#MeToo pioneer Charlotte Proudman reveals she received bottom spanking note on ‘judicial headed note paper’

By on

It came shortly after the barrister went public with City solicitor’s ‘sexist’ LinkedIn message

MeToo pioneer barrister Charlotte Proudman has revealed she once received a letter on “judicial headed note paper” explaining how her head of chambers needed to give her bottom a “good spank”. The “handwritten” missive came in the wake of her decision to go public with a “sexist” LinkedIn message from a law firm partner.

Writing in the Telegraph (£), Proudman reveals further examples of the shocking sexism she and others have encountered, including one that occurred on her first day back at work after the “media storm”.

Proudman recalls finding a “handwritten letter on judicial headed note paper” which “rattled on” about her “incompetence to practice” and how her “stance on sexism had brought the profession into disrepute”. The letter, which appeared in her pigeon hole at chambers, concluded:

“PS. I shall tell Mike (Michael Mansfield QC) to give your bottom a good spank the next time I see him!”

Proudman became a household name in 2015 after she tweeted a screenshot of a message from Alexander Carter-Silk, in which he said she was “stunning”. At the time, her actions — which pre-dated the now well-supported MeToo movement — were criticised by some, with the Daily Mail going as far as labelling her a “feminazi”.

The 2019 Legal Cheek Chambers Most List

Her latest comment piece comes just 24 hours after another junior barrister, Red Lion Chambers’ Joanna Hardy, went public with her nine-point plan to help stamp out sexism at the bar. Proudman says of this plan:

“Joanna Hardy has been widely praised for speaking up, by colleagues and the media — I did not receive the same support. Fortunately, times have changed in the wake of the MeToo movement. Women have supported other women in sharing their stories. They have created a cultural shift, whereby once ‘acceptable’ forms of insidious sexism and abuse are now being challenged.”

Saying she’s yet to see “meaningful change”, Proudman reveals she is a member of several WhatsApp groups where women in law share their “daily experiences of sexism”. In one example, Proudman recalls an incident that occurred only this week where a female barrister described how a male senior barrister had groped her in court. In another, she explains how “a solicitor at a magic circle law firm” once described a young female trainee as being “too ugly to rape”.

Rounding off her article, Proudman argues that “tangible change” will only occur when there is gender parity where power is really held — “within the judiciary and Queen’s Counsel”. This, she adds, will only be achieved by implementing quotas for women in the workplace.

Official statistics show that around a quarter of senior judges (High Court and Court of Appeal) are female, while women account for just 16% of QCs.

Comments on this article are now closed.

Sign up to the Legal Cheek Newsletter



If it’s true, publish.



Mocking disabilities is really NOT on!



Hardy has been widely criticised for her comments, which many have felt to be unhelpful.



She should change her name for gender equity to Proudperson.



Proudperdaughter surely?



Old ones are the best.



“Proudman reveals she is a member of several WhatsApp groups where women in law share their “daily experiences of sexism”.”

Can you imagine if this was the reverse? I.e. men’s only WhatsApp group about how they don’t like the attitude of Ms Proudman and her cohort? It would be on the front page of the Daily Star and the members would be struck off.

Can we please stop encouraging those who are riling others up in pursuit of a “cultural shift” but in reality creating a witch hunt for the wider profession? I concede that the attitudes of the older demographic of the profession need changing, but stop acting like comments like this are universally applicable.



An incident in which “a male senior barrister ha[s] groped [a woman] in court” is not an example of a “daily experience of sexism”. It is an example of sexual assault. Whether consciously or not, Ms Proudman is conflating issues in order to pursue a misguided political agenda.

Nobody would disagree with the sentiment that a female barrister should not be groped in court. However, people do disagree with the behaviour, attitude and positions put forward by Ms Proudman. Frankly, she is an embarrassment to herself and an embarrassment to the profession.



Completely agree with the judge tbh

She’s out of order, attention seeking and a little missy on the make

She chose her second name, having previously been “Charlotte Bailey”

Why on earth a feminist would chose the name “proud-man” I don’t know



Cos she wanted to call herself Poundland in solidarity with the underclass, but was too blind drunk (again in solidarity) when filling out the forms



He’s on the spectrum.


Mr Boner Law

He was in his 50s. So anyone under 35 is a hottie to him.

As I am a close in age to C Proud, I can attest to the fact that she is not attractive, and that hair is ridiculous. I would give her a solid 5 out of 10.



If this is a joke/wind up it’s in the poorest of taste. Rape is about power and violence. It has nothing to do with attraction. What the hell do you think you’re doing posting this crap?



Does she also want quotas for any other groups, or just the group to which she happens to belong?


Steven Seagull

Quotas are a total joke in any event.

Get the best to do the job. If they happen to be men (or women), then so be it.



If ‘Mike’ was identified only as ‘Mike’, how does she know that it meant Michael Mansfield QC?



Am I the only one who read the whole smacking her bottom for being naughty statement, as in the childhood punishment and not some form of sexist remark?

It would appear in the context of being a crap barrister and bringing the profession into disrepute that this seems to be the case, but maybe I am just being naive.



Whether it was meant to suggest sexual or non-sexual chastisement, and irrespective of what we think about CP and her motives, can we not agree that there is no place at all in the profession for comments like that?



No. We can’t agree. Fuck of and sterilise someone else’s profession.



I guess the grievance money has dried up and she needs to resurface for a bit of media cash



Wow – I appreciate that this is probably horrendously politically incorrect but that is a stunning picture of Miss Proudman!!! She definitely wins the prize for the best Legal Cheek picture I have ever seen! If Miss Proudman sees this, she should know that I’m always interested in understanding people’s skills and how we might work together.


Ciaran Goggins

Typical of the subconscious phallocentric oppression of wimmin. Teh menz, teh patriarchy!



Lots of angsty baby-men on this comment thread.



Your position seems to be that belittlement and name-calling are absolutely fine, so long as the targets are men. That can’t be right, can it?



If that really happened she would have named and shamed the judge as she did the Stunning Photo lawyer.


Bar Hopeful

Quite surprised by the number of comments on here from people apparently so unaware of the concept of irony that they are using very sexist and misogynist language to claim that Charlotte Proudman is lying about the sexist and misogynist abuse she receives…

Frankly, I hope that none of you are at the Bar as it would put me off becoming a part of it if views like yours were in the mainstream.



Is the accusation that the note was written by a judge? As another commenter said, the note should be published. Was the matter complained about at the time? If not why not?


Comments are closed.

Related Stories