Neil, if I read you right, you’re saying 2022 was not a good year for “the Ailing UK Gender-Critical Movement”? And you coin a witty (or nonsense) term, Litigatitis, to prove this.
I disagree. Do you think any other year was better than 2022? If so, which?
Yes, so-called Litigatitis has been valuable. While the Gender Cultists can get away with falsehoods in the media, politics, academia and other areas of public discourse, their arguments don’t stand up in court, thank God.
That is the reason why, unfortunately, the GCs have to resort to law. And it has been one of the most successful tactics of the year (alongside the Let Women Speak tours, imo). Look at this list on www.crowdjustice.com/case/stand-with-maya End of year update. Of her Employment Tribunal win, which found that gender critical beliefs are “worthy of respect in a democratic society”, Maya writes:
“Since then I heard from hundreds of women and men who have been able to use “Forstater” to forestall complaints escalating at work, and who feel braver in speaking up. There are several cases ongoing which use the precedent including Allison Bailey’s (she won against Garden Court and is appealing against Stonewall), University lecturers Jo Phoenix and Cathy Boardman, the author Gillian Phillips, the Green Party cases (Shahrar Ali, Emma Bateman and Dawn Furness ) the social worker Rachel Meade, Sarah Surviving’s case against Brighton’s Rape Crisis Centre and the LGB Alliance case. In other incidents, organisations such as Nottingham Library have apologised for taking discriminatory actions.
Litigatitis is still one of the main ways forward and I fear that your negative blog may well discourage readers from crowd-funding and otherwise supporting these important legal actions.
I have long been extremely pessimistic about the likelihood of rolling back this insidious movement because of at least two factors: one is the amount of money involved in continuing this movement for all players and two is the related amorality and often downright malevolence of politicians and corporate heads and boards and institutions w/ respect to the rights of women and children. Same old, same old.
In addition, it has long been apparent that there are too many true believers in the movement who really believe in the promised utopia this movement they are told will usher in. And too many others who are willing to go along with those true believers who understand the disadvantage to women, children, and same-sex attracted individuals and that's OK by them. And finally so many others who just don't know and don't want to know not only about this movement but anything.
Neil, if I read you right, you’re saying 2022 was not a good year for “the Ailing UK Gender-Critical Movement”? And you coin a witty (or nonsense) term, Litigatitis, to prove this.
I disagree. Do you think any other year was better than 2022? If so, which?
Yes, so-called Litigatitis has been valuable. While the Gender Cultists can get away with falsehoods in the media, politics, academia and other areas of public discourse, their arguments don’t stand up in court, thank God.
That is the reason why, unfortunately, the GCs have to resort to law. And it has been one of the most successful tactics of the year (alongside the Let Women Speak tours, imo). Look at this list on www.crowdjustice.com/case/stand-with-maya End of year update. Of her Employment Tribunal win, which found that gender critical beliefs are “worthy of respect in a democratic society”, Maya writes:
“Since then I heard from hundreds of women and men who have been able to use “Forstater” to forestall complaints escalating at work, and who feel braver in speaking up. There are several cases ongoing which use the precedent including Allison Bailey’s (she won against Garden Court and is appealing against Stonewall), University lecturers Jo Phoenix and Cathy Boardman, the author Gillian Phillips, the Green Party cases (Shahrar Ali, Emma Bateman and Dawn Furness ) the social worker Rachel Meade, Sarah Surviving’s case against Brighton’s Rape Crisis Centre and the LGB Alliance case. In other incidents, organisations such as Nottingham Library have apologised for taking discriminatory actions.
Litigatitis is still one of the main ways forward and I fear that your negative blog may well discourage readers from crowd-funding and otherwise supporting these important legal actions.
I have long been extremely pessimistic about the likelihood of rolling back this insidious movement because of at least two factors: one is the amount of money involved in continuing this movement for all players and two is the related amorality and often downright malevolence of politicians and corporate heads and boards and institutions w/ respect to the rights of women and children. Same old, same old.
In addition, it has long been apparent that there are too many true believers in the movement who really believe in the promised utopia this movement they are told will usher in. And too many others who are willing to go along with those true believers who understand the disadvantage to women, children, and same-sex attracted individuals and that's OK by them. And finally so many others who just don't know and don't want to know not only about this movement but anything.