Sara Morrison v BFF - thread 5

[SexRealistic]

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

You had three drinks?

Thank you for the lovely photo!
Your username, plus the BFF system of numbers, has reminded me of the
'counting out' rhyme we used when we were kids:
One potato, two potatoes, three potatoes, four
Five potatoes, six potatoes, seven potatoes, more

Note that even though we were children, our numbering system was already more sophisticated than the BFF's, we went up to seven before employing 'more' or 'many'

A modern version which may have been more relevant to you last night is
One tequila, two tequilas, three tequilas, four
Five tequilas, six tequilas, seven tequilas - floor!

Take it easy, and I hope nobody posts anything in bigly shouty letters until your head is better🤕
Here's a nice comforting cuppa:

I'm not optimistic about this. The conspiracy at the heart of the case is hard to believe and/or prove. It's a risky move to provoke your partners into complaining. Making things worse to have an excuse to fire SM just seems self defeating in terms of the organisation's reputation. Although that list of who was cc'd in does seem very random, but that's not much to go on. There's also the accusations of quite big lies coming from both MD and SM about each other. One of them sounds barking mad, but I'm not sure which.

So how fangirly would it be to print off that photo and pop it in a little frame ? Would my adult kids, who think I’m bigoted, spot it?

That’s ok - you probably missed a lot of the evidence.

Sara sent 11 LGBT email addresses to Michele. Michele said she agreed the list with Sara but that was a lie. When Sara left the office she sent the email to 49 email accounts. Lots of randoms - not LGBT but the women’s groups Sara called out at LWS.

Oh and then what happened?

Outburst Arts complained thrice: once via CEO on official work account, via another Outbrust employee on a Gmail account and via a Rainbow Trust account who forwarded on a ‘service user’ email who in 2023 was an Outburst producer and film maker and added ‘hope this helps’ to the email.

It helped cover up they were all directly from Outburst coincidentally.

Quite the overkill as they only have two or three employees at any given time.

Was Outburst Arts a treasured partner you ask? Oh no, they hadn’t actually worked together.

Why you ask? Well Michele Devlin was on the Outburst board from 2010 until 2012 - during that period she stepped down. Why? Oh because according to evidence in court she got off with Ruth McCarthys girlfriend and she now lives with her some 14 years on.

But having a back channel would help if indeed there was an alleged conspiracy.

That’s for the Judge to decide on the evidence.

Personnel Today has a 'you may also like' recommendation slider where this interesting article flashed up (once):
https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/lgbtq-is-not-one-big-happy-acronym-lgb-inclusion/

[SD] He misrepresented SMs speech, saying she'd called the named women's groups a 'racket' when she'd actually said that about the tendency of causes in general.

I went back and read what SM actually said:
They say they represent women but women with different and equally legitimate views. Women who do not believe the sacred tenants that sex work is work and surrogacy does not exploit women. These are the women they silence. Those women they turn their backs on.
Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business and eventually degenerates into a racket.”
Sara Morrison’s speech – Gender Blog

I know SD has a job to do, but saying that SM called named women's groups 'a racket' was simply untrue.
He could get a job writing tabloid headlines, you know the kind where a politician says they may differ slightly from a colleague on a minor matter and the headline is
GOVERNMENT IN CRISIS AS MINISTER LASHES OUT AT CABINET COLLEAGUE
🙄

I've no idea what the outcome of the tribunal will be.

The panel may believe that LWS is a platform for bigots and transphobes and rightwingers and de facto SM acted against the interests of her employer by speaking on that platform.
I don't think there was much said in defence of LWS e.g. its open mic policy rather than invited speakers, hence the range of political opinions expressed.

They may think that SM was unwise to speak as she did at LWS but BFF didn't respond in a correct, professional way.

They may think that but also think that SM didn't handle the situation correctly either.

They may conclude that BFF was so imbued with gender ideology that anyone who believes in biological realism could not carry out their job successfully, as they would be in a hostile environment and constantly having to suppress their own opinions and work to promote the opposite of their opinions.

They may decide that 'you can believe anything you want, as long as you don't manifest it' isn't really diversity/equality/inclusion and SM was discriminated against because she not only held, but spoke up about her opinions on sex and gender.

Hopefully they bear in mind that the BFF runs a film festival for all the community, including women, it's not a gender/trans group, so why would adherence to gender ideology be required of its employees?

It's going to be a long wait till we get all the answers!

Just popping my head back in to say if @plasticpotato is SM then you’re awesome and I’m mega jealous of that photo with queen Naomi.

Pleased that SM has found a new job, and I wish her well. Just a wee cautionary thought about damages, in the event of SM winning.

Last century (!) I was made redundant, and started an application to a tribunal. Then, as now, many months would pass before the tribunal date rolled round. I recall my lawyer explaining how hard it would be if, in the intervening period, I were to be appointed to a new job on a similar or greater salary, as she would not be able to demonstrate a financial loss for me. (In the end, I was offered a reasonable sum at the eleventh hour.)

