That's why discussions over why we have EDI departments taking precedence over the legal department and acting against the HR department are important. And why looking at how inexperienced highly paid graduates who have been conditioned by ideology over understanding of matters of law which protect junior members of staff are important.

What is apparent is despite EDI supposedly being about recognising the invisibility and lack of voice of certain groups the reality is EDI has successfully been used as a way to silence others at the expense of actual equality. It's been used to preserve the status and power of the middle classes and their beliefs over the working class rather than for what it claims to stand for.

Now I'm middle class and I was pro remain. And I wouldn't vote for Farage (or Trump if I could) in a million years. Because I know and see what they are.

But I have been saying a lot of this stuff about class since before the referendum. And it's only becoming more and more apparent in terms of a failure to listen to people without power about the problems and concerns they face on a daily basis.

This is why gender v sex isn't going to vanish in a puff of smoke. Because underneath all of it is the sheer level of sexism and sexual abuse based on sex that women see and feel and experience on a daily basis.

The trans argument sits on the corner point of class issues and sex based issues and outside typical left v right politics but very much within authoritarian existing power v incoming authoritarian power battles. That's why it's so pivotal. It has implications and ramifications far beyond 'just wanting to pee'. It is about who controls access to women in many respects. And women are not being allowed to say 'oh well actually I'm fighting for myself and to hell with both groups trying to use this area to control me'. And the media facilitate this dynamic because ultimately they are not separate from authority because they ARE that authority.

There's various grass roots groups out there on all manner of subjects who have sprung up in this climate of dissatisfaction and these two new centres of power are competing for ownership of them.

This is why I find individual voices and the grass roots stuff that MN is very good at allowing to flourish independently so important and compelling.

I think this Scotsman article is so hugely important for all these reasons. It gets to grips with many aspects of how and why we are at the point we are.

I post in the hope that it helps to get others to have the penny drop in terms of how it all joins up and fits into ongoing much broader political changes.

Unless Labour sees this problem as it is, not as they want it to be, it will haunt them until the next election and it WILL cost them dear. To put it bluntly constituency demographics don't favour them well enough to sit on their hands and do nothing.

For whatever reason that motivates him, Streeting sees this very clearly indeed and I find that fascinating in its own right. His support for the Darlington Nurses (note Darlington) is as tactical as it is sane.

thenosiesttermagant · 15/02/2025 09:46

This reply has been hidden

This reply has been hidden until the MNHQ team can have a look at it.

RedToothBrush · 15/02/2025 09:50

NotMaroonButRaspberry · 15/02/2025 09:01

This is what is so stupid about ED saying, "I wouldn't put myself in that position. "

The whole hearing has clearly demonstrated that wherever SP went for privacy, DU could have argued he had a right to follow. Their own policy ensured that she couldn't get away. (Plus surely this would have been an "incident if avoidance."

ED demonstrates a belief that SP is beneath her and that she somehow who do things better because she's nicer and understands the issues better.

It's a form of contempt that's really quite unpleasant.

It's funny how throughout this case, just one or two sentences from the witnesses are revealing such a huge amount in such concise form.

Motorina · 15/02/2025 09:51

thenosiesttermagant · 15/02/2025 09:28

I mean it beggars belief if they could suspend SP before they'd even heard her side of the story and done an investigation but they magically CAN'T suspend DU whilst an investigation is carried out about his attitudes to female consent freely given and publicly observed in court.

I've seen the form response from the GMC and, in my professional opinion, it is - what's the word? - bollocks.

I appreciate anyone can be anyone on the internet, but I do have relevant professional experiences, albeit not with the GMC/MPTS.

Any tribunal proceedings has a lot of stages before it gets to the hearing. We've seen that with Peggie. Requirements for applications about process at various stages. Taking witness statements. Requirements for disclosure. It's only when all those are completed (or not!) that it goes to the final hearing. The GMC is the same.

