Blowing Down the House of Cards: Bailey, Cass, Duffield
A week in which things began to move
Don’t just read this. I mean don’t only read this if you want to know what’s going on. “Whoever controls the narrative controls the world”.
Here is one narrative .
Right now ,the house of cards that is “gender ideology” is toppling over and some sanity is being restored to the whole shebang. Allison Bailey is allowed to think what she likes and believe what she believes and should not be discriminated against for this.
Stonewall ,who advised her chambers give advice on what they would like the law to be which is not the same as advising on what the law actually is. Stunningly, these high-powered barristers took this advice. After all, it is more important these days to be seen as inclusive and be given a gold star by Stonewall than to be actually , right. These gold stars don’t come cheap. Organisations pay a lot of money to be a Diversity Champion.
Stonewall’s advice breached Equality law and Bailey’s chambers had to pay for it. They are liable not Stonewall. Bailey won her case against her chambers but lost against Stonewall who were found not to have caused or induced the discrimination.
The tribunal found that Bailey was discriminated against because of her gender critical beliefs. She was awarded £22,000 in damages. These were aggravated damages and this only happens when the discrimination has been found to be particularly nasty and oppressive.
Many of us hailed this as a victory not because the tribunal ruled that Bailey’s beliefs are right – that is not and never was the job of the tribunal - but because they are protected by Section 10 of the Equality Act.
It is worth explaining this, I think . It is illegal to discriminate against “protected characteristics ”. These are : age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity , race, religion or belief , sex and sexual orientation.
In this case, Bailey’s beliefs on gender identity could be upheld because “belief means any religious or philosophical belief and a reference to belief includes a reference to lack of belief” .
This is key. Bailey’s lack of belief in what was spoken about as “gender identity theory” or Stonewall dogma or the mantras of half of the loons on Twitter is not grounds for discrimination. Her lack of belief in the following was protected which is why she won against Garden Court Chambers. This is what the tribunal summarised as Bailey’s beliefs about gender identity theory as proselytised by Stonewall.
“Stonewall has reclassified “sex” with “gender identity”.
The tone of Stonewall’s campaigning on this subject has been binary, absolutist and evangelical: “You are with us, or you are a bigot.”
Discussions on the subject have become vitriolic, largely as a result of Stonewall’s absolutist tone, which has been replicated by other organisations.
This has resulted in threats against women (including threats of violence and sexual violence) becoming commonplace.
Stonewall has been complicit in these threats being made.
Gender theory as proselytised by Stonewall is severely detrimental to women for numerous reasons, including that it denies women the ability to have female-only spaces, for example in prisons, changing rooms, medical settings, rape and domestic violence refuges and sport.
Gender theory as proselytised by Stonewall is severely detrimental to lesbians.
In redefining “sex” as meaning “self-declared gender identity”, Stonewall has reclassified homosexuality from “same-sex attraction” to “same-gender attraction”.
It is homophobic for Stonewall and other followers of gender theory to encourage lesbians to have sex with male-bodied people, and to label them as bigoted if they won’t.
The adoption of gender theory by Stonewall left those gay, lesbian and bisexual people who did not subscribe to gender theory without representation, and labelled as bigots by their main organisation supposed to stand up for their interests. “
As I said, she lost against Stonewall because it could not be proved that Stonewall directly caused the discrimination. They just handed out the advice that did. Not a great look surely, offering advice that may be detrimental to lesbians for a holier-than-thou set of barristers is it?
But the ‘be kind’ religion of Stonewall and its followers means being kind to some is often at the expense of others. It means turning a blind eye to even entering a conversation about women’s sex-based rights to single sex spaces. It admonishes lesbians who don’t want to have sex with people with penises as “sexual racists”. A lot of what it says lately ,is barking from banging on about trans toddlers to pushing drag queens into libraries . Drag can be terrific , god knows how any of us learnt to read without it really. Still why give a lucrative gig to a woman when you can give it to a man dressed as a woman and be seen as part of the new “radicalism”?
Allison Bailey, is as I made clear in my last piece here, someone you would think twice about taking on. I admire her very much and her’s is a life of exemplary integrity. She has fought extremely hard to be who she is . She is far from the terrible transphobe she has been made out to be . In her own words :
“I have been abused as transphobic and bigoted. This is absolutely not the case. I have always been an advocate for transgender rights. I believe passionately that transgender people must enjoy protection under the law from discrimination and abuse. I abhor all attempts to strip transgender people of the full rights of citizenship; and in the USA the horrific killing of black trans identified males; trans women (by other males). However, I do not accept, for one moment, that in order to secure protections for trans women, including from male violence, women must lose a single one of the the hard won rights and protections they have from men, however they identify.”
She just won’t bow down to the cult that says gender identity has replaced sex. She is a gay woman who does not want to have sex with men , whatever they believe themselves to be.
