Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread 2

[myladydisdainisyetliving]

Previous thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5546841-tempest-v-rural-payments-agency-tribunal-thread-follow-on-from-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 existence of the Sex Equality and Equity Network in the Civil Service (SEEN). 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.

I will also 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. The claim originated because she said "only women menstruate" and a search with her name and those terms at the usual gardening website should point you to her plot.

I missed the last bit this afternoon. Sad times.

But very much looking forward to Naomi's book reading tomorrow.

My DH came in with a cup of tea and overheard ST's testimony about TW 'breastfeeding'. He had only two words and one of them was creep. He couldn't get out of the room fast enough.

Agree, good point. Most folk don't have these people in their ears like MN posters do.

I agree, i think the Supreme Court could not hide their collective surprise at some of the things they learnt, i watched it live.

There is a good podcast just out, featuring Tanya De Grunwald who talks about how private organisations are resetting the whole “bring yourself to work”. Interesting insight into the public organisations such as the arts and the NHS.

“In this conversation we trace the personal psychology underneath workplace wokeness: the embarrassment about capitalism that pushed HR toward "higher purpose," the older gay men reliving Section 28 through trans activism, the weaponized fragility that lets the loudest voice win every argument. Tanya explains the brain drain that happens when sensible people leave and "nodding dogs" stay behind — and why the private sector is now leading the cleanup.

We also dig into what bullied kids fail to learn about self-protection, why "bring your whole self to work" is a mental-health disaster, and what it looks like when leaders finally take the room back. If you've been wondering whether the vibe shift is real, this episode is your field report from someone who sees the spreadsheets.”

https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/you-must-be-some-kind-of-therapist/id1612777134?i=1000774665090podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/you-must-be-some-kind-of-therapist/id1612777134?i=1000774665090

No, that’s true but hopefully not devoid of critical thought! And not seeking just to be outraged but seeking to safeguard children and hold on to women’s rights.

Thanks for the link @NotInMyyName I was just thinking a few hours ago that I hope whoever came up with the concept of bringing your whole self to work steps on some Lego with bare feet. Utterly ridiculous idea…..bring your professional self to work and leave the rest of yourself at home.

As an actual woman who isn't breastfeeding or going through the menopause, I would not look at those groups at work. Not only because I don't have any interest, but also it would feel invasive.

For some thats the point.

NC might get there on the whole invading biological women's spaces tomorrow as obviously that could be deemed a source of harassment.

NC: Neither EDW nor SEEN has ever said you should not be able to express your opposing position.

ST: I think they have - let me look.

The scene that comes to mind here is Russell Brand's recent interview where he wittered on about religion then, when asked about bible quotes, leafed desperately back and forward while Piers Morgan rolled his eyes so hard they almost fell out of his head.

My position at the moment is that the claimants grasp of reality is so tenuous that if they said the sky is blue on a sunny day I’d still have to go outside to check.

😂i saw taht i nearly disappeared in a cringe.

I think they need shutting down across the civil service. Too divisive, for what quantifiable benefit? It seems there are some staff for whom these groups take up a huge amount of their time rather than doing the job they are paid to do.

SEEN wouldn't have been needed if they handed bent over backwards to the gender identity movement, but they did, so it was, and maybe still is.

I don't know much about these menopause support groups but I used to run a breastfeeding support group and the whole purpose of the support group was that it was peer to peer. I hosted the group, I could help solve common breastfeeding issues but a lot of the support actually came from service users to other service users to bring a community of people who were all going through the same thing, to share the highs and lows and collaborate on creative solutions when issues were not quite so straightforward.

I expect the same would go for a menopause support group in principal.

If a transwoman turned up to any of my groups they would be out on their arse faster than they could say nipple secretions. A lot of the women I supported were from minority ethnic backgrounds. Some women came from a culture of postnatal confinement and came out of desperation, some came from Muslim or Jewish backgrounds where exposing certain parts of their body whether that was hair or breasts to men that were not their husband or relatives was not allowed in their religions and my primary purpose in these groups was to facilitate comfort and safety whilst preserving dignity.

