Klaxon! Tweets wanted for Sam Gyimah MP, Minister of State for Universities, Science, Research and Innovation

[FeminismandWomensFights]

Klaxon! Calling all gender-critical people and groups, and especially scientists who are on Twitter: closing date 5pm today Friday 30 Nov

www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/science-and-technology-committee/news-parliament-2017/sam-gyimah-ask-twitter-questions-17-19/

Committee asks for Twitter questions for session with the Minister

On 11 December the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee will hold a one-off evidence session with Sam Gyimah MP, Minister of State for Universities, Science, Research and Innovation, and Dr Patrick Vallance, Government Chief Scientific Adviser.

Science and Technology Committee
Twitter: @CommonsSTC**

MPs on the Committee want to ensure that their questions reflect the most pressing concerns in the science community and are inviting the public to submit questions to be put to the Minister.

Submit your question via Twitter between 8.30am on Wednesday 28 November and 5pm on Friday 30 November using #AskSamGyimah.

This is a GREAT opportunity to raise issues about university teaching or researching, grant funding, ethics approval, freedom of speech and debate, freedom to educate students along accepted scientific lines, oppression of women academics who speak out, silencing of scientists, the climate of fear in universities, sexism and working in science and universities...

www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/science-and-technology-committee/news-parliament-2017/sam-gyimah-ask-twitter-questions-17-19/

I’m not on Twitter.

But could someone who has read the FLAG attitudes to gender thread / done the survey ask what government department it actually is that assigns gender to newborns. And if he is aware that research is stating this as fact when it is actually a lie?

Because I’ve had some babies and the government has assigned them absolutely fuck all.

Bump because this closes 5pm today

Bumping too. This is important.

Bump

Hmm, I wonder how many of my colleagues are actually on twitter. I'm not, and I suspect most others aren't.

It's not a brilliant way of finding out the most pressing concerns of the public, simply because it's not a representative cross-section of society, but in fact self-selects people who either want to publicise themselves, their businesses/writing/etc., or in some cases simply love the "sound" of their own voice.

Fermats agreed not ideal format because lots of people will not feel comfortable submitting questions via Twitter.

If this is a big problem it would be valid for people to email the Committee email address saying why they need to send in their comment or question via email.

OTOH for those that do have Twitter obviously the audience is wider than the recipient because the platform is so public -so it serves to raise awareness potentially.

The main advantage though of this is if these questions are noted by the Committee, the Minister may be asked them in Committee AND the committee may do a future inquiry on these topics-the resulting report would be v influential to raise questions about these issues in Parliament and in government departments etc.

Also.... Anyone can tweet with their questions for Minister that are science and university related... don’t have to be a scientist or an academic to raise these concerns.

closes 5pm today!

I have access to a Twitter account and can ask for a question to be sent. What do you think would be the best? I have done the survey, which I think was written by idiots, and am disgusted that so much funding has been given to such incompetents.

So my greatest beefs about the actual survey are to do with how badly it is devised and how much they've beeñ paid to do such a bad job. I'm not sure I'll phrase it well enough.

Really sorry, just had a look. Could someone just give me instructions on what to click, and should I Put a heading or something (don't use Twitter much)

#AskSamGyimah I would like to ask why the Government is not challenging the pseudoscience being propagated in schools by lobby groups such as Gendered Intelligence, Mermaids, Allsorts and Stonewall

Hi Jux, I think you just need to tweet your question and include the hashtag #AskSamGyimah

I'm happy to tweet questions for people if they're not on Twitter. I'll check in at 4pm and tweet anything in this thread that has my name in it.

Jux I would just pick any area you feel most strongly about and ask about that- the wider picture will start to emerge once anyone starts looking into any particular area or example. So eg could be something like:

-is the Minister aware of a culture in many UK universities which seeks to compel academics and students to conflate human biological sex with chosen gender presentation (as if these were not distinct)? This pressure restricts freedom of speech, research, publication and teaching and learning in science and medicine, law, social science, psychology and many other areas.

Eg is the Minister aware that female academics and their employers can be targeted on social media if these academics raise questions about the important scientific, medical, social and legal implications which arise when human biological sex is conflated with chosen gender presentation?

Eg is the Minister aware that sometimes UK academic research conflates human biological sex and chosen gender presentation, eg when asking for respondents’ views? The possibility for respondents’ misunderstanding of the meaning of such terms when there is this conflation, shows that caution will be needed if seeking to use such research as an evidence basis for policy.

Thank you. Yes, when you focus, it's fairly easy isn't it?

Crone thank you

I think the question really needs to be related to higher education or the committee will ignore it. So something like: "Do you agree that universities should make robust efforts to stop student organisations from silencing and intimidating feminists?" or "Do you agree that the recent attempts by student extremists to shut down debate about the gender recognition bill are deplorable?"

Does the Minister think that funding bodies should continue to fund research grounded in Queer Theory? Why?
Or is time that Queer Theory went the same way as Phrenology and Astrology?

Jux excellent. So many people won’t even have heard about it or understood that there is any issue for women here. So raising a few questions for people to think about is really important.

@CroneInAMillion
Thanks so much, could you ask

what government department it is that actually assigns legal gender to newborns. As this is being used as the basis of Flag attitudes to gender survey which will effect legal policy. It is also used widely but government funded LBGT / trans charities working in schools.

Personally I wouldn’t advocate for shutting down any area of study, but definitely I would advocate for treating the results of research findings with appropriate questions which should be able to be freely asked. Like we should do with all research but especially as we’d do with every other area of evidence based in a particular political leaning or religious belief.

The problem with this area of belief is that asking questions is not allowed #nodebate and any questions are taken as offensive and can be used against people as evidence of hate or ‘phobia or something else really bad and aggressive when it isn’t.

hackmum is right, questions need to be linked in some way to science and tech ideally and universities or they can ignore it.

I am not on Twitter

Is he aware of the ESRC funding which is clearly designed to come up with a specific answer and then lead a bill to replace sex with gender as a protected characteristic? Two questions from this. 1. Is this an appropriate use of public money, as the research is flawed from the start and 2. Does he understand and agree with the TOTAL removal of women’s rights which would happen if sex is replaced by gender in equality legislation?

Great points. Could riff on those a bit more maybe:

1. Has the Minister undertaken to assess the impact that the replacement of human biological sex by gender in UK equality law would place upon the freedom of scientific enquiry, research and teaching in UK scientific and medical academia?

1. Has the Minister undertaken to assess the impact that the replacement of sex by gender in UK equality law would have on the UK life sciences and pharmaceutical industry, where drugs and other clinical interventions are developed and tested based on the reality of sex differences?

1. Has the Minister undertaken to assess the impact that the replacement of sex by gender in UK equality law would have in the NHS where sex-based differences are currently acknowledged to be scientifically and medically real and are essential to be taken into account to ensure patient safety?

1. Has the Minister undertaken to assess the impact that the replacement of sex by gender in UK equality law might have on UK government, NHS, academic research and other data collection standardisation? (In the collection of data pertaining to either sex or gender).

1. Had the Minister considered how the replacement of sex by gender in UK equality law might lead to the depletion and fracture of existing research data sets and might lead to difficulties in linking data sets with other non UK countries (who continue to use conventional sex-based classifications in data collection)?

1. Has the Minister undertaken to assess the impact that the replacement of sex by gender in UK equality law would have on the position of women working in science? Women are currently under represented at many levels in the scientific, research and academic workforce in the UK, and by obscuring the statistical collection of data pertaining to sex and potentially replacing this with gender identity we will not be able to see or to tackle discrimination against women in science, research or academia, nor their under-representation in the workforce.

Whoops numbering went a bit awry there

Actually I’m rephrasing point one

1. Is this an appropriate use of public money, as the research is flawed from the start and is clearly aimed towards a political end.