Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread 5

[fanOfBen]

Previous thread:
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5549488-tempest-v-rural-payments-agency-tribunal-thread-4

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.

Another lot don't much like being embodied at all and want to silence all reminders of it.

And these people will be female.

Why?

Because in a default-male culture where the male body is the default symbol for "person" and the female body the default symbol for "sexual interest", FTM means removal of the things that call attention to the sexual body (breasts, female-coded appearance), while FTM means adding them.

FTM are moving towards our culture's "neutral" (ie actually male) body, MTF are moving away from it.

I'm not trying to make it sound more logical than it is, but I think there is some coherence to it, and I can understand why some people find it a convincing/attractive belief system.

Of course the social categories of men and women would not exist if we were amoeba, but a lot of the social experience of being a woman has nothing to do with physical differences, lots of stereotypes about women's abilities (or lack of) or character traits pretends to be as natural as biological sex even if its just made up bs.

Put another way, I would say GI is a form of mistaking the map for the territory, but they are not the first or only ones making that mistake.

This. It's pretty stark when it's spelled out.

Though now I'm wondering where, in our culture, male asceticism is hiding. The old idea that embodiment itself is unspiritual and demeaning (often coupled with disdain and disgust for women, who are seen as more entangled with bodily things). The modern term " meat suit" has echoes of this.

I'm not totally convinced by that analysis. There are reasons for some men to want to move away from society's expectations of them. An under-confident man (especially a young one who hasn't found his place in the world) can find the expectations of workplace success very difficult, for example, and can (unreasonably IMHO) see women as having an easier time. The fact that feminists often see men as the ones who generally don't pull their weight, and women as having to carry an unfair burden, doesn't stop such men thinking that the grass could be greener as a woman.

I am partly talking from experience. I have struggled through most of my life with under-confidence (Lord save me from the under-confidence of a mediocre man!), less of a problem now I'm retired, but I remember looking for any get-out from my guilt at not being the confident successful man I thought I was supposed to be. The model of manhood was: academic success (or at least skill in a respectable trade), socially popular and confident, head of the household, sporting prowess, a leader, physically strong etc. I was also supposed to be caring and compassionate, but that felt secondary to the characteristics that all "real men" had, and we're still not supposed to cry when watching Bambi. Most of us men don't live up to all that, and for some, particularly those with autistic traits, the expectations placed on women can appear less unattainable. Of course that picture of women's existence is thoroughly idealised and unrealistic.

But I am convinced that in some cases, trans-identification in men is motivated at least in part by a desire to escape society's expectations of men.

That's the irony. The whole ideology is dependent upon the existence of sex and upon people knowing it exists.

Even more than that - it's dependent on each sex matching, or aligning with, a gender identity. It's not the GC people who have decided that male sex = man gender, and female sex = woman gender. That's the genderists.

Who, after having introduced this rather regressive concept of 'brains/minds/souls/personalities aligning with bodies' then make a big fuss about how they don't actually align in special people.

Whereas GC views are male sex = any brain/mind/soul/personality and female sex = any brain/mind/soul/personality. No alignment required.

This is why under GI, male people who feel feminine equate that with being female. Never mind that there are female people who wouldn't share single feminine characteristic with them.

If they genuinely believed that a woman was 'a person, male or female, with a particular set of feelings/character traits/brain/mind etc' then they wouldn't see any need to emulate a female body, because being female is no more 'womanly' than being male is.
Yet they clearly don't.

Yes, Clare Moriarty Permanent Secretary Defra 2015 to 2019 used to post blogs mentioning her female to male trans child. And I mean child, think she was 14-15 at the time.
Sorry, forgot who I was replying to who mentioned the culture.

I think you may be on to something. I was wondering the other day about men who come out as trans in middle age and why that seems to be a pattern, and about the fact that people like Jan Morris seem to have ticked the Successful Man boxes before they jump ship.

It occurred to me that it is the time when the younger generation of successful men are coming up behind them and starting to overtake them, and that there might be an element of "jump before you're pushed". Quite apart from any sexual motives, it is easier in some ways to be an Object than a Subject.

Thoughtful men who realise that they don't or may not fit the successful man stereotype might well reach this crisis point at an earlier age. Most battle on and do the best they can (and hopefully find that life is richer and more unexpected than they had ever imagined). But now the trans thing appears to offer an out, and some of them will take it.