It's relatively rare that a fitness to practise investigation will be raised on the same facts as an employment tribunal, but it's not uncommon for it to happen where the facts are also part of a criminal investigation. The two processes are analogous. With a criminal case, the police will investigate, and the criminal courts will wend their torturous way to a final hearing, months or years later. At the same time the regulator will:

  1. Consider whether the allegations on the face of them amount to a fitness to practise concern
  2. If so, open an investigation
  3. Gather evidence. This may include statements, contacting current or past employers to see if they have fitness to practise concerns, or seeking expert reports

Importantly, they will also consider if they need an interim order to suspend or restrict the clinician's registration to protect the public or the reputation of the profession whilst that process is ongoing.

The substantive hearing has to wait til after the criminal trial. But the substantive hearing takes a year or two to get to anyway. All of that prep stuff happens in parallel.

For Upton, the GMC could, right now:

  1. Assess whether the threshold to open an investigation is met
  2. Request transcripts
  3. Get an expert opinion on the consent concerns
  4. Seek comment on that opinion from DU via his indemnity
  5. Based on those, consider if any interim order process is needed

That they are declining to do even the first of those speaks volumes.

In addition, the GMC response suggests that it's declining to comment on the employment tribunal. Whilst I don't know what queries they were replying to, commenting on the ET would never be the GMC's role, before or after its conclusion. Their role is to investigate concerns about a doctor's fitness to practise, which they could start doing on Monday.

I suspect the GMC is working on the basis "Ohhhh it's just a bunch of wims, they won't know what they're talking about. Let's fob them off with some plausible sounding bollocks." It's just the same old misogyny in new clothes.

venuscat · 15/02/2025 09:53

I have been following the threads on the tribunal and would appreciate it if somebody can clarify the following for myself.

  1. Am I correct in saying that neither of the Fife NHS investigations into Sandie ever got to
    the conclusion stage in the sense that there was a verdict issued to Sandie? ie. Did the the instigation of the ET action by Sandie put the actual investigations on hold?

  2. Related to the above, I am sure I read somewhere that Sandie's solicitor pointed out the current law to the investigator (Not sure which one) that Fife NHS was applying the law incorrectly in respect of single sex changing rooms - Can anyone clarify this and what happened when Fifie NHS received these advices.

Thank You

Jimmyneutronsforehead · 15/02/2025 09:55

Motorina · 15/02/2025 09:51

I've seen the form response from the GMC and, in my professional opinion, it is - what's the word? - bollocks.

I appreciate anyone can be anyone on the internet, but I do have relevant professional experiences, albeit not with the GMC/MPTS.

Any tribunal proceedings has a lot of stages before it gets to the hearing. We've seen that with Peggie. Requirements for applications about process at various stages. Taking witness statements. Requirements for disclosure. It's only when all those are completed (or not!) that it goes to the final hearing. The GMC is the same.

It's relatively rare that a fitness to practise investigation will be raised on the same facts as an employment tribunal, but it's not uncommon for it to happen where the facts are also part of a criminal investigation. The two processes are analogous. With a criminal case, the police will investigate, and the criminal courts will wend their torturous way to a final hearing, months or years later. At the same time the regulator will:

  1. Consider whether the allegations on the face of them amount to a fitness to practise concern
  2. If so, open an investigation
  3. Gather evidence. This may include statements, contacting current or past employers to see if they have fitness to practise concerns, or seeking expert reports

Importantly, they will also consider if they need an interim order to suspend or restrict the clinician's registration to protect the public or the reputation of the profession whilst that process is ongoing.

The substantive hearing has to wait til after the criminal trial. But the substantive hearing takes a year or two to get to anyway. All of that prep stuff happens in parallel.

For Upton, the GMC could, right now:

  1. Assess whether the threshold to open an investigation is met
  2. Request transcripts
  3. Get an expert opinion on the consent concerns
  4. Seek comment on that opinion from DU via his indemnity
  5. Based on those, consider if any interim order process is needed

That they are declining to do even the first of those speaks volumes.

In addition, the GMC response suggests that it's declining to comment on the employment tribunal. Whilst I don't know what queries they were replying to, commenting on the ET would never be the GMC's role, before or after its conclusion. Their role is to investigate concerns about a doctor's fitness to practise, which they could start doing on Monday.

