Next step in overriding female rights!

There are several questions I would like answered.
Were other women using the same changing room as Sandie Peggie?
Were they subjected to the same treatment by Dr.Upton, and if so, what was their response?
Was the Equality policy on which this action is based discussed with female staff?
Do Doctors have male and female changing rooms?
Can a member of staff really be dismissed for 'misgendering' and therefore be accused of using the 'wrong' pronouns?
( I know teachers have been accused and in some cases dismissed for using the 'wrong' pronouns on children.)
What sort of man, a doctor no less, insists on using a changing room when a female member is dealing with a heavy menstrual flow?
Finally, what has happened to the respect which used to be expected from young, inexperienced members of staff towards older, experienced members, whatever their status?

Just to add to this whole sorry saga, a trans rights group has reported the editor of the Scottish Daily Express to the police for referring to Dr Upton as a man in their reporting of the tribunal.

I'd like to think she has a lot of support both there and throughout the country.

Yes, how much is this all costing and who exactly is driving this as well as this doctor.

Why is precious nhs money being used to defend what is basically a lie, Dr. upton is a man, Sandie is correct to ask him to leave a female changing room.
This case makes me so angry, it would be amazing if every female worker in the Fife hospital downed tools in support of Sandie !

Why do those who don't accept that sex is a biological fact always claim they are being 'attacked' when people disagree with them?

We've seen this time and time again over the years, and it is simply not true. More people believe that sex is immutable than don't, so someone claiming that it an option based on 'feelings' that they can never define are highly likely to run into disagreement, just as Flat Earthers will. That is not personal, and pointing out that humans have known the difference between men and women since time began, that language is structured around that basic fact, and that even thousands of years after death it is easy for experts to sex a bone is not 'attacking' anyone, or 'hate speech'. The sense of entitlement and hectoring tones of those who claim that they're saying something makes it true, and if anyone disagrees they are 'hateful' is far closer to attack and hate speech.

Someone on twitter said, if she's dismissed then the findings of the tribunal don't need to be adhered to. I don't know how much of that is accurate though. It's a very bad look for NHS Fife. I believe Sandie is taking legal advice, so isn't taking this lying down

I think NHS Fife have shot themselves in the foot with this move with this move, to be honest. They're literally stomping all over the tribunal with hob-nailed boots! This could backfire on them big time.

Oh that's just vindictive of them, they've truly lost their minds.

Sandie Peggie has been called to a misconduct meeting this coming Friday. She has been told/warned that this may lead to dismissal.
Management at NHS Fife have totally lost the plot, you really couldn’t make this up.

x.com/dsanderson_85/status/1891211318843126142?s=12

Absolutely true Mollygo.

Like PN I’m more interested in the real issues here.
È.g. Whether this doctor understands that his words and actions are contributing to the concerns of those TIM who do not insist on being in female spaces or who understand perfectly that sex is immutable.

The actions of TIM cheats and their insistence on being accepted as the women they can never be damages those trans who just want to live without causing problems.

A few thoughts.....

Why did Beth Upton need permission to use the women's changing room? Had any of the other women using it asked for permission? What made Beth different to them? Why did Beth feel the need to get official permission when Beth is 'a biological female'? I have the tiniest suspicion that maybe Beth knows more about the immutability of sex than he's admitting.

Aveline

PoliticsNerd are you threatening us?

... so I wasn't the only one to detect a warning then...

Cynicism about the doctor's argument does not constitute hate-speech anymore than the doctor's own views do - which appear equally cynical.

The only time I have ever even vaguely worried in this debate was when my children were brought in to it, that was on this site but GN dealt with it promptly.
Justine (owner of MN) deserves lots more credit than she ever gets in terms of women who helped to further womens rights in relation to this debate.

I would be surprised if she is worried, it is something we have seen a thousand times before, I could have written the script. I am just surprised there has been no mention of clown fish.

I'm far more concerned with the real issues here.

Of course you are ViceVersa.

PoliticsNerd

ViceVersa

PoliticsNerd

ViceVersa

What exactly do you feel constitutes discrimination or hate speech on this thread, PoliticsNerd? Most of us who have commented have merely cited examples of what has been given in evidence during the tribunal.

I have already answered this question.

If you say so. I don't think you have.

And? What has happened to your topic while you worry about me?

My topic? Not sure what you mean by that, and I can assure you I'm not worrying about you in the slightest. I'm far more concerned with the real issues here.

PoliticsNerd has carefully avoided retracting the accusation that I introduced "age, sexual orientation, place of residence etc" when I didn't. Beth Upton introduced those areas in a reply contributing to an allegation of him being verbose. I merely questioned if he'd ever been asked about any of them.

There are two sexes, so determined by the gametes they are organised to produce (even if a failure in the body means they don't) There is no third or more gamete therefore no third or more sex. No mammal has ever changed from being organised to produce a large gamete to produce a small gamete or vice versa.

The old information is often just incomplete or simplified for introductory purposes. As you learn more, you (hope to) gain a deeper and more nuanced perspective on the subject.

Perhaps that's what doctors do too.
Maybe Professor Robert Winston, a world leading expert needs to consult with Beth Upton to gain a more nuanced perspective and deeper understanding of biology?

ViceVersa

PoliticsNerd

ViceVersa

What exactly do you feel constitutes discrimination or hate speech on this thread, PoliticsNerd? Most of us who have commented have merely cited examples of what has been given in evidence during the tribunal.

I have already answered this question.

If you say so. I don't think you have.

And? What has happened to your topic while you worry about me?

Allira

Witzend

Must say I find it astonishing that a doctor calls biological sex a ‘nebulous’ concept!

From politicians* it’s one thing, but I’d never have thought a doctor would need a crash course in basic biology!

A GCSE in Human Biology might be sufficient to learn the difference.

You may or may not be right about 100% determination of sex but GCSE is a poor example of exactitude. After GCSE you go on to higher levels only to be told you have to build on the "basics".

The old information is often just incomplete or simplified for introductory purposes. As you learn more, you (hope to) gain a deeper and more nuanced perspective on the subject.

Perhaps that's what doctors do too.

PoliticsNerd

ViceVersa

What exactly do you feel constitutes discrimination or hate speech on this thread, PoliticsNerd? Most of us who have commented have merely cited examples of what has been given in evidence during the tribunal.

I have already answered this question.

If you say so. I don't think you have.

Allira

PoliticsNerd

Aveline

PoliticsNerd are you threatening us?

Don't be silly. I'm not doing anything of the sort.

Just a warning then?

However, those on the receiving end of those freely expressing their beliefs are also protected by various laws that limit how the can be delivered. Even Gransnet is not above the law.
🤔

You really don't have anything to actually discuss, do you?

ViceVersa

What exactly do you feel constitutes discrimination or hate speech on this thread, PoliticsNerd? Most of us who have commented have merely cited examples of what has been given in evidence during the tribunal.

I have already answered this question.

PoliticsNerd

Aveline

PoliticsNerd are you threatening us?

Don't be silly. I'm not doing anything of the sort.

Just a warning then?

However, those on the receiving end of those freely expressing their beliefs are also protected by various laws that limit how the can be delivered. Even Gransnet is not above the law.
🤔

Aveline

PoliticsNerd are you threatening us?

Don't be silly. I'm not doing anything of the sort.