Although most of the discussion on the 'conversion practices' draft bill is about parents, it could also pose serious problems in the work place:

Making Equality Act compliance a criminal offence?
The crime may be tried as a summary offence at a magistrates’ court, which can hand down a 12-month prison sentence, or by the Crown Court, leading to imprisonment of up to five years. Corporate bodies such as companies can also be tried for “failing to take all reasonable steps to prevent the commission of the offence”.
This is likely to have a significant chilling effect on individuals expressing gender-critical beliefs and applying sex-based rules at work.
https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/draft-conversion-practices-bill-threatens-parents-with-jail-time/

You can just see how some people would be having a field day with this if it became law...

Swyer development chart - for anyone interested.

I'm sure I saw mention ages ago of Samantha sporting a parasol when arriving to the court. Does anyone have a photo, and did the parasol have a ladylike lace trim?

I get to this point in a tribunal and I realised how distressed I am. Not asking for sympathy, it comes with the territory of TT. Why distressed? A tribunal like this always brings home the depth and breadth of institutional capture by trans ideology. So many women (in particular) are prepared to abandon the sex based rights that our mothers and grandmothers fought for.
It's this very weird idea that TW are allies and/or deserve the protection of women.
NO. They are a Trojan horse, men invading our spaces, our sports, our shortlists, our truly safe spaces for vulnerable women.

They can f==k off.

I think someone had seen a picture online of ST with a parasol, and asked whether there was any sign of one at court - don't think there was a positive court sighting.

Here's the 'u' and the 'c' you mislaid. ❤

Appropriate then that Elliot Page is playing Sinon who sold the horse to the Trojans so they'd take it into their city for the Greeks to massacre or rape and enslave.

I'm not that interested in the Nolan vision of a 'novel' translation of the Iliad.

I feel for Ellen. What terrible things must have happened to her that she has abandoned her womanhood. It is a deep and terrible sadness. Hollywood hates women - the real kind - and so has created this 'girl boss' super thin with big boobs and high cheekbones who can kick ass in hand to hand combat with a man.

Apologies if you were trying to be delicate, but as I recall the quote it was "Running a nice warm bath of someone else's oppression and getting in it to have a wank".

<sets aside yogurt based pudding>

Actual footage

I agree.

Yet Sandy Peggie got accused of harassment by the judge (or his AI) in his findings. And it gets gleefully repeated over and over in TRA circles.

Given the Weinstein and Epstein revelations, and particularly with her getting into the industry very young, I think we can make an educated guess. And I'm not surprised she's ended up hating womanhood. But the people who sold her the lie that becoming a man was the answer (or a possibiity) are also monsters.

lots of posters are getting confused about who ED works for - she doesn’t work for Defra. The Land Registry is a non-ministerial department and it is not part of Defra group so whoever is paying her salary it’s not Defra. This is why I couldn’t understand why she had so much information about what was happening in Defra and why she’s apparently in possession of information from Sarah Homer’s office. Gov departments all have different intranet pages so you can’t just go and look at another departments internal messaging, it’s not possible. Nor can you look up contact details for people in other departments (which is hugely annoying when trying to work with other government departments).

@QuietBlueFrog thanks for clarifying.
I am very interested in how Sarah Homer will come across when questioned. On the face of it it was her intervention that overturned Janet Hughes' decision to find for ST, but on the other hand her office is a complete leaky sieve.

I also have concerns about the spreadsheet of doom that they made so much of. Were names redacted? for example. I have questions on why it was shared at all and who agreed it. SH?

Further background on previous PS including a Tweet from her celebrating meeting with A:Gender
gendercriticalwoman.blog/2022/12/06/citizens-advice-bureau/

This case is of great interest as I am in the midst of taking my (ex) local authority employer to employment tribunal (no gardening needed at this time) regarding removal of single sex spaces (given recent cases is fairly straightforward hopefully) but is also about over promotion of trans ideology in terms of use of Teams meetings backgrounds/flag poles with pride progress flag for weeks on end….being a sex realist was almost impossible there!
So vague similarities maybe between ST visceral hatred of GC imagery (from the other side)? The difference though between ST/ED and myself is that I have never said council can’t use the progress flag etc (although I dislike it) but rather emphasis on no hierarchy of protected characteristics and should be proportionate use alongside other PCs. I dont think ST/ED have done themselves any favours so far in their ideological approach to this tribunal and it seems to me their only chance of any success is if CS cocked up procedurally.

Is Sarah Homer going to be questioned? I’m sure there’s a list somewhere but I’ve missed it. She comes across as a zealot for the cause.

Sorry, you are right it is Nicola Bettesworth, Group HR Director not SH. I suspect she will be well versed in EA/FWS and show studied neutrality.