I suspect the GMC is working on the basis "Ohhhh it's just a bunch of wims, they won't know what they're talking about. Let's fob them off with some plausible sounding bollocks." It's just the same old misogyny in new clothes.

Is there a higher power than the GMC that can be called into question as to GMCs questionable tactics to avoid doing their due diligence?

thenosiesttermagant · 15/02/2025 09:55

RedToothBrush · 15/02/2025 09:44

I'm going to quote this as it's such an important point and it's the one that locks into British politics over the last decade or so in multiple ways.

The employment tribunal, which will continue into the summer because of NHS Fife’s inability to produce essential documents in time, has not only exposed the nebulous nature of gender identity theory – that a human being can change their sex through sheer will – but the ingrained class divide at the heart of the NHS that also characterises the debate around gender.

Gender identity theory is largely a middle-class pursuit, a fake radicalism which doesn't bother its pretty little head with tackling the material causes of poverty and inequality. Instead, as feminist writer Sheila Jeffries argued in 2014, it is a social construct designed to maintain male dominance. And since its inception, the National Health Service has put the demands of the doctor class first before the needs of the largely working-class nursing and support staff.

Middle-class arrogance
Former Labour MSP Jenny Marra, who attended the tribunal over several days, said the evidence reeked of class and entitlement. She observed: "Middle-class arrogant male doctor breaches nurse's boundaries is not a new story. But this time the doctor is facing down the nurse with the backing of politicians and illegal guidelines drawn up by public sector officials who have been hoodwinked into betraying reality and the many working-class women at the frontline of our public services.”

It is not surprising that middle-class professionals, whether doctors, HR managers or even politicians, have found comfort in the simplistic politics of identity. How much easier it is to pin a trans ally badge on a set of scrubs or business suit than begin to tackle the centuries’ old structural issues that trap millions of women in low-paid jobs, poor housing and ill-health, often at risk of sexual violence and abuse.

Sandie didn't go to her union for support at a key moment. Why? Because she knew her union wouldn't support her on this issue.

Time and again we see this pattern of those with power and influence denying an issue and saying there's no evince of an issue.

But they also get to gate keep and decide what constitutes evidence and what doesn't - like Upton did.

I've said this on various themes over the years in various ways: absence of evidence does not indicate an absence of a problem. It might mean you just aren't quantifying something that might be starring you in the face and there's the temptation for those in power to be dismissive as a result. But it doesn't stop a problem if you deny it.

Some examples of this: my classic MN one - Bounty. The NHS denied there was an issue because they didn't have complaints even though if you looked in here there were hundreds. They were blind to the problem and didn't want to acknowledge it and they had a conflict of interest over it. They didn't want to acknowledge the inappropriateness of facilitating high pressure sales tactics in a ward setting nor how this raised questions over dubious consent through undue pressure.

Ditto maternity care across the board.

Then we have Brexit - and one of the things the leave campaign tapped into was this sense of public sector waste and this middle class prioritisation and punching down. Dominic Cummings had it firmly in his sights long before Elon has come along in the US to try to do the same. I think people are forgetting what happened here, has hugely influenced what has subsequently happened in the US not the other way round. Now that is starting to reverse some what. But the seeds of this, didn't come from the likes of Trump leading the way. There was a huge amount of public dissatisfaction and concern that the Leave campaign recognised could be tapped into and collectively become an anti status quo / anti establishment vote rather than actual being anything to the European Union as such.

Now despite having left the EU, many of the actual issues that led to people voting for Brexit have not even been looked at. That's why support for the Tories to 'deliver Brexit' has collapsed. Cos it never really was about leaving the EU in so many respects. And these underlying issues of discontent remain.

Labour isn't doing a great job of identifying this.

Gender identity or more correctly, EDI stuff was one of these issues. When you look at polling of world views for voters from the referendum a few of the startling things is how polarised views were between pro-brexit and anti-brexit voters on subjects relating to anything which falls broadly under the umbrella of progressive activism.

It's widely been put down to, by middle class types, as regressive and bigoted views.

