Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread 3

[myladydisdainisyetliving]

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

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.

This is a very complex case to follow. It’s certainly an important discussion given the wider implications.

Sadly I think you are being optimistic. His reason of connotations only considers connotations from the perspective of TRAs because not using TiM but TW has connotations for women’s rights. Significant ones. He has. It thought those connections have equal merit. That’s a problem.

My theory at this stage:

either the judge has had enough of this tribunal already and is completely on ST's side

or the judge has had enough of this tribunal already and has also had enough of ST and has made up his mind by now that it's all total BS

'NC - if it's there, then I'm sure HH will be able to take you to it.'

NC has used this a couple of times instead of getting into a 'Oh no it's not!' argument

From TT:

had access to senior official in DEFRA. You could have written to anyone in DEFRA you wanted to, you did not try and were not knocked back so to speak
ST - there's an official process and I was the only one following the process, I was told after my appeal was upheld to contact

someone and when I emailed them I was told immediately to follow the business as usual process and send to the designated email address
NC - now, a complaint by Charlotte Ludford, a senior person, she's taking up the cudgels on your behalf on the 'only women menstruate' comment

And yet women in tribunals have had to talk about their menstrual blood.

It seems extraordinary to me that the judge is commenting to the point of saying that NC's questions are "oppressive".

or the judge has had enough of this tribunal already and has also had enough of ST and has made up his mind by now that it's all total BS

Possibly, and trying to limit the claimant's obvious distress?

From TT:

ST - I didn't ask her to do this,
NC - its taking up the trans activist side isn't it
ST - I think its CL being involved in LGBT network,
NC - it goes straight to the top of HR doesn't it
J - do you see in that email she says, this has been raised to our attention by a member

the network, what network
ST - I assume the LGBT network,
J - did CL have a role in that network
ST - I think so, but don't know
NC - I think it's at the bottom of the email
J - I was just running it down...in fact email suggests that it was the DEFRA Pride network

The judge was right, there was no need for "at taxpayers expense". Saying it was getting oppressive is just more indication of bias though.

From TT:

NC - are you part of DEFRA pride network
ST - no
NC - but you could have been
J - one other question, you've mentioned contacting Val, did you ever try and contact senior management about your concerns about SEEN
ST - I don't believe so

NC - your position is that SEEN should not have been allowed to engage with senior management
ST - with regard to their network or with regard to their Yammer
NC - it's a network, to advocate for members, it was proper for the network to raise concerns with senior management

Me too, absolutely.

I think as earlier posters have mentioned, as an ET judge in his recent years he will be more used to ET claimants repping themselves and who have no real idea of procedure or the law and he has probably got into a habit of over compensating Claimant behaviour because of that.

The problem here is that he is also clearly carrying the legacy of Stonewall training and has not invested in trying to understand the changing picture since then. His lack of critical understanding of bench book updates kinda proves this.

So is intellect, and let’s assume he has an able intellect in usual circs, has been hampered - like is brain is operating with one of its ‘arms’ tied behind its back and he has got so used to it he is unaware he is missing the use of that arm.

I think this is a possibility too. The judge knows the lingo and seems to be aware of the issues in "the debate". His comment the other day about not going a rabbit hole read to me as him not wanting proceedings to get derailed by the semantics, when they are already pressed for time.

He maybe feels that things need to proceed with a certain level of respect and politeness/delicacy, which is obviously subjective, but won't affect the outcome of the ruling. I hope that is what is going on and I'm not being naive.

ST seems to have regained his sangfroid/stiff upper lip/mojo now the topic is no longer <gasp>a children's book😱

From TT:

because the network was under sustained and vicious attack.
ST - it was AM and EW who were posting and they had the ability to moderate comments and decide what to post, they had more power than other people
NC - it's the nature of networks to have equal amounts of power

NC - now onto a:gender website archive page, they are boasting about it's influence
ST - listing successes
NC - their influence seems quite strong, participated in 50 events, it seems to have a very considerable reach and influence
ST - you're asking me about things I can't

answer, I'm not involved in that
J - maybe for submissions
NC - agender is a cross civil network ED is your friend you are a member
ST - yes I am
NC - so part of it's job is to represent you
ST - I guess so
J - give us page ref
NC - CA has worked with a:gender previously

He really, really, really didn't want to talk about The Book, did he?

Some wise woman on a previous tribunal thread raised a really good point that I think is relevant here to the way the judge is responding. Men in general have a really low tolerance for disgust. So things women can deal with (childbirth, personal care, death etc) many men get the ick about at a much lower threshold. Men when confronted by TIM claiming they are menopausal, can breast feed, have periods etc are so disgusted that they cannot compute any man would ever say this. Therefore the alternative must be the man is a woman because he clearly isn’t a man. When NC made her comments yesterday about babies and nipples and men being menopausal she may have inadvertently triggered the Judge’s disgust threshold to the point he’s behaving like he is today. I’m not excusing him or blaming NC but I just think it’s food for thought about why some men so easily believe TIMs are women.

NC.. they are boasting about it's influence
ST - listing successes

He's very quick off the mark there, isn't he? Obviously completely recovered from his distress.

I would have thought so too.

From TT:

, worked closely with them
ST - it seems to suggest that
NC - still on subject of contact with senior people, notes of interview with Nicola Becksworth, she confirmed she had had two meeting with ST
ST - that was related to my g/x
NC - ample evidence that a:gender has influence

over DEFRA policy,
ST - I'd disagree with that, CA has had contact with agender but no evidence it had anything to DEFRA
NC - you said that ED is a friend, and given her presence here supporting you everyday, a close friend
ST - well, we know each other,
NC - it's absurd to say

Oh poor ED, relegated to someone that ST "knows" rather than being a friend

NC - you said that ED is a friend, and given her presence here supporting you everyday, a close friend
ST - well, we know each other,

😶

I vaguley remember something about the Ancient Greeks consigning any men who did not conform to their idea of masculinity to the woman bucket. They weren't proper men so the obvious thing to do was to categorise them as women.
I now see this all over the place, rather than men getting to grips with a diversity of men women have to endlessly budge up and make room for the non-conforming men in our spaces. The idea of women being our own category seems to be impossible to grasp.

Edited to add that I don't think men who say they want to feed babies are merely non-conforming men, they are perverted men.

From TT:

given your friendship with ED, that you don't have access to senior levels
ST - she's a friend but I would never cross the line, to ask her to act on behalf, just because I have a friend who possibly has power (DEFRA no link to agender), I wouldn't ask her to use that power

J - was ED chair of agender during this whole period
ST - you should probably put that to ED
J - did you consider asking agender to support you in your concerns
ST - it's a cross government network, I contacted the Cabinet Office myself they said they couldn't help me, I guess