The Conversation finally publishes Dr Stock

[silentcrow]

Some of you will remember the cowardly way The Conversation published Katherine Jenkins' rather ridiculous pro-self-id piece a month ago, having denied Prof Kathleen Stock the same opportunity. In fact I think a number of you commented on the piece, and we had a discussion thread here www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3349118-Pro-Trans-article-Women-Can-Have-Penises-Katherine-Jenkins-Nottingham-University

Well, Prof Stock has finally been given space to have her say, and it's a great piece, unsurprisingly, effectively mythbusting the TWAW line. Enjoy it here: theconversation.com/why-self-identification-should-not-legally-make-you-a-woman-103372

h/t to Manchester Feminist Network for spotting it

Those of you who are super-observant and good at following the money, do take a look at the funding partners section down the right hand side and see if you can spot an anomaly...

All the LOLs that they're too scared to allow comments!

I was considering cancelling the Conversation's email on the basis of being too cowardly to publish anything GC. They managed a half-effort (not Katherine's piece which is excellent: the no comments bit) so I suppose I shall now see what happens next.

There is something very interesting about Professor Stock's article: the confident dismissal of the notion that TWAW.

To paraphrase, she says that they aren't, and never will be, and we can move on to discuss the other 'familiar objections'.

The argument that TWAW is not backed up by evidence and the public didn't need much convincing that Women Don't Have Penises.

The comments section has opened and so far there are supportive posts. Nice one, Kathleen. What a shame that the article wasn't published soon after the weird nonsense from TWAW Katherine Jenkins' back in August.

I’m glad the comments have opened. It’s highly unusual for them to be closed - so much so, I was going to post about it.

And first prize goes to Madeleine...

Very clear and concise, I like it.

Great, thanks for posting. I’d seen the article but wasn’t aware of the history.

I think it was Rosa Freedman they’d declined to publish previously. I wrote to them to complain and their politics editor replied denying censorship (though it was clear from what Rosa Freedman was tweeeting that they had been fearful of the TRA response). She said they would publish feminist viewpoints in the future.

Prof Stock is outstanding:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3353260-Kathleen-Stock-womens-organisations-have-decentred-biological-females?pg=1

A bump for the early evening crowd as it's worth a read