andrewducker: (Default)
andrewducker ([personal profile] andrewducker) wrote2022-05-19 12:00 pm
nameandnature: Giles from Buffy (Default)

[personal profile] nameandnature 2022-05-26 10:47 pm (UTC)(link)
Reading back, my use o f "doctrine" probably came from the earlier use of "doctrinaire" i.e. inflexible and not pragmatic.

Assuming the number of people wanting a support group is high enough (which, unfortunately, it probably is), it seems possible to arrange multiple groups so that people who won't get on for whatever reason can be in different ones without anyone being excluded from being in a group. That'd be pragmatic.

Suppose the centre were in fact running multiple groups (I'm not sure whether anyone has said whether they were or weren't). The centre's view was that the complainant's reason for not getting along with someone in her group was a bad and wrong reason. Their refusal to put her in another group looks like they valued punishing her for that badness over just putting her in a group which didn't have male-presenting people in it.

The harder case would be when there was only one group (because of limited resources rather than limited demand, presumably). In that case the complainant's case would be a lot weaker, because she's got to argue that her rights should overrule other people's rights to get group support, and why should we think that?