Sara Morrison v BFF - thread 5

[SexRealistic]

https://genderblog.net/sara-morrison-v-belfast-film-festival/

SD must be hating NC right now.

..or as a fellow-professional, admiringly thinking
'Damn, she good!' 😄

From NW

NC the SSP issue is one of a number of matters which would not land a claim, but in respect of the other ways the R treated C and in response to each other too - keys, taking C off shared drive, putting her on SSP - all of those capable of an innocent expl but taken together

... incl no steps towards OH referral evince a settled view that SM was no longer part of the org and did not need to be treated like a normal employee. These relatively small acts of exclusion combine to suggest SM was being pushed out.

My impression has been that they have been running away from facing this as fast as their legs will carry them.
Well, hard luck.

Thank you! It feels a lot better xx

From NW

NC C was put on to SSP because she was no longer seen as a valued employee. If they valued her they would not do this nor would they take so long before referring her to OH.
NC turns to what SD calls the "foolish error" of failing to send C her work password.

From NW

[sorry that was MD failing to send C her password]
NC on the same day MD sent the password to the wrong email account, she made sure the TP person - Bethany O'Neill - sent her message to SM's gmail account. The clear explanation is that MD was deliberately deprving SM from access

If that's how it happened, that really is spiteful.

Even if it was a foolish error to begin with, MD did nothing to rectify the issue once she became aware, except hiding it in the SAR response documents.

.

Do we know if other e-mails had been sent to SM's g-mail account?

Most e-mail clients will pickup addresses that you have used before once you have typed in the first few characters. Sending to the wrong address would require that you physically typed in the wrong address and ignored any auto-complete feature.

From NW

... to her work email as "part of the process of shutting her out"
it is particularly dismaying that MD says after putting SM's email password into a bundle as part of her SAR response and then when she finally sent the password in November, telling SM she had already sent it to her in July and October.
"that is the sort of behaviour that is commonly referred to as gaslighting - telling people lies" and indicating that it was their fault when something goes wrong. to do that to an employee who was off sick with mental health issues was a shockingly cynical and cruel thing for Ms Devlin to do and her evidence on this point was particularly unsatisfying

NC Gender Identity Theory is novel and so counter-factual it can only be sustained by shaming and silence - you can call on your own experience and knowledge that sex realism and gender critical belief - if there had been an age old discussion about whether men can become...

Yes, indeed. Agreed.

And the October issue of putting the password in the bundle is bang to rights.

This is really nasty behaviour.

Lunch. Back at 2.

I don't think we know, although we can deduce at least that MD knew SM's gmail address. However, clearly MD would have emailed SM at her work address plenty of times before, so it seems plausible that that would have been the top or most automatic auto-complete; I don't find the initial mistake all that implausible - she could have done it by genuine mistake, and only then realised she could make use of it. It's the rest of the gaslighting that is shocking.

NC is spelling it out loud and clear. If the tribunal doesn't find for SM then there really is something rotten going on.

From NW

... women and women can become men just by saying so, there would be a history of that discussion going back decades. There isn't.

[NC ends - some disco about when to reconvene. SD says he has quite a bit to say and with qs and responses we could be going through till 4pm. Decision made to break for lunch back at 2pm]

Like having your homework graded in front of the whole class by the most thorough and no-nonsense professor (a real one, obvs)

edited for autocarrot

Any insights @ProfessorBinturong ?

I’ve a few questions if I may.

• why does the BFF not list its board of directors
• where would one find their accounts
• their website is woefully deficient on who their people are and what they do, is this normal or am I looking in the wrong place

Since we're doing Bohemian Rhapsody mishearings:

Is this the real life? Is this just Battersea?

Thank you Myrtle!

Agree, I don't think that we have been told where the message was sent in error. I guess that it could have been sent to the work e-mail that SM could not get access to.

Equally, if the rest is clearly gaslighting then sending mail to the wrong address may well be a deliberate start to the process

That's for the transcribing AND for sharing the Esoteric Code of the Bigly Letters - I will use it with wisdom, caution and restraint😏

I am pretty sure we were told it was indeed sent to the very email address that SM did not have access to!

Have to say also, to my mind the most shocking part of the whole thing is that anyone knew anyone else's password!