Guardian opinion piece supportive of Stock

I know it’s frustrating that Jess has deleted it, but actually in the long run I think it will help because she has either deleted it because she has been told to, or because of the hate in the comments and that has to make her see exactly that is reasonable debate and opinions that are being called “hateful” and “bigoted”.

Was Jess being piled on?

Not too little too late.

This is a fab piece and my silly lefty mates will hopefully read it!

I wonder who phoned her to tell her to delete? Makes me so angry she’s done this several times before.

Im pleased The Guardian price has been published. I wonder if Dr Stock’s treatment has made a few people wake up? Including the Guardian.

I think she has teenage children? Maybe she is worried about the a back lash affecting them? Maybe there is something going on in her personal life that means she doesn’t want to put up with the abuse at the moment. Having said that I don’t understand why it should cost so much to be a Labour MP and support Stock.

I hate the silencing of women. Absolutely hate it.

Jess gets it, I know she gets it. Its so frustrating that she isn't brave enough to stand up for women

Yes, deleted, pathetic.

Jess does seem to have deleted her tweet, which is really disappointing.

If the definition of man and woman are no longer biological-sex-based, then at the very least the new proposed definition needs to be clearly articulated (and not circular).

I was also surprised by the Guardian headline on Kathleen Stock in relation to the union statement. I thought the headline was uncharacteristically (for the Guardian) sympathetic towards Stock:

www.theguardian.com/education/2021/oct/12/professor-says-career-effectively-ended-by-unions-transphobia-claims

Susanna's intervention is useful. As the debate spreads and more people are looking on, then they see that no matter how mildly and reasonably someone expresses gender critical views, they will be attacked. Eventually some of the onlookers will think "hang on, these attacks don't seem to have any basis, they're just unhinged slurs".

Her approach has its place as does the much more assertive ones by people like Posie Parker. There are a number of different audiences amongst those uncertain about the gender identity ideology and they will respond to different messages presented in different ways.

Almost all people think "woman" and "man" denote biological sex. And most people outside of the Guardian bubble will agree with the thrust of her article.

I think she may also be making the point that she accepts that some people disgree with her and she doesn't regard this as a threat.

I've just thanked Jess for retweeting it. The responses to her will raise awareness of a few more people hopefully. Glad to see she's dipped her toe in the water.

It is cruel to pretend that there is, or that there is any likelihood of it being invented.

From the comments:
"Trans people are oppressed. Do not tell them what methods are unacceptable in their quest to liberate themselves from this oppression."
(my emboldening)
Perhaps I am reading too much into this...

Jo Maugham retweeted a response to the 'human bodies have limits' line which says that we should rip out grandad's pacemaker, because we must never use medical technology.

You know, we use pacemakers precisely because there are limits to our medicine. We can't make people grow a new heart or give them a magic pill to make it better, so we have to resort to an artificial cludge like that.

And if we can't repair someone's heart, how on earth do people think we can make people change sex?

(I figured this out when I was about 12 or 13 and read about a "sex change" and could tell that that did not tally with known medical technology).

Its times like these I feel bitter about white male privilige.

Jo Maugham retweeted a response to the 'human bodies have limits' line which says that we should rip out grandad's pacemaker, because we must never use medical technology. That's a pretty breathtaking straw man right there.

mobile.twitter.com/jessphillips/status/1448272184791666689

Jess has tweeted it, there is already the predictable responses in her replies

I guess the difference is that SR doesn't pretend the spectacles are her eyes and that she has great eyesight FFS

*cannot make this up

As seen on Twitter. You cannot make

"While I want people to be free to live as they choose, I also believe that human bodies have limits. And I am concerned about the influence on young people of the idea that, with the aid of medical technology, these can be transcended." - Susanna Rustin, who wears spectacles