A breastfeeding support group is no place for a man. The men who wanted to support their wives were always welcome to make a private appointment or make a phone call to us or the national breastfeeding helpline. They could also consult Google or even a forum, like mumsnet, dadsnet or... gulp, reddit, but basically there is a plethora of information available to them in various other sources without invading a woman's group.

I wish NC had gotten the opportunity to ask why, if in good faith he would only seek to support his loved ones, he couldn't consult these other services - out of business hours like he kept bloody insisting gender critical women do.

One thing that caught my attention today (notwithstanding the target-rich environment) was the following exchange about requested changes to a SEEN blog:

"NC: Proposed change to a reference to sport participation, notes that there has been much contested discussion. It's true that SEEN is being closely [unfavourably, clarification mine] scrutinised by high level managers?

ST: Yes unusual for senior ppl to help out in that way."

Unfair scrutiny transforms into "helping out" SEEN, which ties in with answers from the other days and this morning. He refashions whatever he hears into whatever he wants, as many other posters have also noted, but it's bewildering to read the reporting and how unabashed he seems about wildly weasel wording his way through this whole affair.

I find people with personality disorders very disorienting for that reason. Their approach and responses are often startlingly at odds with what most people understand as appropriate. At times they appear to be fairly rational, and you interact as you would with anyone, but then there is another jarring and bewildering direction taken, and everything spins off. Never sure to what extent its purposeful confusion.

I think she is leaving the panel to fill in certain blanks themselves which would make sense. In my inexpert opinion it seems to me that her main purpose is to demonstrate that his claims are not supported evidentiary and that the byproduct is clear harassment of SEEN by ST.

I think she’s done that brilliantly so far.

AL was leaning towards making it clear DEFRA met as many of his demands as they could within the law whilst NC is hitting a home run in ensuring that he can’t actually point at anything remotely anti trans or harassing or discriminatory in all of it.

He does not even realise that he has been trying to prevent women meeting to talk about their rights, and that their rights in the workplace matter. I think she has made that abundantly clear to the panel and unless theIr collective brain cells have not been fully assimilated into the Borg they can’t help but see it too.

Totes. He has clearly spend his months of sick leave rehearsing those shifts of logic and meaning. I would suggest it was Robin thingie, the lawyer, who might have helped him prep but from Robin‘s X post I don’t think he has that mental agility.

So far has he been able to point to a single instance of his claims about what SEEN were saying with actual proof?

I don't think he has and every single one has been "they wrote blah blah blah about trans people" which when pushed becomes "well they wrote x but I know in my la la world they really meant that they want me to turn into a pink elephant and float off to the clouds and go pop" (I may have made part of that up).

But maybe I missed some actual evidence?

I just really hope this panel do fill in the gaps. Based on the past few years worth of tribunals I fear I've veered from optimistic to nihilistic.

I am happy that there is a woman on the panel at least for this. I just really hope that she can offer practical expertise and not just agree with the men's interpretation of the law.

I have worked in areas with vulnerable adults in the housing sector. I did collaborative work and commissioned training from a NHS service specific for this group.

the trainer said they are very like a puppy in a room, cause complete chaos to all that surround them.

In my experience they can come across as harmless but can become obsessive and fixate on both people and issues. Very black and white and the world is against me.

This will sound harsh, but a loss in the lower courts often works out best in the long run.

Yes, as in Forstater. Well, I think there's a good chance of this going to appeal no matter what the ruling - if ST loses then I reckon he (or his backers) will want to appeal, and if Defra lose then I suspect SEEN will apply to appeal - I'd be more surprised if Defra did, though.

We’ve not been served well by women on panels generally speaking. I think it the intrinsic unspoken agreement that for women to gain any authority in senior roles, or roles with status usually afforded to men, the first rule of fight club is to conform to the expectations of men. They are seldom feminists but more likely to be practitioners of patriarchy, doing their bit in holding it up.