In reality I think it's more complex than that - it's been a concern about virtue signalling and performative issues being prioritised to the neglect of practical everyday boring functional concerns with a hell of a lot of money spent on looking good rather than dealing with systematic problems people face daily but have been neglected.

And that's what has allowed the rise of Trump and the re-emergance of Farage.

And that's not going to go away.

That's why discussions over why we have EDI departments taking precedence over the legal department and acting against the HR department are important. And why looking at how inexperienced highly paid graduates who have been conditioned by ideology over understanding of matters of law which protect junior members of staff are important.

What is apparent is despite EDI supposedly being about recognising the invisibility and lack of voice of certain groups the reality is EDI has successfully been used as a way to silence others at the expense of actual equality. It's been used to preserve the status and power of the middle classes and their beliefs over the working class rather than for what it claims to stand for.

Now I'm middle class and I was pro remain. And I wouldn't vote for Farage (or Trump if I could) in a million years. Because I know and see what they are.

But I have been saying a lot of this stuff about class since before the referendum. And it's only becoming more and more apparent in terms of a failure to listen to people without power about the problems and concerns they face on a daily basis.

This is why gender v sex isn't going to vanish in a puff of smoke. Because underneath all of it is the sheer level of sexism and sexual abuse based on sex that women see and feel and experience on a daily basis.

The trans argument sits on the corner point of class issues and sex based issues and outside typical left v right politics but very much within authoritarian existing power v incoming authoritarian power battles. That's why it's so pivotal. It has implications and ramifications far beyond 'just wanting to pee'. It is about who controls access to women in many respects. And women are not being allowed to say 'oh well actually I'm fighting for myself and to hell with both groups trying to use this area to control me'. And the media facilitate this dynamic because ultimately they are not separate from authority because they ARE that authority.

There's various grass roots groups out there on all manner of subjects who have sprung up in this climate of dissatisfaction and these two new centres of power are competing for ownership of them.

This is why I find individual voices and the grass roots stuff that MN is very good at allowing to flourish independently so important and compelling.

I think this Scotsman article is so hugely important for all these reasons. It gets to grips with many aspects of how and why we are at the point we are.

I post in the hope that it helps to get others to have the penny drop in terms of how it all joins up and fits into ongoing much broader political changes.

Unless Labour sees this problem as it is, not as they want it to be, it will haunt them until the next election and it WILL cost them dear. To put it bluntly constituency demographics don't favour them well enough to sit on their hands and do nothing.

For whatever reason that motivates him, Streeting sees this very clearly indeed and I find that fascinating in its own right. His support for the Darlington Nurses (note Darlington) is as tactical as it is sane.

Great post Red.

as feminist writer Sheila Jeffries argued in 2014, it is a social construct designed to maintain male dominance Spot on.

And this
What is apparent is despite EDI supposedly being about recognising the invisibility and lack of voice of certain groups the reality is EDI has successfully been used as a way to silence others at the expense of actual equality. It's been used to preserve the status and power of the middle classes and their beliefs over the working class rather than for what it claims to stand for

I mean why the hell is the very young IB, with no apparent ability to even google what the actual law is around changing rooms and without the sense to involve HR and NHS legal, earning as much as a clinically trained nurse with 30 years experience? Because they're a middle class gender zealot? Bonkers! This NEEDS TO STOP. I'm sure IB has time to retrain and get some actual skills, perhaps learning from her current experience.

NebulousHog · 15/02/2025 09:55

IB isn't a manager, she's an officer, and she may not have written the policies.

Does anyone have an EDI staff structure for Fife?

anyolddinosaur · 15/02/2025 09:56

@ConstructionTime Thank you, some interesting pictures there.

RedToothBrush · 15/02/2025 09:58

UnhappyAndYouKnowIt · 15/02/2025 09:33

It upsets me that the whole of DEI has been consumed by gender ideology, when it's a much needed resource. People from some cultures are at a much greater risk of some illnesses and are much less likely to be able to access support. If we can raise awareness within those communities, we can reduce the risk of disease or offer support before conditions become severe. That's what DEI is supposed to be about--getting the best outcomes for everyone.