Thank you also, @ProfessorBinturong

Tbf it was more than three ;)

I didn’t expect it but I feel very emotional today, such a weird feeling. But no matter the outcome, I feel validated. Mostly because Naomi has articulated so well what has happened. It’s been impossible and devastating the last few years, I’ve lost my social circle, my income, my security. I’m working for Genspect on a freelance basis and is not salaried to the extent I can live on it. As it is a small city, I’m finding it so hard to get a job, but hopefully it’ll change in the new year. My lovely mum has helped me so much, financially and emotionally.

thank you, I appreciate your commitment to my trial- it’s bizarre to see 5 threads about it 😂

It also may be that having the courage to take BFF to tribual showed Sara's strength and abilities in a new light, and the potentially bigger personal win is being noticed and taken on for a more prominent new role.

From the article, my highlighting.
Highlighting the two failed recusal applications, which alleged panel members were biased against gender-critical or sex-realist beliefs due to past associations with other organisations, the barrister suggested they were indicative of the former festival employee’s mindset. “If you don’t share her political opinions, she doesn’t want you around,” he said.

This is what he's saying about Sara, but actually it's a confession about his own side.

But employees are also expected to do as much as they can to get a job to minimise losses. Deliberately not getting a job could be used against an employee.

Tribunals will award losses for the time out of employment. So if someone is constructively or unfairly dismissed, and they take six months to get a job, the tribunal is held nine months after they filed their case, then the tribunal will award six months' salary as loss of earnings. Obviously assuming the employee wins. Legal costs are rarely awarded in tribunal cases, so if SM had to pay her own fees and won, she wouldn't get that back unless the tribunal awarded damages that included legal fees.

I rate Sean, but some of things he said were so helpful to Sara that I was confused. Keeping focusing on the dirty by association. What this was about was NC said you think Sara is guilty by association for sharing a platform with others. (Contrast with sharing a PRIDE rally with kink fetishists or TERF haters). He said no not at all. Not guilty. But a while later said dirty by association. Totally undermined his case. So for it to be highlighted draws the panels attention to his evidence. Odd.

Also re suspension not being a neutral act - any time he argues that in the future I hope someone quotes it back to him.

Naomi and Charlotte had to supress smiles at time.

While gender theory is apparently not debatable- when people are brought to Tribunal to talk it through it gets very twisted up. Quite the muddle.

I know you have had to do this for yourself, and I know it's really hard to do, particularly when the other side attacks you, and when words you wrote or said that were never intended to be public have been shared in court.

But you are also helping so many other women, some who will never even know what you've done for them. And importantly, you are probably helping clarify the law on single sex spaces and the right to express sex realist beliefs, particularly in Northern Ireland.

This is hugely significant and for this we thank you ♥️.

Women who do not believe the sacred tenants that sex work is work

Eggcorn alert! 😁

We should be thanking you Sara.

The strength and bravery it has taken to not just put up with what was happening to you but to do something about it is remarkable.

Reading along throughout the tribunal it has been shocking discovering the underhand behaviour of BFF towards you.

We always think these tribunals can't get any more insane and then each one brings a new level of 'what the fuck?' Yours was just one long constant WTF?

I am in awe of your courage. And hope your job hunting bears fruit sometime soon.

Thank you.

Professor Bb xx

I went back and read what SM actually said:
They say they represent women but women with different and equally legitimate views. Women who do not believe the sacred tenants that sex work is work and surrogacy does not exploit women. These are the women they silence. Those women they turn their backs on.
Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business and eventually degenerates into a racket.”

To be honest I do think that it is legitimate to claim that this amounts to labelling the named organisations as a racket. Not literally. But literalism may be pedantry here. Rhetorically, this was clearly a thrust of what she said.

And I do worry that severe public criticism of partner orgs may be something that an employer could reasonably regard as misconduct?. And that it might in fact be grounds for claiming that an investigation was legitimate (even though the actual investigation may have proceeded in improper ways). So I worry that the case may be lost, at least on its major points: the evidence that the respondent had different motivations didn't seem (from the outside) to be clearly robust enough .

More cheerfully, I'm loving the typo - "sacred tenants". Presumably these are the ones that can't be evicted under any circumstances.

Ah - so that's who plasticpotato is!❤
If I'd known, I'd have offered you a 🍾rather than a , because of my admiration and gratitude for your courage in standing up for your principles, and for all of us.

Sound woman yourself!

And how were they partner organisations?

Did you hear any evidence on that?

I don't think there was much said in defence of LWS e.g. its open mic policy rather than invited speakers, hence the range of political opinions expressed.

Naomi did ask one witness (MC, I think) if they knew how LWS events operated but it wasn't answered or pressed.

And if they were women's organisation doing what it said on the tin i.e. being women's organisations, there'd have been no reason to criticise them.

My formal apology for not having heard of eggcorns (defined 2003) is offered; I have been out of the loot since I retired.

👏🏼😁

@plasticpotato - just want to add my voice to all those who have thanked you for being so brave and standing up for women's rights. I'm so glad you had the wonderful NC in your corner when it came to the fight this month.

In the spirit of these threads I'd like to award you the FWR medal for gallantry.