Sally Hines is writing female out of feminism- I'm terrified

Sally seems increasingly, um, unwell. Her recent tweets are bizarre (and a number were deleted).

So we don't need to campaign against FGM any more, unless we're going to out ourselves as massive transphobes?

It is an extreme bubble Hines lives in, the same bubble people who claim "male bodied" is an "old fashioned" way of describing male bodies. (That's if they really believe that. I don't know that they do, unless they've done self hypnosis by repeating the words over and over.)

There's money behind it. Men always have money, and male anti-feminists are willing to spend it on an anti feminist agenda.

For example, in the 1980's, anti feminist organizations spent money and political capital removing women's studies from college curricula and replacing it with "gender studies" so that people like Sally Hines have a job.

You know how people call this period "3rd wave feminism"? It's not a wave. It's backlash and gaslighting, and MRA's trying to co-opt it all, from rape stats, DV stats, and the word feminism itself to prevent a real wave from forming.

I'd often wondered were usages like "woman doctor" and "woman astronaut" had come from, when the equivalent would be "male doctor" and "male astronaut", not "man doctor" and "man astronaut". It hadn't occurred to me that this might be an attempt to erase the word "female" from language referring to humans

I think you are inventing a conspiracy theory here. The common usage was female [insert traditional male job] or even lady [insert traditional male job].

Hadley Freeman is speaking out. Good on you Hadley!

I think there is a Sally Hines who IS trans though.

I'd often wondered were usages like "woman doctor" and "woman astronaut" had come from, when the equivalent would be "male doctor" and "male astronaut", not "man doctor" and "man astronaut". It hadn't occurred to me that this might be an attempt to erase the word "female" from language referring to humans.

"no-one without an anti-trans agenda says female anymore. People say women"

Er, except those involved with medical research who understand the differences between a male and female body. For starters....

Oh well, at least she went for woman over 'womxn'. So there's that.

The police are one of those groups of people who routinely refer to “males” and “females” rather than “men” or “women”. So that’s quite funny.

Oh, and biologists, of course. They use “male” and “female” a lot. The transphobic bastards.

I wonder if people like Hines realise that they are working on furthering extreme Thatcherism.

I think this all the time.

She's expressing an opinion. It's a truly batshit opinion.

The thing is not to be terrified of something that is merely a 'novel' opinion, or to regard it as powerful or gospel. Other people hold other opinions and other perspectives, and this battle is about whoever you are, whatever funding you hold, normal people don't act as if you can personally define everyone else's reality. And oh yes, let's look at law. And the human rights of others. And how the man in the street regards this kind of interesting point of view.

The flip side of her 'no one uses the word female without an anti trans agenda' suggestion is 'no one tries to convince others that the word 'female' is political and weighted instead of a simple fact without an anti woman, anti biology and anti democratic agenda'.
Defend that one Sal.

Presumably Hines also wants to put an end to us talking about female and male socialisation.

So we are taking bodies out of any and all talk about women’s conditions, and we are now also told to remove the social elements. Which leaves us with only individual identifications. Thatchers dream has come true; there is no such thing as society, there are only people.

I wonder if people like Hines realise that they are working on furthering extreme Thatcherism.

There seems to be this theory (on those boards) that one way or another women sell their bodies either for security or lifestyle/children or more straightforwardly for cold hard cash. I honestly thought that this attitude was dying out - but scratch the surface and there we are :/

For many women across the globe, that is the reality. It's more like slavery than selling though, because the key is you have no control. But yes, I think it's a big mistake to believe that we have achieved equality. Even in this country, 2 women a week are murdered by current or former partners and countless more are assaulted. You can see on these boards day after day women whose partners are physically, sexually and financially abusive and it just becomes normal to them.
In order to truly tackle oppression, you have to name its source and try to break down the structures that hold it up. Part of that is challenging the notion of the ideal heterosexual family with a male breadwinner and a female carer.

Tell women that their problems pale in comparison to those of men.

Disappeared down a MRA / Jordan Peterson rabbit hole today, I'm going for a long bath to scrub myself clean

There seems to be this theory (on those boards) that one way or another women sell their bodies either for security or lifestyle/children or more straightforwardly for cold hard cash. I honestly thought that this attitude was dying out - but scratch the surface and there we are :/

You know I didn't think that this was a thing... that friends were exaggerating. ugh.

You don't become a professor through length of service, you become one through getting big research grants and having published a lot.
That said, I think it is absolutely right to say Rosa Freedman is infinitely more intelligent and thus a threat to her, thus the unpleasantly personal tone of her tweets against Rosa.
People whose careers rely on bullshit are going to be very insecure indeed when clever analytical people turn their attention to the same subject area.

Men's sexual rights. Natch.

Yup. Legalise sex work (but do nothing to reduce the unequal conditions that lead to women selling their bodies).
Be porn-positive and stamp down on 'kink-shaming' (AKA calling out men who get off on degrading and humiliating women during sex).
Refer to women as sluts and whores and tell them to see this as empowering.
Tell women that their problems pale in comparison to those of men.

I think she has struck lucky and been promoted to professor through length of service. She did her PhD there and has stayed ever since. From her writing and speaking, she is not terribly bright. That's why Rosa Freedman is such a threat to her- she's nearly 20 years younger, infinitely more intelligent, and she rose to become professor very early, plus has a big profile in her area and well-respected work (so her promotion was on merit, not length of service). And I actually think it's true about the few to no publications that she is so touchy about. If it wasn't, she would just say what her pubs are and stop going on about it. However, she's quite clearly obsessed with smearing Rosa.

what issues are feminists campaigning on

Men's sexual rights. Natch.

Or is her research typical of the academic stuff they produce?

As an alumna, I would say no.

How does she even know she is a CIS woman if female doesn't exist?

Good point. Given that the word basically means a female person who doesn't identify as trans. I suppose she has the special gender feels to tell her this.

Given how high profile she is, aren't Leeds University slightly embarrassed. Or is her research typical of the academic stuff they produce?

How does she even know she is a CIS woman if female doesn't exist?

Virtue signalling twat.

She's an irritant, spraying theoretical shite from her ivory tower but hopefully no policy makers or legislators are giving her any real credence.

If biological sex is irrelevant to feminism, what issues are feminists campaigning on?

I'm increasingly feeling that the only mainstream-acceptable type of feminism at the moment is this kind that has no concept of structural analysis, pays no attention to biology, and doesn't try to challenge anything major about the status quo. Preferably all about the individual and with a heavy emphasis on self-reflection, not so much about how the individual experiences the world in their actual physical body. Language should be as unclear and waffly as possible; you're allowed concepts like 'patriarchy' and 'women' if you absolutely must, but you're not allowed to explain what you might mean by them, definitely not when it might start applying to actual people.

So basically: 'feminism' that doesn't explain anything and doesn't threaten anything. Which we are also supposed to accept is the most progressive form of feminism that feminism has ever known.