Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Sally Hines accuses Professor Rosa Freedman of being mean on Twitter

156 replies

OrchidInTheSun · 25/11/2018 01:16

Hines says she's copied in her university and the ESRC into tweets about her. She's very cross. So cross that she can't spell Rosa's name properly - it's Freedman, not Freeman.

Here's her tirade
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1066446520575250435.html

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Thread gallery
15
Melamin · 29/11/2018 09:32

That was good -

The 'mad circularity of this argument' has been exposed in their Womans Hour refusals and it is there for everyone to hear for themselves.

R0wantrees · 29/11/2018 08:13

Telegraph review of Woman's Hour 'Sex & Gender' series:
'How Woman's Hour exposed the tensions at the heart of the transgender debate'
by JEMIMA LEWIS

Gender is such a hot topic – more of an inferno, really – that it’s easy to get your fingers burnt. Last March, Woman’s Hour presenter Jenni Murray wrote a long, nuanced article arguing that trans women who grow up male don’t experience the world in the same way as natal women. For this, she was publicly rebuked by Stonewall, accused of transphobia and added to the student union blacklist of Wicked Old Women.

Now it’s the turn of her co-presenter, Jane Garvey, to slap on a hard hat, grab a hose and dash into the burning building. All this week and last, Garvey has been hosting a series of debates on gender, trying to understand the conflict between feminists and trans activists, and – a genuine public service, this – render it comprehensible to the average listener. One of the weirdest things about this argument is how hard it is to understand. Every single one of us has personal experience of sex and gender; yet the subject has become so encrusted in jargon that only the most obsessively interested parties can follow the conversation.

“What are sex and gender?” Garvey asked at the start of the first debate, last Monday. Sociologist Sally Hines cleared her throat and attempted clarity. It didn’t last long. “Sex, I would argue, is a very complex mix of chromosomes, hormones and genitals… So we are talking about biological factors, but we’re not talking about anything at all which is straightforward…. We are talking about a complex mix of factors which, especially in the West, have often been seen through a binary framework.”

You could practically hear Garvey’s eyeballs rolling in her head. I share her impatience with the self-important verbosity of gender politics. And if Garvey sometimes seems exasperated by her trans guests, who can blame her? They keep refusing to take part in a proper debate – insisting on recording their interviews separately from the enemy.

This Monday’s discussion was supposed to be about how to improve communication between the two sides. But Bex Stinson, head of trans equality at Stonewall, refused to appear in the studio with her opposite number (Helen Lewis of the New Statesman) on the grounds that the debate was too toxic. The mad circularity of this argument – I won’t try to have a civilised conversation because the conversation is too uncivilised – was especially baffling because Lewis is one of the gentler critics of the trans lobby.

She already believes that trans women are women, deserving of the same rights and respect as other women. Yet, said Lewis, because she doesn’t subscribe to every element of trans doctrine, Stinson apparently regards her as a dangerous bigot. And “if she’s saying that about me”, added Lewis cleverly, “she’s saying that about – I would say – 95 per cent of Woman’s Hour listeners.” That’s how to win a debate: speak plain English, know your audience – and above all, be in the room." (continues)

www.telegraph.co.uk/radio/what-to-listen-to/womans-hour-exposed-tensions-heart-transgender-debate/

AngryAttackKittens · 29/11/2018 07:37

Of course she did. She isn’t open to the idea that a thousand reasonable tweets asking pertinent questions might mean that a lot of people have valid disagreements. Cults don’t allow questioning. Fundamentalists don’t allow doubt.

I mean, she calls GC people questioning her (very silly) comments evil bigots and flouncing - nothing happens. She adjusts her perspective in response to the feedback and indicates so publicly - potentially gets an actual barrage from culty people who if she flounces may be inclined to follow with balaclavas on and smoke bombs at the ready.

It's easier to keep on believing that the thousands of people disagreeing are wrong, and quite possibly safer.

hackmum · 29/11/2018 07:34

We undermined the professional standing of someone who can’t even spell her own job title. It’s like shooting fish in a barrel.

toriap2 · 29/11/2018 06:52

Ooohh, and there I am at the bottom. You cut off my no doubt witty and sensible reply though 😁😁

LangCleg · 28/11/2018 23:00

Someone take away her phone ffs, I almost feel sorry for her.

