Sally Hines accuses Professor Rosa Freedman of being mean on Twitter

Hines has relatively few publications for a senior academic. Two articles on her website are listed twice.

Not everything published would be put in the REF. Esp at a Uni like Leeds. If thr journal isn't highly ranked then that article might not be submitted.

Look them up on their uni web pages. It shows all their publications. They're both professors. It takes loads of time, work and effort to become a professor.

Becoming a professor, publishing and getting grants all require multiple peer reviews by equally qualified people.

Freedman's extensive research is about international human rights law. Hines's extensive research is on gender and sexuality. That's why Hines got two ESRC grants on this topic, and Freedman didn't (and likely wouldnt have bothered applying as she'll know her publications and expertise are in the wrong area).

The hubris of calling Hines's qualifications into question here is just embarrassing.

Spanna, if you think Professor Freedman is 'appallingly unprofessional', do you think the same about Adrian Harrop, Sally Hines herself, the 'lawyer' suing Graham Linehan?

What a weird thing to say. Prof Sally Hines certainly has published in this REF period. You're not gonna like it though

Another request for Sally to come here and debate these issues. Come on Sally, it will be a piece of cake for you, surely?

LOL! I think Sally should probably avoid, avoid, avoid.

Hines is probably annoyed because Rosa has pointed out publicly that Hines does not have a single publication that can be submitted to the REF. This is quite remarkable (and not in a good way) for someone in Hines's position ( Professor).

Yes, this has been Rosa's sin.

For those who don't know, the REF is a five year cycle that assesses (and ranks) universities on research quality. Despite Sally's £1m+ in funding, she has not published a single piece of work in this REF period that could be submitted. Not one.

Sally clearly feeling bruised from the Woman's Hour debacle and is now on the attack. But the more she attacks, the more she exposes herself. Her best bet now would be to lay low and let the attention pass elsewhere. But it seems she lacks the self-awareness to do this.

Another request for Sally to come here and debate these issues. Come on Sally, it will be a piece of cake for you, surely?

". I’m fascinated by the fact that people can believe something so at odds with reality."

Yes, me too. I want to know how this belief has become so widespread so quickly. Why so many small c conservative institutions have accepted it and changed themselves radically. There seems to be a big gap in the whole process where there should be a explanation. I would be happy to believe that TWAW if only someone would tell me why I should believe that.

When I was at high school there was a girl who was a big mouth.

She had to be the centre of attention in every class. and would disrupt every class with loud pronouncements. They were mostly rubbish, seemingly made up on the spur of the moment.

Ones I remember

I don’t have a pen because my family are so poor they can’t afford one
I forgot my French dictionary because I literally he a heart attack last night
My brother is away in America. In the marines/a ranger
My Aunty is related to the pope/queen/Donna summer

Her little makes would snigger and hi5 her and the teachers would fluster and not tell her to stop talking shite. They really didn’t quite know how to handle her.

She never got into trouble for disrupting the class or lying. Not once. She was just allowed to perform until she got bored with herself and went back to staying out the window.

Jesus- explains a lot about my education...

Also the psychology of people not actually believing something, but insisting it’s true and forcing others to believe it/changing societal structures and laws to codify it is fascinating.

Also terrifying.

NOBODY believes you can change sex. So why are we doing all this?

I would love to talk with them too. I’m fascinated by the fact that people can believe something so at odds with reality.

I suspect people don’t believe it though, because I’ve asked SO many people on here the simple question ‘do you believe humans can change sex?’ And not a single person has said yes. Not one.

So if people can’t change sex, what IS it they change? They change the way they look and act. And that can only ever be cosmetic, and behavioural. And really, people should be able to do all that anyway (I mean my god I remember top of the pops in the eighties...)

So if we know that people can’t change sex, and we agree that people can wear and dress and act as they wish, we are only arguing about one thing: situations where biological sex actually is important.

Then we ask: when are those situations? The answer is any time the sexes need separate provision for safety, privacy and dignity, or differential medical treatment.

And we already segregate for that.

So why change? You can’t change sex.

I’ve never heard a convincing argument why, and I am listening.

So Sally, come and tell us why. Genuinely, I want to hear.

She is such a liar. Posters are checking her claims and there isn't a single instance of tweeting or retweeting @'ing them in.

She really isn't very bright is she? Or, being charitable, she uses Twitter without knowing how it works 😂😂

Noooooooo. I feelz like a lord and a professor and a doctor. I feelz therefore I am.

ego sentio ergo sum

I’m getting that on a T-shirt. It will be stunning and brave.

But you, Fekko, are overpromoted.

I think shitting on women’s rights and the safeguarding of children is ‘mean’

Professor Sally Hines calls out Professor Rosa Freedman for being appallingly unprofessional on Twitter

There. Fixed it for you.

Bowl, I always appreciate your informative posts. I wish you could talk to some of the TRAs / allies I know.

Are they a professor like me? I’ve not been published yet either. Amazingly.

Hines is probably annoyed because Rosa has pointed out publicly that Hines does not have a single publication that can be submitted to the REF. This is quite remarkable (and not in a good way) for someone in Hines's position ( Professor).

Thank you bowl - that was an interesting post (I feel like I’m back at school)👧

Sally, if you’re reading this: sex is not a spectrum. I am a geneticist and I’m happy to explain why this is in as much detail and at whatever level of technical detail as you wish.

But in a nutshell: there are sperm and the type of adult humans that make them, and there are eggs, and the type of adult humans that make them.

So: if sex was a spectrum, you’d see other types of human, and other types of sex cells (gametes.) we dont see that though. Because sex isn’t a spectrum.

And no, intersex conditions are not any proof of a spectrum.
And no, being unable to make sperm or eggs isn’t proof of anything other than infertility- of the type that is the classification, not ‘all bits in working order.’

I would love to hear your argument as to why sex is a spectrum and debate it respectfully as you say you want to do in your article.

As you are a prof and I a mere Dr, I doubt this will be difficult for you?

Spelling isn’t Hines’s forte. Neither is rational argument. If she’s representative of the quality of our academics today, I’d advise young people not to bother with university but to read some books instead.

Lisa Muggeridge is good on Sally Hines: