Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread (follow on from Chair of SEEN is being sued)

[myladydisdainisyetliving]

Previous thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5031904-the-chair-of-seen-is-being-sued
TT substack: https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/tempest-vs-defra-and-rural-payments

Tempest (a TW) is claiming discrimination, harassment and/or victimisation on grounds of gender reassignment. Central to the claim is the Sex Equality and Equity Network in the Civil Service (SEEN or IP). SEEN has been granted right to intervene. Parts of the original claim against the co-chair of SEEN (Elspeth Duemmer-Wrigley) and another party (Andreas Mueller) were struck out or narrowed. Another claimant, PQ, is no longer part of the case.

The hearing is in Leeds; the number of online observers has been limited by the court due to "capacity" and posters are reporting that requests for links are being declined on those grounds.

Also to note that Elspeth still has a garden in need of seeds and water to support the ability of SEEN to be an intervenor in this case.

it says that but

ST should get that tattooed somewhere...

Can't think where....

From TT:

to GC people, if it did they could complain
AL - RH article complaint was from you
ST - not just me
AL - takes to page, email from 14 March, asking for progress of appeal outcome on Detrans Awareness Day, you say further that it is an attempt to undermine trans identity despite fact written by person who is trans,

ST - not trans they detransitioned
AL - but they thought they were trans
ST - I've explained how that article is received, I don't know how to explain it any more

AL - page 751
J - can we go a little slower please
AL - yes judge

AL - your complaint was looked at, mod panel considered against the article, no breach of comms principle, therefore the article was not removed, your complaint was not ignored
ST - it was looked at yes, the findings were incorrect
AL - your basis for saying it should be removed is the same for any GC posts, that you find it inherently offensive,
ST - can you repeat
AL - anything that is gender critical is inherently offensive
ST - I don't think I said exactly that but I would expect it to be removed because it undermines and removes visibility from trans people.

I question the wiseness...

I question your lack of wisdom.

👏👏👏👏

despite fact written by person who is trans,
ST - not trans they detransitioned

So… you're not really' trans' if you say you are, only if you stay, you are

From TT:

AL - moving on to another issue. Vigil held for Brihanna Gey, this is AM's comment you take issue with this, we don't have the original post about the vigil that he's responding to, it's his response you take issue to, AM has responded to someone else, making or implying a causal link between GC and this despicable crime is not fair to GC colleagues

ST - he does call it a despicable crime
AL - he's arguing about precise use of language
ST - no, it's a post in LGBT network about vigils, he had said nothing about GC people or thoughts, no link to GC views,

J AM suggested there were

ST - AM highlights impact on colleagues and doesn't give any consideration to those colleagues. This is yet another post from SEEN that has nothing to do with sex equality between men and women. They never post about sex equality. This post from AM is just disgraceful.

J - are you saying that SEEN has never made any posts at all about equality between men and women
ST - that is what I am saying, yes
AL - the comment he's making is based not on the initial post but on a comment that was made about it the initial point about rhetoric and use of words, was made by the first comment
ST - the comment that Ben made, never mentioned any of those things
J - we come into this half way through, hard to know what came before, we don't know

" removes visibility from trans people. "

Any idea what this means? (Genuinely, in a non-snarky way - what is ST trying to say here)?

All this appears to be is ‘if I don’t like it, it should be removed’. His lack of awareness of any other views/feelings is staggering!

AL - your complaint was looked at, mod panel considered against the article, no breach of comms principle, therefore the article was not removed, your complaint was not ignored
ST - it was looked at yes, the findings were incorrect
AL - your basis for saying it should be removed is the same for any GC posts, that you find it inherently offensive,
ST - can you repeat
AL - anything that is gender critical is inherently offensive
ST - I don't think I said exactly that but I would expect it to be removed because it undermines and removes visibility from trans people.

So him complaining should have been enough 'I want it gone, make it so'
This is a result of Equality Policy's that states that if a person says they've been offended only what they thinks counts. The Perpetually Offended Charter.

