A lawyer who works for the government in the United Kingdom faced a lawsuit after she stated that only women menstruate.
Elspeth Duemmer Wrigley, a lawyer who is linked to the Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs, was reportedly accused of harassment over her comments, which she shared at work. Wrigley also chairs a civil service network, Sex Equality and Equity Network (SEEN), that represents staff with “gender-critical views,” according to Daily Mail:
Among the reasons given for the lawsuit, she says the claimant is suing her for a statement made during a seminar on 'Women and Autism' in which she said that 'only women menstruate'.
According to Ms Duemmer Wrigley, the claimant - who has not been named - believes the existence of the network 'has the effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating and/or offensive environment for the claimant'.
[...]
Ms Duemmer Wrigley claims all her actions are protected under Articles 9 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, under rights to freedom of belief and expression, respectively.
In a crowdfunder for her legal expenses, Wrigley said that the claimant also sued her because she shared links to an interview with a detransitioner and to a children’s book that pushes back on transgender ideology.
There are many protected beliefs in our organisation, some religious (such as Christitianity) and some philosophical (such as veganism). Some people believe that we all have a gender (sometimes ‘gender identity’) separate from our biological sex; that sex is a spectrum, and that biological sex is an idea that first emerged with white European colonisation. Such beliefs are protected by law,” she wrote.
“Other people, such as myself, hold that sex is binary (male and female), fundamentally biological and an important category to recognise in language, laws, sport and [the] workplace. These beliefs, sometimes called ‘gender critical’ are also protected by law,” she added.
On Monday, Wrigley wrote that the case against her was formally withdrawn.
“However, this does not end things,” Wrigley wrote. “The claimant is still seeking remedies which would directly impact me, those who are gender critical within the Civil Service, and the SEEN network. For this reason I am seeking to remain on the action as an Interested Party, to ensure that none of these remedies are implemented.”