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

Garden for more Naomi and Charlotte! AHF doc appeal

10 replies

alsoFanOfNaomi · 03/12/2025 09:35

The makers of the Adult Human Female documentary, Deirdre O'Neill and Michael Wayne, have been given leave to appeal the ET judgement that went against them and in favour of UCU, concerning UCU's actions in trying to prevent the film being shown. In what to my unlawyerly mind was an extraordinary judgement, the ET judge basically agreed with UCU that the film makers were bigots and it was fine to shut them down. It is hard to imagine anything more delightful than Naomi and Charlotte explaining the problems with this to a new judge, and UCU plays a large part in enforcing gender ideology in universities: this would be a great case to win, especially at appeal where it will set precedent.

Thread about the original case as it was being heard:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5294574-ucu-being-taken-to-tribunal-over-discrimination-for-gc-views

Thread when the adverse judgement came out:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5351523-employment-tribunal-ucu-vs-adult-human-female-makers-lost

Twitter link with an example of the advertisement for the screening that the ET thought was objectionable:
https://x.com/JRLevinsLaw/status/1995430636786770368

Text from the gardening site (check you have the page where the URL ends -2 for the current installment):

In Defence of Academic Freedom: Adult Human Female
by Deirdre O'Neill and Michael Wayne
As many of you know, we have taken our academic trade union UCU to tribunal after it twice successfully campaigned to prevent the screening of our film Adult Human Female at Edinburgh University. This is a film whose subtitle is: ‘a documentary in defence of women’s rights’. Having failed to get assurances from UCU general secretary Jo Grady that the union would defend our right to show the film on university campuses, we felt we had no choice but to act. UCU has become a bastion of harassment, bullying and censorship whenever reasoned concerns have been raised about the implications of trans rights claims for women. UCU's part in getting our film cancelled seemed to encapsulate so much of what has gone wrong. So it was incredibly disappointing and frustrating for us and our supporters, that the tribunal found against us.

However, with the help of our supporters over the summer of 2025 our campaign raised the £6600 needed to ask for leave to appeal that decision. A judge has now ruled that all our grounds of appeal are reasonably argued, and the appeal will be listed at the Employment Appeal Tribunal with a time estimate of two days. Our appeal will be heard no earlier than October 2026.
Naturally we are pleased that we still have a chance to make UCU accountable for its actions and try and achieve a course correction in its behaviour by legal means. But once again we must reach out to our supporters and ask for financial help. We are convinced that this issue and this case is important enough for free speech in higher education to do this, although we are aware of the wider economic context in which so many people are struggling. But if you are able to contribute, no matter how small, then together we can take this fight to appeal and still hold UCU to account.
We have an initial target of £1000 but to cover the costs of the appeal we will need to raise £54,000. We managed a similar sum for our first case, we hope with your support we can reach our target for appeal.
Thank you for your support.

UCU being taken to tribunal over discrimination for 'gc' views | Mumsnet

[[https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/gender-critical-documentary-makers-take-ucu-tribunal https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/gender-crit...

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5294574-ucu-being-taken-to-tribunal-over-discrimination-for-gc-views

OP posts:
MarieDeGournay · 03/12/2025 10:16

I found this article from the times a useful reminder of what the judge said.

However, their claims have been dismissed in their entirety, as Judge Jean Laidler ruled that the union had been “entitled” to act as it did.
“The role of this tribunal is only to determine the legal issues before it and not to enter <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/oor0F/www.thetimes.com/article/the-supreme-courts-ruling-on-trans-women-in-detail-87kjbxp3j" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">the debate on gender,” she said in a 52-page judgment. “The reason why the UCU acted as it did was because it believed that other members of its union would be offended by some of the content in the film and could be put at risk and that, under its policies, the union was entitled and indeed required to protect them as best it could.”
Academics lose discrimination claim over trans film

I don't usually criticise judges, because they are judges and I am not, and they have sat through all the evidence and I have not, and I have not read the 52 pages.
That said - this judgement says the opposite of other judgements, that it is the role of the law to defend people from being offended. I'm pretty sure other judges have said the exact opposite!

So it will be an interesting appeal.

Raquelos · 03/12/2025 13:10

Potentially much more important to get a win on appeal since my understanding is that appeal judgments at the EAT set binding precedents, whereas decisions from the lower courts do not.

KnottyAuty · 03/12/2025 13:19

Do you think the judge was totally TRA’d to say this? Or totally GC attempting to pave the way for an EAT win?

alsoFanOfNaomi · 03/12/2025 18:10

The judge was very impressed by the "dog whistle" idea, that the film makers could be judged by the fact that transactivists interpreted what they said as transphobic regardless of what their actual words were. Which meant they couldn't win, whatever they said. Which cannot be legal.

OP posts:
Chersfrozenface · 03/12/2025 18:36

Been doing some car boot selling. Proceeds go to crowd funders like this.

alsoFanOfNaomi · 11/12/2025 15:57

In this installment of the "Naomi and Charlotte set the world to rights" show, the grounds for appeal have now been published at the crowdfunding site. They still need a LOT more carrots though, if you have some to spare...

OP posts:
fromorbit · 15/12/2025 10:26

Update. More gardening needed. Check out the garden to read grounds of appeal.

You can now read our grounds of appeal drafted by Naomi Cunningham and Charlotte Elves. All nine grounds have been allowed to proceed to a full hearing.
Thank you to everyone who has supported us so far. We still have a long way to go to reach our funding goal, so please consider donating if you can and please share this page as widely as possible.

Chersfrozenface · 15/12/2025 10:35

Gardened.

EweProfessorSurnameDoctorProfessor · 15/12/2025 10:49

Donated! Seems like a good precedent to set, although infuriating it's still needed

RoyalCorgi · 15/12/2025 11:15

alsoFanOfNaomi · 03/12/2025 18:10

The judge was very impressed by the "dog whistle" idea, that the film makers could be judged by the fact that transactivists interpreted what they said as transphobic regardless of what their actual words were. Which meant they couldn't win, whatever they said. Which cannot be legal.

Quite. Especially given that trans activists think everything is transphobic, including references to biology.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page