In the same way that a great deal of medical research is focused on symptoms and outcomes for men, to the detriment of women, medical advice is also geared very much towards Western culture. Information is only available in English, and assumes that everyone can read. Specialised diet information is in English and based entirely on a Western diet.

We can't reduce the levels of diabetes (and subsequent dementia) in communities of South Asian descent by advising substitutions that only fit within a Western diet. Cooking and eating together is a key part of the culture, so you have to work within the culture to find solutions.

Sorry, I know that's a sidetrack. I just feel worried that backlash against DEI as a whole because of gender ideology, could mean people from disadvantaged groups will be worse off.

I actually agree with that.

The trouble is DEI has become a vehicle for protecting the interests of some groups with efforts put into silencing others as part of that, rather than representing all groups and trying to listen to all groups.

It put a value on each voice, rather than making them equal.

And ultimately that's become a tool for safe middle class job protection and gatekeeping.

It's fallen foul of the same thing that's happened in a lot of the charity sector - where money is raised to support the jobs within the charity - rather than serving to improve things for those who the charity claims it centres (hello Stonewall).

No wonder in an era of cost of living concerns it's really hitting a nerve.

AlisonDonut · 15/02/2025 09:59

venuscat · 15/02/2025 09:53

I have been following the threads on the tribunal and would appreciate it if somebody can clarify the following for myself.

  1. Am I correct in saying that neither of the Fife NHS investigations into Sandie ever got to
    the conclusion stage in the sense that there was a verdict issued to Sandie? ie. Did the the instigation of the ET action by Sandie put the actual investigations on hold?

  2. Related to the above, I am sure I read somewhere that Sandie's solicitor pointed out the current law to the investigator (Not sure which one) that Fife NHS was applying the law incorrectly in respect of single sex changing rooms - Can anyone clarify this and what happened when Fifie NHS received these advices.

Thank You

The only thing we know is that Sandie's solicitor wrote the letter and then the discussion dissolved into 'it was/wasn't even an investigation' and hasn't been brought up again.

I think the woman that wrote it is the one sat next to NC [she is certainly on the lgeal team] so I'm sure they won't be forgetting about it. If needed.

No idea if the 'investigation' was ever completed, no.

JasmineAllen · 15/02/2025 09:59

SqueakyDinosaur · 15/02/2025 09:04

Swerving slightly I listened to the Employment Law Matters podcast episode with NC recently (the one where she talks about her mother working at Bletchley Park). One of the things that struck me was that she is so posh that she had no idea who Bungle (the hippo on Rainbow) was. No ITV for little Naomi!

Bungle was the weird giant man bear. (Camp) George was the Hippo !!!

DeanElderberry · 15/02/2025 10:00

To me the gender debate is entangled with a clash between reality - sexed bodies - and an imagined gendered identity that many of us do not have.

Suppose an issue arose in a hospital in Scotland where the two parties both had an identity based on ideas, principles, a sense of self and a sense of community. One a Catholic, one a Protestant.

The class and connections in this could work out either way - Masons, Orange Order, versus Catholic charity groups. Either or both could be well-placed on the hospitals board.

Both Doctor and nurse in this the same sex. The Doctor committed to their belief system and using their connections to further their own ends, the nurse aware of their roots but putting patients and the job first.

If the row was about territory, football scarfs, leaking into views on reproductive rights and who gets which days off in a busy schedule with a side order of assumptions about class and education, and it threatened to disrupt work. And the Doctor started to get vindictive and to invent fantasy situations that proved them right and the nurse wrong.

How, then would the hospital manage those people? Not realist versus believer, but believer versus believer?

RedToothBrush · 15/02/2025 10:00

Also note.

Gender identity took off just as social mobility came to a grinding halt.

GargoylesofBeelzebub · 15/02/2025 10:01

This is quite amusing

technicallyhuman.substack.com/p/a-courtroom-drama

Motorina · 15/02/2025 10:04

Jimmyneutronsforehead · 15/02/2025 09:55

Is there a higher power than the GMC that can be called into question as to GMCs questionable tactics to avoid doing their due diligence?