Some parts of the tribunal were nuts. The Stonewall person with their Mum and support peacock or whatever it was who rambled on about sex changing over the course of a lifetime . WHAT? Are these people inadequate and stupid? Not to put too fine a point on it . Yes. That is not very kind I realise but nor is publicly tweeting shite and organising against your colleagues as Garden Court Chambers did to Bailey is it?
It is more than possible that I am over-identifying here but I have a smidgeon of an idea what it is like when colleagues and in my case some digital doo- dahs in Australia complain about you to your employers. Firstly, they say it isn’t actually about you then they are shocked that journos leak their names to other journos and then some of them write you idiotic emails claiming they had no idea what they were signing.
Did Garden Court Chambers think Allison Bailey would just suck it up. Did the Guardian think I would go quietly?
Am I bitter ? No. I am just better than them.
The sneaky “be kind” cowed letter writers mostly can’t think their way out of a paper bag. They are not journalists in my book . But who cares? They just adopt the latest fashionable pose , as does half of the idiotic Labour Party . I suppose they cannot fathom people who don’t do feminism for fun, who actually mean it, who really care about what happens to women and girls and are not that concerned about what men think about it. This is the mistake made around the whole “trans issue”. No one objects to people being what they want to be as long as you don’t impinge on our rights or revert to a whole load of regressive stereotypes.
We want to open up all forms of gender expression. That IS fun. Trans Rights Activists want to box us in because ultimately theirs is a deeply conservative view.
Possibly some of these worms still live in the parallel Twitter universe where Stonewall won, despite its deeply defensive statement. Stonewall remains untainted and Bailey and us witches who love her, lost badly .
I don’t really know how they reckon with the severe damage to Stonewall’s reputation. On the evening of the decision I happened to be out with a friend who is a super smart lobbyist who explained to me exactly what CEOs would be thinking. They want some credibility ie 'bang for their buck’ and will withdraw their organisations if that is compromised. Stonewall may have monopolised the “diversity “ market and there is now room surely for others to come in.
Then the next day, another little puff and ‘we blow your self-ID house down’ came with the Cass Report. It had long been said that Hilary Cass had no truck with the practices of GIDs, Tavistock’s Gender Identity Development Service which basically practiced affirmation “therapy” , prescribing puberty blockers after as little as two sessions. Cass made clear in “decommissioning ”Tavistock’s clinic and opening up more clinics where exploratory therapy means focussing on a child’s overall mental health needs and not only gender issues, is a real reversal of what has been going on.
Again I am sad about this as many of us were aware of the problems for years because besides the many whistle blowers such as Sonia Appleby (above) who went public , for a decade any journo who was perceived to be gender critical was getting emails about what was going on. I and others I know, tried to alert The Guardian to this. But this did not fit in with their ideological drift to all things American. This, to me still remains a dereliction of journalistic duty, however you spin it.
In the bad column I wrote ie. the one that caused 338 dildos to write their “anonymous” letter to the supposedly “feminist” editor of that paper , one of the things I said was this.
“How did we arrive at a situation where there are shocking and rising numbers of teenage girls presenting at specialist clinics with gender dysphoria, while some who have transitioned are now regretful and infertile?”
The very brave Keira Bell who took legal action against the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust
Bailey’s victory and the Cass report feel a little like vindication then. Just a little though because I know the entire therapeutic establishment is still endorsing the affirmation model and that Stonewall dogma is everywhere. And everyone is still scared. So now is absolutely the time to speak up, though I very well understand the reasons many can’t or don’t.
We have not won but we are getting there and right now I am wondering how organisations such as the Labour Party are going to walk their way back on this stuff. Having expelled life long members for attending Woman’s Place meetings are they now going to carry on saying that a woman can have a penis? They are deeply confused and have just given an open goal to Liz Truss who knows what a woman is as well as a pork market. All of this is nothing but a total gift to the Tories.
Are these fools going to ever say they got anything wrong?
What are the dim BBC/Guardian sheep going to do? And a special shout out to that expert endocrinologist/part time tax lawyer /Jesus Jollyon who just possibly gets things skew whiff , never mind poor old Mr Right Side of History who has more meltdowns than Boris Johnson has leaving dos. Are we all meant to forget what these people argued and how they threw women’s rights by the wayside for cult thinking, how they demonised any woman who would not bow down?
You dear friends, can read the different narratives and make up your own minds but I would just give you one more example , where Twitter/Social Media collides with something else. Something ,some of us call facts. I know !! So quaint
Lovely Rosie Duffield MP who has spoken out on these issues ,was surely, if you only looked at Twitter, going to be deselected as she is largely hated by all decent people . It turns out not to be case. She has just riled up what she calls “shouty men”. Plus ça change . She has just been reselected to stand.
So raise a glass to Allison , Rosie and your good selves. It’s been a good week .
It was made even better for me by going to see Martha Wainwright. God she is great live. Hasta la vista ,babies.
Here is Martha.