From NW
NC so womens' groups trying to shut other women down for expressing those views they deserve criticism
LB speaking out is fine, but if it starts to cause reputational damage then its understandable people would want to explore
NC if women's orgs are trying to silence other women for speaking about serious
LB "I can't speak to their moral compass"
NC and BFF trying to say we can't speak about these things is "cowardly and unprincipled"
LB I don't think that was what was being said
NC it's not about women's groups tho, is it really - it's about SM speaking out about gender critical issues
LB it was that she had aligned herself with groups widely perceived to be transphobic and that troubled some people in the trans community
NC yes so it was about her alignment with view which were not approved
LB I think it can be both those things can be true - there wasn't any sense she wasn't allowed to say it. There were just aspects which clashed with the BFF's approach
NC you haven't looked me in the eye throughout all those questions
SD this is not relevant
J why asking
NC I want to know why she's doing this
J she doesn't have to. are you saying it's disrespectful
NC her demeanour is part of her evidence
J [to LB] do you want to comment on this
SD interjects - it's common for a witness not to look
LB I'm just trying to think clearly
J do you want to make an application
NC I don't want the tribunal to make her look me in the eye - I'm just drawing it to the tribunals attn
NC we don't tend to make free with crit of our friends - there is the right time
LB yes
NC but it's not true friendship to watch your friends behaving badly and say nothing
LB that seems subjective
NC and at the political scale where we say our friends are our friends and no matter how badly they behaved we're not going to crit them
LB the groups were groups the BFF had been working with for some time
NC so that means it's okay not to crit them
LB "complaints were received... they had not been investigated as to their validity. That was to come"
NC groups don't like being criticised and if they are crit they may complain, but it doesn't nec mean anyone has done anything wrong
LB it meant they needed to be investigated, I don't think anyone had made a judgment that anyone had done anything wrong
NC for Alliance for Choice to join in an effort to "drown out women's voices" was "deplorable"
LB no I don;t know why they did it
NC and if one of your employees took issue with it - it should be brushed off
LB no- complaints should be investigated
NC if your friends are going to abandon you for speakig the truth according to your conscience - they're not friends worth having"
LB I would say probably not
NC arts are important
LB yes of course they're important
NC and it's important for an org like BFF to have integrity
LB complaints and been received and they had to be looked at as part of an investigation
NC turning to the chronology (chron) - this first came to your attn at 4 May board meeting
LB yes
NC then MD sent an email on 5 May
NC you saw that the same day
NC you say at par 4 of your WS "The Respondent organisation has a
long-standing reputation for supporting LGBTQ+ rights, therefore I was worried that
Belfast Film Festival would suffer consequences."
NC should the tribunal conclude from that that you fear that by speaking at LWS, SM would seem to be opposing LGBTQ+ rights
LB potentially
NC that seems to be what you're saying there - there's something that might damage that rep
LB yes
NC and that's what's borne out by her critics [NC takes her to the bundle. Ruth McCarthy 4 July email "In April this year, Sara Morrison, Equality and Inclusion Officer for Belfast Film Festival who you have copied in here, spoke openly
at an anti-trans event in Belfast. She spoke on the same platform as Jolene Bunting, a Britain First fascist who is proudly anti gay, anti abortion, anti Catholic and anti migrant. Jolene Bunting was also recently taken to court by local gay drag performer and regular Outburst contributor Matthew Cavan, who she labelled as a paedophile and harassed
repeatedly while encouraging others to do the same.
In addition to legitimising an anti-gay fascist, Sara stood on the
same platform and legitimised anti trans campaigner Posie Parker, who organised the event. Posie Parker is an anti queer crusader who has been touring her circus around the world and building anti trans sentiment that has caused and continues to cause massive damage, not only trans people but
to LGBT people across the board and especially those living in the most precarious economic and political circumstances.
The anti-trans and anti-LGBT discourse that is perpetuated by
events such as the one that Sara lent her voice to, are impacting on the safety and well-being of real people. We have worked with vulnerable trans and queer people
and lesbian women in 27 countries globally who are being
battered by this growing rightwing discourse, human beings
who are our friends, family, team members, arts network, our
support and people we love. At Outburst we see every day the
damage that this discourse is responsible for and it is terrifying. I will always champion freedom of expression and freedom of speech, especially in art, and have no interest in silencing intelligent open discourse. There is however a world of difference between generous, kind and brave space for
exchange - a space that we work hard for Outburst to be - and
legitimising and adding to dangerous and damaging anti
LGBT rhetoric. To receive an email where Sara is
included as someone we are invited to organise an LGBT event with on behalf of Belfast Film Festival, feels deeply
inappropriate. We unreservedly applaud Pride’s decision this year to centre trans rights. We are in this together or we are
lost. Things have become too dangerous and if we are not part
of the solution, not part of intelligently building trust, kindness and solidarity instead of firing up division like Sara has
done, then we are part of the problem."