LGB VictoryAllison Bailey wins employment tribunal case against Garden Court Chambers

submitted by reluctant_commenter from twitter.com

all 9 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm glad she won. A shame she couldn't win against Stonewall directly, but winning against her employers means other employers will likely ignore Stonewall complaints.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

DISCLAIMER: I am not a lawyer, I just followed this case with much interest.

My TLDR:

  • Allison Bailey sued both Garden Court Chambers (her place of employment) and Stonewall UK for discrimination and resulting damage to her livelihood.

  • The court found that Garden Court Chambers did discriminate against Allison in a way that caused damage to her livelihood.

  • Now Garden Court Chambers has to pay Allison.

  • The court did not accept that Stonewall discriminated against Allison in a way that caused damage to her livelihood.

So, Stonewall is trying to spin this in a way that absolves them of all blame. If you see pro-trans headlines claiming that Stonewall is completely innocent, that's why. However, what those headlines are ignoring is that Stonewall's discriminatory advice-- advice that Garden Court Chambers used-- is what led to discrimination and damage to Allison.

To use a metaphor: Imagine you have 3 school children, Child A, Child B and Child C. Child A tells Child B to do something discriminatory to Child C. Child B goes and does it to Child C. A teacher examines the situation. The teacher decides that because Child A did not directly harm Child C, only Child B is blamed and punished for harming Child C. Are other children likely to take direction from Child A in the future? Probably not, if it's going to get them in trouble!

WHY THIS MATTERS: Even though Stonewall technically got out scot-free on this case and doesn't have to pay damages, there are a bunch of other organizations that take their advice that are now incentivized to stop taking advice from Stonewall.

edit: Here's a press release about the case: https://allisonbailey.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/2022-07-22-Press-Release-Publication-copy.docx.pdf

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Hopefully, Allison's courage here will lead to Stonewall being successfully sued by Garden Court Chambers. Into oblivion, with any luck :)

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Oh they're suing Stonewall? I thought they were doing an appeal. This article suggests that they might appeal.

edit: To be clear, I would love for them to sue Stonewall, lol.

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Not so far! But it seems a distinct possibility. (Disclaimer: not a lawyer, unless an affinity for legal dramas counts.) After all, Garden Court Chambers has to pay up now; doesn't it make sense that they'd try recouping the money that Stonewall has cost them from Stonewall itself?

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

After all, Garden Court Chambers has to pay up now; doesn't it make sense that they'd try recouping the money that Stonewall has cost them from Stonewall itself?

Ahahaha, your first mistake was thinking logically!

I think it's more likely they'll double down on gender ideology, and thus challenge Allison. Suing Stonewall would require them to take the stance that Stonewall's advice is garbage... which would require GCC to stand up for objective reality. And trans ideology still has a firm grip on all major social media networks. From what I watched of the Allison Bailey trial, it seemed that many people at GCC were apathetic about the topic and a vocal minority really wanted to double down on claims such as "sex doesn't exist!" and "lesbians not wanting to date transwomen is sexual racism"-- I think that vocal pro-trans support might win out.

(If you like legal drama, I'm watching this video of Dr. Shannon Curry's testimony in the Amber Heard trial-- Amber's lawyer is arguing with her about personality disorders.)

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Ahahaha, your first mistake was thinking logically!

LOL which is to say... more like an actual lawyer than these weapons-grade dumbasses :)

But, believe it or not, that gives me some hope with regard to the following:

I think it's more likely they'll double down on gender ideology, and thus challenge Allison. Suing Stonewall would require them to take the stance that Stonewall's advice is garbage... which would require GCC to stand up for objective reality. And trans ideology still has a firm grip on all major social media networks.

But Rellie... your first mistake was thinking logically! (As a wise woman once said.) Or, rather, crediting GCC with having the capacity to do so! Here's what I mean: you laid out a logical reason why they wouldn't sue Stonewall-- one itself based on logic, in fact (i.e., that doing so would contradict support for trans ideology). The thing is, such a violation of logic would only bother (or even occur to) those who think logically, correct? Which, as we've already established, does NOT include those at GCC!

Perhaps the very thing which has caused GCC to do so much damage will also be our salvation in the end. Their hopelessness at logic. So they needn't ever recognize how wrong they've been in order to strike a blow against Stonewall. No, they may well do so still while thinking they're BFFs. Unable to perceive the contradiction. But serving our purposes-- and those of all gender-woo-rejecting people-- nonetheless.

And hopefully dealing themselves, as well as Stonewall, a death-blow into the bargain :)

[–]Mikulbleu 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

As someone who went to public school, usually child A does get away with it. Every time.

[–]automoderatorHuman-Exclusionary Radical Overlord[M] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

RIP Snappy, I AM THE NEW GOD!

Click below to view and/or archive snapshots:

If this comment is being added for sites which cannot be usefully archived - for example, video hosts or an existing archive site - please let the Moderators know by sending ModMail. REPLIES TO THIS COMMENT ARE NOT SEEN BY MODS

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this sub if you have any questions or concerns.