"Similar to South Africa attempting to racially integrate society"

An extraordinary statement made regarding the "cotton ceiling" in evidence at Bailey v Garden Court Chambers & Stonewall

Apart from setting out the the background to the case drawn from publicly available papers, I’ve not commented on the parties’ respective cases in Bailey v Garden Court Chambers & Stonewall because proceedings are ongoing and the gender borg do rather have a tendency to misrepresent what one says for gain. As such, I won’t be commenting here on the merits of Allison’s claim or the cases put forward by the defendants, but I will comment on what I consider to be an extraordinary aspect of today’s evidence - regarding the so-called “cotton ceiling” - in defence of lesbians and homosexuality more generally, as I feel compelled to. I do so on the basis that the evidence reported below is a true and accurate account of what was given in evidence.

Above: At this point words fail me frankly, I invite you to think of your own description, none of mine are in keeping with civilised expression or the best traditions of legal drafting.

For anyone who doesn’t know, the term “cotton ceiling” (and its male equivalent, the “boxer ceiling”) are deployed by biology deniers to suggest that the same-sex sexual boundaries we homosexuals by definition have are in some way barriers to be overcome. A sort of reincarnation of the “you just haven’t met the right man/woman yet” homophobia many of us have been subjected to over the course of many years and are thoroughly sick of. This is not some esoteric, academic conceit. Biology deniers convene “workshops” over these issues and teach one another how to get homosexuals to sleep with members of the opposite sex who adopt novel gender identities. Some call it woke conversion therapy. Most recognise the preferred target by some margin are lesbians as opposed to gay men. An advert for one of these gatherings was rather brilliantly dismantled by Glinner, and a quick read of his piece will tell you all you need to know: that same-sex attraction is a “sexual barrier” which needs to be “overcome”. Lord only knows what the “visual representations” were or what schemes were shared so as to “strategise ways to overcome" said barriers.

Above: A good reason not to visit Toronto

It will, I suspect, come as absolutely no surprise to anyone to hear that your average lesbian tends to be less than impressed by a group of persons adopting gender identities telling them they’re somehow wrong/bad people/morally equivalent to racists for simply being lesbians and choosing not to sleep with biological men. Sadly, one rather expects to hear this sort of thing from biology deniers, and poor lesbians are used to this with even the CEO of Stonewall describing lesbianism as a product of “societal prejudices” and in one email coming right out and saying lesbians are “sexual racists”. Unsurprisingly you might think, many lesbians speak out about this. One such example was Allison Bailey here who described the workshop discussed above as “coercive”, which was what led to the extraordinary South African comparison. To put that description and the evidence in context, I’ll just say something briefly about the witness and where we are with the evidence adduced thus far in this tribunal.

Catherine McGahey QC is a public law specialist at Temple Garden Chambers. She provided advice to Allison’s set, Garden Court Chambers, on whether or not tweets sent by Allison using the word “coercion” were a breach of the relevant professional rules for barristers using social media. Her chambers sought this advice because they were conducting a disciplinary exercise against Allison on the basis of a complaint from Stonewall. Her position today in evidence in respect of one tweet was as follows: “‘coaching to coerce’, I thought those tweets were over the line”. Much of the evidence around the South African tweet above was on the precise meaning of the word “coerce”, and whether the suggestion that these workshops are coercive can be sustained on the evidence.

Above: Allison Bailey marching for LGB rights in San Francisco 1991

So that’s the background. Now, I have a few things to say about the remark, “No, it is similar to South Africa attempting to racially integrate society.”

(1) Same sex sexual boundaries are not opening offers in a negotiation, nor are they matters we homosexuals are unsure of. They happen to attract the status of a protected characteristic via s.12 of the Equality Act 2010 and, frankly, even if that were not the case, lesbians and gay men are entitled to simply be lesbians and gay men without their perfectly reasonable, innate and normal sexual boundaries being regarded as barriers for those adopting gender identities to overcome. To quote the late Magdalen Berns, “Leave lesbians alone”.

(2) This remark is being understood by many as a direct comparison between racists and homosexuals because the “workshop” makes clear persons being “integrated” into dating pools/the category of potential sexual partners are those with trans identities i.e. people who are biologically diametric to the homosexual dating pool which they seek to enter. I regard it as a deeply unfortunate piece of wording and I hope very much it is clumsy phrasing. As matters stand, people across social media are horrified by this statement and they are drawing inevitable comparisons to Stonewall CEO’s eccentric and offensive statements on race.

(3) If I’m being naïve regarding the meaning, I say only this. The persons in South Africa opposed to racial integration were, by definition, racists. Racists are rightly despised and held in contempt. I do hope it is not being suggested that same sex sexual boundaries represent a failure to “integrate” those with trans identities. If that is the suggestion, it is an extremely serious matter.

(4) It really is an irony that a person debating the propriety and appropriateness of tweets by Allison goes on to make a remark which many homosexuals and others regard as deeply offensive.

(5) I’ve been wondering how I might react were I a barrister in court hearing this. Homosexuals are legal professionals, Judges, court staff. We also read about court cases. No other minority it seems to me is expected to put up with discussions of this nature. I appreciate the evidence which the tribunal is considering is in part about the tweets, and I appreciate that Ben Cooper QC (Allison’s Counsel) was asking about these matters. What I cannot understand is why comparisons to racial integration in South Africa are helpful, proper or necessary. Ironically, Mr. Cooper QC had just finished a series of questions about the BSB Social Media advice to barristers to the effect that heated debates should be avoided. As the social media furore following the South Africa tweet aptly demonstrates, this exchange has simply caused a heated debate (and horrified reaction).

(6) May I just remind everyone that lesbians are human beings with feelings. I know few seem to care about that these days, as obviously some have formed the view lesbians and their sexual boundaries are just inconveniences to be overcome (hence, the “cotton ceiling”), but having texted with lesbian friends this morning I can say many are genuinely hurt and distressed by this sort of comparison to apartheid. One commented that it “hurts my heart” to think of how younger lesbians reading this sort of thing might feel and how careless talk of this nature feeds into self-hatred and guilt.

(7) As I trust this piece makes clear, to anyone who does take the view that lesbians are somehow morally deficient or analogous to racists please be warned that a growing number of gay men stand shoulder to shoulder with our sisters. We will not allow wholly unjust and deeply offensive statements about homosexuality to pass unchallenged. Expect to hear more from us from more of us.