Kathleen Stock’s union betrays her.

@secular111 So take a flick through and quote me the page and paragraph number of any transphobic phrase or sentence from it.

Can't wait to see the answer to this....

This bit bugs me (photo). Why should the dignity & respect of "allies" be enshrined in anything? Either everyone's dignity & respect should be, or those of a particular disadvantaged group could be, but those of a disadvantaged group and their friends & not anyone else's - ??

In the Times now:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b2dd7b6a-2b52-11ec-a548-f9bb1ebf6985?shareToken=1150863bdc3df44692b33d9b3edb5132

The absolute, bleeding obvious hypocrisy of 'we call for an inquiry' on the 'diminishing of rights and freedoms'

...... yeah, I call for a bloody inquiry too. Let's work out whose rights and freedoms are being diminished by someone impartial who still has a grip on objective reality, because it fucking well isn't male people's. This union are apparently fine with rights and freedoms being diminished so long as it's only female humans affected in the process. If I was a member and female I'd be finding another union that weren't so wholly and overtly hostile and discriminatory to people born female.

I remain staggered that people this stupid get into positions of public relations.

Unions are having a tough time.

Working conditions have changed - it's harder to unionise; it's harder for unions to organise for working conditions.

This just doesn't help.

OK.

I'm going to stop writing now. I know I'm going on. And possibly at a tangent from the main issue.

But I just can't get over how depressed I feel. I just want to ask the UCU how they think this is going to help all the many, many people in the workforce who desperately need a reinvigorated Union movement.

The people on zero hours contracts, in warehouses, doing driving jobs, in the care industry ...

How does this help?

When the heck did the grown ups leave the room?

I'm almost weeping as I follow this on Twitter.

The number of muppets who can't see that there is a huge difference between serious political activity and this idiotic social media-inspired virtue-signalling.

And that the descent of a Union into this kind of stupidity is tantamount to a confession of their complete vacuity and irrelevance as a serious political vehicle for the members.

Is there some kind of stupid drug that people have taken?

This is real life. It's not some Twitter spat.

A serious Union should be placing a big distance between themselves and these protesters for a start.

Because that protest is the absolute opposite of any action a serious political organisation should be doing.

And we haven't even reached the subject of a member's free speech, yet. Which is a crucial issue.

Honestly.

I despair.

I'm furious too. Not only does this mean that many GC academics have or will lose Union protection, it also brings trade unionism generally into further disrepute. And this at a time when they're desperate to recruit new members!!

PS Serious unions take their members' money and they lobby for change.

Indeed, in order to be serious and be taken seriously, they conduct research and communicate with their members.

They focus on issues that are proven to be of direct and immediate intwrest to their members' working lives.

They do this because that's how you win gains for your members.

And winning gains of direct interest to your members is how you get taken seriously as a Union.

What they don't do is portray themselves as unserious fools by 'taking a stand' by publishing a letter for social media likes.

That makes them look incredibly silly.

So silly, no-one is going to take them seriously.

It's what children do. Not organisations that take money from members and aim for actual, real power and actual, real change.

Honestly.

It's so stupid - just stupid - I could cry.

Perhaps something in Material Girls? I have my copy to hand, and I no doubt so do you, even if second-hand.

So take a flick through and quote me the page and paragraph number of any transphobic phrase or sentence from it.

I mean if think she transphobic, how would she be able to write 320 pages without writing something transphobic?

Now replace RD with a white middle-class male, and preferably a UCU member and you'd have to speculate what support the UCU would provide. I imagine it would certainly be a statement-of-support, as UCU promotes transracialism and it documents that support and makes it available through its web site.

So, no, 'taking a stand against transphobia' is not what this Union is doing right now.

I honestly don’t think somebody who genuinely believed that trans people are vulnerable and cared for their well-being would be encouraging the belief that suicide is an understandable reaction to disagreement.

I can’t think if any other situation where this argument is made.

The problem is the union isn't being clear. They want a strong stance on trans inclusion AND a strong stance on academic freedom. But what does trans inclusion actually mean? If it means not harassing trans students then there are already policies in place, and no academic has the right to engage in such behaviour. It's not academic freedom to behave in a harassing way. But Stock isn't harassing anyone, so this can't be what they mean. But if trans inclusion means going along with trans identity theory as it's set out in queer/postmodern theory then there is an obvious clash between trans inclusion and academic freedom. Not every academic (particularly in analytic philosophy) agrees with or believes in postmodernism or queer theory. They have a different theory about gender and transgenderism. So I'm really struggling to understand what the union is trying to say here.

So, no, 'taking a stand against transphobia' is not what this Union is doing right now.

What they are doing is undermining trade unions.

It's completely out with the remit of a functional Union to seek a test-case of a member in order to try and enforce a non-legal definition of transphobia - particularly when that member is subject to extreme harassment in her workplace.

A functionsl Union would defend their member - and by inference, all their other members - from the curtailment of their right to free speech in the workplace by a group of extremists.

And they are extreme.

This is extreme behaviour.

Don't normalise. Don't munimise.

Even if you think they are 'your side'.

UCU (National) as expected.

So as no-one here is talking about anything else and as no-one has said anything remotely transphobic there is no need for you to have brought up your question - unless of course you are trying to libel Kathleen Stock by implication? Is that what you're doing? If so have the guts to come out and say it - go on - under your own name!

I'll gladly contribute to the funding if Stock then choses to sue you.

And even if you are so cowardly as to chose to insinuate lies under a pen-name then remember a good lawyer could get a court to get Mumsnet to say who you are if you are sued. It has happened with other social media. Jean Hatchett won a goodly wack of money over defamation recently.

There is nothing transphobia here or in anything Kathleen Stock has written or said. If you have not the guts and the conviction to come out and say what you mean then zip it and buzz off.

What has Kathleen Stock done or said which is transphobic?

I don't think anyone on here condones transphobia. Stating that sex is immutable is not transphobic, it's a basic fact of life.

Love that letter from philosophers around the UK - really good news.

Ignore the ploppers, people.

I think this is a flashpoint and Posy is right that if it goes through, it will affect what anyone is allowed to say or teach at any university in the future. If they can railroad Professor Stock - they can railroad anyone. The people involved in this campaign need seeking out and charging with criminal offences. It is NOT OK to try to terrorise people and force them out of their jobs - why does this even need saying.

Corblimey: If we are being honest, the subtext to this message is that Kathleen stock is transphobic and she will not be supported by the union. The students are right to protest her. Even if we are being charitable and assuming the statement is a good faith endorsement against transphobia , this is a strange time to make that statement. A member of staff is very publicly being harassed and having her academic freedom threatened- what does transphobia have to do with anything? Surely a better statement would be to reiterate that academics have full academic freedom. Like.. a statement against transphobia is nice and all but how does it help professor stock? What’s your interpretation of what is going on?

A union taking a stand against transphobia is a good thing, no? No one here condones transphobia, do they?

Just read my “letter from Suzanne” , knew there would be a thread on here so came to register my anger that a trades union could behave in such a cowardly manner. I have been a trades union member for all my working life, and always believed that they stood for supporting their members against unfairness and injustice , not for bowing down to loud and shouty voices. I knew the Labour Party had abandoned rational thought, it’s a sad day today to learn that they are taking unions with them.

Every time we seem to be taking a few steps out of this madness we are pushed back, but as Suzanne says, women have faced bigger and nastier struggles in the past, and triumphed, and we will prevail. But I am so angry on behalf of the people who are being hurt and vilified on our behalf along the way.

What is the world coming to. I am genuinely concerned