Employment Tribunal finds NB does not meet PC of GR

[DrProfessorYaffle]

https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/h-lockwood-v-cheshire-and-wirral-nhs-foundation-trust-and-others-2401211-slash-2024-and-2407178-slash-2024

"Although the claimant has taken steps to change attributes of their sex
from female, by changing their name to a name which can be identified as of
either sex, and has changed their preferred pronouns, those are not in our
view attributes which are for the purpose of moving from one sex to the other,
they are steps in the process of moving away from the female sex to a
different gender identity, ie that of non binary. The claimant is not proposing,
nor do they intend to take any steps to reassign their sex from that of female
to male.
105. We therefore find that the claimant does not have the protected
characteristic of gender reassignment."

Yes that, but also wrong sex medical treatments that can cause serious harm or loss of life to the patient, or in the case above cause a miscarriage because no one was aware of the pregnancy.

One of the so called allies I've butted heads with over this was all for concealing the sex of a patient, and didn't want to acknowledge just how dangerous that would be in a medical setting. That's just wilful stupidity, or worse.

Those "allies" worry me and enrage me in equal measure. They are capable of understanding the danger but will keep banging the validation drum and shouting down people who raise reasonable concerns. But there are vulnerable people out there who won't know this danger exists, or might not have the capability to understand it. They are being encouraged by the dangerous misinformation from those allies who offer only validation, and they won't listen to reason because the allies keep up the narrative that we are bigoted, phobic, and want to erase all people with a gender identity.

Haech needs to grow the fuck up.

Oh no! I did notice some other typos but not that.
That just goes to show how hard it is to rewire your brain to this language even when it's literally the focus of the thing you're writing.

How is it in relation to the Two Spirits Gender would you know?

If it goes to appeal and is upheld, yes.

If that means being both sexes simultaneously as opposed to neither

1. obviously impossible in the real world
2. hasn't been specifically tested in court in the UK.

I think there's a hint in the government page on applying for a GRC - "Non-binary genders are not legally recognised in the UK." Note that is says "genders" in the plural. "Non-binary genders" would, IMO, include "Two Spirit Gender".

I only found this case decision and write up by randomly clicking on it while looking to see if SP was released.

I wonder how many other ET decisions relate to TRA/GC cases and fly completely under the radar?

Yes and that even with being super careful and probably running through it all with tech too, these mistakes happen in a way that they just don't with correct sex based pronouns.

This stuff sucks up your head space and slows down your processing. When I worked with someone who was female and had a traditionally female name but become NB with pronouns they/them but also adopted a male name, I got pulled up on saying she about her by mistake (she was not present and the person I was speaking to was very shocked and made it clear they were judging me for messing up). From then on I avoided interactions with this person but also conversations about their projects etc too. It really affected my ability to work and speak normally and therefore was a brake on productiveness. Having to choose words slowly and carefully, knowing a public telling off and withering judgment awaits mistakes does not suit a fadt paced work environment.

Haha yes. I immediately pictured Gareth furiously sticking paper over the space between him and Tim

I saw a clip of an interview with Russell Davies, the Dr Who bloke, constantly correcting himself when he was talking about a couple of they/thems who'd worked on the show.

It does not come at all naturally. You're trying to change something that you've been doing automatically since before you can remember.

This has probably been mentioned already but this is yet another claimant who wanted to be anonymous.

Reading the judgement, it is shocking how badly the complainant behaved. She generated so much additional work for her colleagues by taking offence at the tiniest of 'mistakes'. She demanded full investigations and grovelling apologies, plus extra training for the sinners and ideally for all the sinners-to-be. She then demanded even more apologies to apologise for how inadequate the first apologies were. (This isn't a joke.)

She also seemed to be off sick far more than she was present. Though as a net (blasted) nuisance rather than net contributor this must have been a blessed relief.

It was almost funny. But for colleagues she must have made their working lives impossible. Hopefully her manager can start firmly and swiftly 'managing' her out of the organisation now.

I noticed that, it's the predictable ritual at the start of every court case.

I see it increasingly the same way I see being told someone's pronouns; it's essentially an attempt to control terms and have the upper hand from the start.

Agreed. But as the organisation is the NHS who are one of the major institutions promoting this bullshit, it seems to be a case of their chickens coming home to roost.

Wonder how many more tribunals exposing all this it will take before the NHS dials back on this delusional rhetoric and starts centring the needs of patients and rights of staff to a safe, professional working environment.
To date they don't seem to have got very far with that one.

This particular person, I agree! Perhaps it is just a convenient excuse to get out of doing any work. I can’t see many people requesting a non binary therapist…

Agreed. But as the organisation is the NHS who are one of the major institutions promoting this bullshit, it seems to be a case of their chickens coming home to roost.

Absolutely. They have made they's bed.

Ooh, the search function on the ET page of the gov.uk website is very thorough. I had only used it to search names before now, but may be gone for some time ...

Although in the ERC case it was really important to be able to confirm to a female client that the person they had been allocated, who presented as NB and had a deliberately ambiguous name was in fact not male.

Amazing!

Enjoy, and report back!

Shelley Charlesworth from Transgender Trend has written about gender activism in the NHS. The Rainbow flag & pride in partnership programmes (the tools H was using to enforce obedience from her co workers) featured. It's quite revealing about how powerful a small group of men have been in the NHS / Gendered Intelligence in imposing this on the NHS.

www.transgendertrend.com/gender-activism-nhs/

5+ years ago, when identity politics was escalating wildly, someone pointed out to me that a third party was being openly disparaging of a particular protected characteristic of my own.

And I brushed it off and said that when people say such things in passing they are showing me who they are. I actually prefer to know what people really feel/believe and then I can ignore or act accordingly. Obviously we can't all go round being discourteous in each other's faces, especially in work or public settings but, if we compel everyone to hide all their controversial beliefs at all times, then we are vulnerable to being blindsided later on.

And the person I was speaking to became almost grief-stricken to think that some people might just be playing along rather than genuinely meaning everything they say. It was quite alarming to me and, of course, I then became a bad guy by association for 'making' them see a different perspective!

The Redditors seem rather confused about what a legal precedent is, apparently the judge should have just googled the Jaguar Landrover case and would have therefore known that NB was included. (Wait until they find out about RMW!)

https://www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/s/ZFUnTh8zLU

Editing as a duplicate post

Dear Rachel Reeves
the answer to the UK's productivity partly explained in this one post.

Stopping people clealy speaking THE truth
reduces productivity

@NebulousProfessorSupportPostcard I’m here for your tribunal findings 🙌🏼