The Professional Standards Authority oversees all the healthcare regulators but I don't think they take appeals from members of the public about individual decisions. If the GMC investigated and went through the full process to an MPTS decision, then the PSA could in theory appeal that decision. They do that in a small number of cases each year, primarily on the grounds that any sanction was too lenient. But that doesn't help now.

I am pretty sure the decision would be challengable by judicial review, but that's an uninformed opinion as that's way outside my professional competence. You'd also need very deep (six figure deep) pockets.

So practically in real terms no, unfortunately.

Needspaceforlego · 15/02/2025 10:04

fanOfBen · 15/02/2025 08:18

NC hammered home the point yesterday that nurses have to change at work - considered unacceptable to travel on a bus in scrubs for example, for hygiene reasons. Similarly with toilet cubicles. They could have traipsed to the basement place at the end of every shift, but if they'd all done that, so would Upton have done.

Totally agree. And sometimes they need to get changed mid-shift.

I had my second baby in a WTF sort of moment. Nobody was ready for it. The MW did a wonderful job of catching baby but got covered in everything in the process! She went to get changed as soon as practically possible.

I can only imagine in A&E they get covered in lots of bodily fluids, as much as they try to avoid it. But it must happen.

Merrymouse · 15/02/2025 10:04

UnhappyAndYouKnowIt · 15/02/2025 09:33

It upsets me that the whole of DEI has been consumed by gender ideology, when it's a much needed resource. People from some cultures are at a much greater risk of some illnesses and are much less likely to be able to access support. If we can raise awareness within those communities, we can reduce the risk of disease or offer support before conditions become severe. That's what DEI is supposed to be about--getting the best outcomes for everyone.

In the same way that a great deal of medical research is focused on symptoms and outcomes for men, to the detriment of women, medical advice is also geared very much towards Western culture. Information is only available in English, and assumes that everyone can read. Specialised diet information is in English and based entirely on a Western diet.

We can't reduce the levels of diabetes (and subsequent dementia) in communities of South Asian descent by advising substitutions that only fit within a Western diet. Cooking and eating together is a key part of the culture, so you have to work within the culture to find solutions.

Sorry, I know that's a sidetrack. I just feel worried that backlash against DEI as a whole because of gender ideology, could mean people from disadvantaged groups will be worse off.

Yes. I think the problem is that DEI has been colonised by interest groups who ignore the law, so it's just a different kind of old school tie.

However if, for instance, you want to protect all beliefs that are WORIAD, or ensure that women have adequate toilet provision in public spaces, you need a structure to express that. You could rebrand the concept as something else, but effectively it would still be DEI.

Chrysanthemum5 · 15/02/2025 10:05

Mountaingoat23 · 14/02/2025 23:41

If Kate Searle keeps hold of her job long enough for it to matter, then the July hearing is the worst possible time for her. She is the clinical lead for the annual clinical fellow programme that brings in up to 18 speciality doctors who do a 12 month contract with them. And it starts at the beginning of August when doctors in training begin their new rotation.

So if KS maintains her current role, she has to try to recruit those doctors to the programme over the next few months, with the shameful knowledge hanging in the air that she is now named as a co-respondent at the ET, alongside the Class of '24 Prize Clown Upton. And then she spends a humiliating fortnight in court, and returns to face the new cohort at their induction, all while waiting for the judgment. And she brought so much of it on herself.

It's hard to see how that's survivable, in career terms. Except that they can't sack everyone because A&E never closes.

I think KS will be quietly moved to another role to avoid that happening.

Crouton19 · 15/02/2025 10:06

@RedToothBrush I agree with that but would just pause on the use of 'middle class' here there and everywhere (not just on Mumsnet). It is a term so vague and a category so large as to be meaningless, particularly in this century where electricians earn more than teachers and class is very often self-identified. I wonder if there is a more accurate term, as we debate the usage of man, TW or TIM?

Please create an account

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

This thread is not accepting new messages.