@poppsocks Peculiar isnt it. I wonder if he even knows what he was trying to say apart from if I dislike it then it shouldnt be allowed.

Next thread is here:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5548369-tempest-v-rural-payments-agency-tribunal-thread-2

reposting so people don’t have to trawl back to the page.

ST seems to genuinely, really, authentically believe that if someone doesn't believe in gender ideology, a 'trans' person disappears. Literally stops existing.

Yes, he's that deluded (or pretends to be for the tribunal, which isn't quite the look he's really aiming for, I shouldn't think)

From TT:

ST - it's possible the posts could be in the moderation log
AL - it's a possibility
J - but we don't have the original post
AL - we have a comment in Caroline Airs WS, about it. Para 55; second 55, sub B, (pagination, para numbers) She says the original post was crass and was considered by the moderation panel, I don't think we have the post. I would need to go through the log and x-ref it. Does the Tribunal wish to do that?
J - not at this point, we may need to do it.
AL - that's all I can do to assist, you respond to AM directly, engaging in debate with him
ST - debate is too strong

J - is the post that was removed the one on top of page 673.
AL - we'll have to check the log to confirm that
J - let's just park that
AL - you criticise him for defending GC thought
ST - I said no one mentioned GC thought
AL - you mentioned it
ST - I criticised him for coming

He sounds very Vicky Pollard

ST - debate is too strong

ooh, I don’t like it when they say true things I don’t like and can’t argue against.

J - are you saying that SEEN has never made any posts at all about equality between men and women
ST - that is what I am saying, yes

How would he know this unless he has every single SEEN post?

Tinkerbell

If you don’t believe a trans person expires

He had his secret spies sending him traumatic screenshots to horrify himself and harass him.

I mean he didn’t see them all - he saw enough 🤯

🧚🏼‍♂️

So he basically thinks his complaints haven't been considered if they don't find in his favour and delete whatever has upset him. Despite the fact that they did consider it and decided against him.

The judge is fed up of the log already

Excel spreadsheet death

From TT:

to an LGBT forum and bringing up GC thought, about a T teen, where GC thought may have played a role, an upset many people.
AL - AM is using your post as an example of where criticism of GC people has crossed a line
ST - it's worse for him to weaponise the topic, it's so tone deaf and uncaring, he comes in to warn people off from making any link to GC people,

AL - one final point, at 673, your post where you criticise him, refer to the mere possibility of a connection, a connection between BG and GC views, you're not denying the possibility of a connection
ST - I'm not denying it, I'm not casting an opinion either way. AL - next point, you make a comment about AM, leaving a emoji on a post about mainly women being silenced, did you see the comment about TRA bullies trying to silence women, we can't see the , can

MY note - sorry about the emoji blow up its something weird with formatting

ST - trans people don't cause harassment

In a parallel universe maybe!

From TT:

you see it at the time
ST - it's lost a lot of formatting, I'm sure it was there
AL - general approach not to moderate thumbs up or like icons, because of resources, we've seen lots of those likes and thumbs
ST - if they are going to moderate then they should apply resources they should moderate, saying we don't have the people is just the failure of the moderation system, or a failure to remove the ability to do it
J - how do we know that it was AM,
ST - you could hover over the likes and it would tell you who liked it
J - do you have any evidence that he liked it
ST - I dont' Judge

AL - the post in question was removed and so on removal, any icons were also removed,
ST - resolves the post itself, doesn't deal with staff people who supported those opinions
AL - so if the post was removed then the like was removed

ST - the post was removed, but AM was not disciplined
AL - so you're saying that anyone who likes a post that is removed, that person should be investigated
ST - that person should be investigated, because the behaviour is there
AL - but there are resource constraints and the possibility for accidents.

J - I don't think we're going to get any further
AL - I'm moving on

AL - article from Guardian, posted do you accept that this was put up on gender equality network,
ST - don't know why it was posted but it was put up

Excel spreadsheet death

It always is! Excel is the Devil's work.