We've recently mentioned this case of a social worker winning her case against Cambridgeshire County Council for her GC views. The case was settled before it reached trial. It's fairly standard stuff: Lizzy Pitt, the social worker, aired her GC views in a LBGT meeting at work. She said that sex is real and is a matter of biology; you can't change sex; mentioned biological in sports; and that she didn't want biological men in women's spaces.
archive.ph
The Council initiated disciplinary proceedings when 5 months later, 5 colleagues filed a formal complaint against her accusing her of, amongst other things, committing 'symbolic violence' (not entirely sure what this means, but I'm thinking that it's less violent than the 'literal violence' we generally hear about
). One poor lamb couldn't sleep for two nights 'thinking about this cruelty' and another suffered 'anxiety dreams' after the meeting. I'm not sure why it took them 5 months to complain - I guess they were working through their trauma. 
Ms Pitt, was suspended from the LBGT group for 12 months hence her appeal to the Tribunal. I find it hilarious that these people are social workers and yet get 'traumatised' by someone merely stating biological facts and their views on biological men in sport and women's spaces. Given the wide breadth of work that social work generally entails, I do worry about how they cope doing their jobs and meeting genuine trauma victims and genuine victims of violence. Perhaps they are in the wrong profession if they are so fragile? And once again, an employer not recognising that, as was said in the Forstater case, GC beliefs are 'worthy of respect in a democratic society'.
Employers can keep on discriminating against us, and they will keep on being held to account by the Courts and made to pay out. We'll get there - eventually.
Cambridgeshire council admits discriminating against social worker ov…
archived 2 Aug 2024 22:30:43 UTC
The Council initiated disciplinary proceedings when 5 months later, 5 colleagues filed a formal complaint against her accusing her of, amongst other things, committing 'symbolic violence' (not entirely sure what this means, but I'm thinking that it's less violent than the 'literal violence' we generally hear about
). One poor lamb couldn't sleep for two nights 'thinking about this cruelty' and another suffered 'anxiety dreams' after the meeting. I'm not sure why it took them 5 months to complain - I guess they were working through their trauma. Ms Pitt, was suspended from the LBGT group for 12 months hence her appeal to the Tribunal. I find it hilarious that these people are social workers and yet get 'traumatised' by someone merely stating biological facts and their views on biological men in sport and women's spaces. Given the wide breadth of work that social work generally entails, I do worry about how they cope doing their jobs and meeting genuine trauma victims and genuine victims of violence. Perhaps they are in the wrong profession if they are so fragile? And once again, an employer not recognising that, as was said in the Forstater case, GC beliefs are 'worthy of respect in a democratic society'.
Employers can keep on discriminating against us, and they will keep on being held to account by the Courts and made to pay out. We'll get there - eventually.
like, wtf!??? 
