"But he had such confidence to say what he did publicly..."

And why shouldn't he?  

Cornerstone Barristers yesterday ended Mr Holbrook's association with their chambers after he refused to take down the offending online posts from January 17.

His 'offensive opinion' was to call a stroppy teenager a stroppy teenager. That's all. And he's not grovelling to her, or anyone else.

He said: 'I don't accept that a policy premised on reasonableness should be outlawed as discriminatory.

'Those, like Ruby's parents, who advocate a particular political view must accept the right of others to criticise it. Equality laws put considerable force on schools to accommodate cultural differences.'

In an article for The Critic , Mr Holbrook wrote: 'The only reason that chambers proceeded to expel me, despite my resignation, was because the salivating attack dogs wanted some red meat to chew.

'Chambers was compliant enough to jump to their barking but it made no difference to me – save to enhance my reputation as a free speech advocate.'

He said he would now do pro bono work, via the Free Speech Union, for anyone similarly 'cancelled' in their workplace.

Good for him. And the stroppy junior political activist? She's clearly furious that he dares to continue to have his own opnion.

'I'm not against people expressing their opinions but it was unfair for him to talk about what I went through at the age of 14, and to call me a "stroppy teenager of colour" for simply calling out a discriminatory policy.

'I had hoped he would take it down and possibly even apologise. He has now written two articles continuing to challenge the validity of my case.'

As is his right. Or did you not really understand what you were saying in the first seven words of your comment? 

Miss Williams said: 'Afro hair is a protected characteristic. We want the choice to wear our natural hair – like everybody else – without being judged.

'I don't know what people thought went on that makes them call me 'stroppy'. He seemed so proud to say it, showing how much privilege someone has to write whole articles on a topic they know nothing about. I'm just fighting for the same school rules that others have.'

But you're not - you're demanding special privileges based on your colour. You're demanding to judge other people without them having the power to judge you right back. Perhaps he'd have been better off calling you a 'thick student of colour' instead. 

You're certainly showing yourself to be exactly that.