No, no! I'm having such fun lollygagging!

Katvonblackdeath · 28/11/2018 22:54

*kathleen

Whoops. Did a Sally style spelling there

Katvonblackdeath · 28/11/2018 22:52

Why why why why why why is she doing this. Katharine is smashing her for six.

She has not the wit or wisdom for this.

Someone take away her phone ffs, I almost feel sorry for her.

Sally Hines accuses Professor Rosa Freedman of being mean on Twitter
Katvonblackdeath · 28/11/2018 22:44

Urge to post all the flounce memes....

Sally Hines accuses Professor Rosa Freedman of being mean on Twitter
Sally Hines accuses Professor Rosa Freedman of being mean on Twitter
LangCleg · 28/11/2018 22:37

It's always the same.

  1. Self-important pronouncement to own audience
  2. Fawning praise
  3. Preening
  4. Self-important pronouncement to outside audience
  5. Critical questions asked
  6. Flounce
  7. Mocking of flounce
  8. Return to make bigger flounce

Rinse and repeat ad fuckinginfinitum.

Melamin · 28/11/2018 22:26

king waffle anti flounce Grin

I'M OFF!

AND ANOTHER THING!!!!...………………..

R0wantrees · 28/11/2018 22:16

from link above

Sally Hines accuses Professor Rosa Freedman of being mean on Twitter
Sally Hines accuses Professor Rosa Freedman of being mean on Twitter
LordProfFekkoThePenguinPhD · 28/11/2018 22:09

And I just saw this : fairplayforwomen.com/shop/

LordProfFekkoThePenguinPhD · 28/11/2018 22:05

Whahahaha - king waffle anti flounce. It’s like making a dramatic exit, ‘that’s the last you will ever see of me!’, slamming door then realising that you’ve forgotten your car keys and having to sneak back in on your hands and knees as every silently watches you.

Katvonblackdeath · 28/11/2018 21:49

Jaw dropping. You don't come back from a flounce oh silly silly Sally.
You just look even more ridiculous.

You were challenged not abused. Grow up.

Oh and while you're at it leave kids to grow up too.

OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon · 28/11/2018 21:44

She’s come back to respond to a tweet by Kathleen stock. Mumsnet gets mentioned

mobile.twitter.com/sally_hines/status/1067885400327430145

Danaquestionseverything · 28/11/2018 12:43

Methinks somebody just got an overdose of reality.

deepwatersolo · 28/11/2018 12:37

On the bright side, at least Sally didn‘t call it a genocide.

Bowlofbabelfish · 28/11/2018 12:37

Of course she did. She isn’t open to the idea that a thousand reasonable tweets asking pertinent questions might mean that a lot of people have valid disagreements. Cults don’t allow questioning. Fundamentalists don’t allow doubt.

But as my Russian friends say. if three people say you look sick, go and see a doctor.

BertrandRussell · 28/11/2018 12:35

"It was a barrage. A barrage of reasonable questions is still a barrage if there are tens or hundreds of people aiming them at you and even if you should arguably have anticipated it."
She characterised it as abuse and personal insults.

RiverTam · 28/11/2018 12:24

dear God, reading that transcript!!! Thanks to whoever produced that, I haven't been able to listen. What absolute garbage Sally Hines was talking.

TheCountessofFitzdotterel · 28/11/2018 12:21

It was a barrage. A barrage of reasonable questions is still a barrage if there are tens or hundreds of people aiming them at you and even if you should arguably have anticipated it.

rightreckoner · 28/11/2018 12:18

Nothing unpleasant. Just sceptical. As you would expect of a thoughtful listening public. Some of the tweets verged on the incredulous but that seems quite mild given the utter nakedness of this emperor.

OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon · 28/11/2018 12:16

I didn't see an unpleasant barrage, just questions. I don't think I saw anything offensive or abusive, though it wasn't directed at me so I may have missed it!

BertrandRussell · 28/11/2018 11:52

Did she really get a barrage after WH? After all, she's not just a passing member of the public-she's an academic and an internationally recognised expert. Most of the tweets I saw were querying her immediate references to intersex people, asking her for explanations for blanket statements and being exasperated by her descent to "TWAW" at the end. In any case, while tir for tat is a bad thing, her twitter feed was nothing like as unpleasant as the usual dross chucked at gender critical academics.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.