Academic Freedom, Harassment and GC academics - ask me any questions

Ok, so nobody is able to cite any studies achieving statistical significance demonstrating harm or negative impacts to women as a result of gender self-recognition processes put into practice in other countries?
So young women losing out on sports scholarships in the US doesn't bother you? Women losing spots on Olympic teams doesn't bother you? Women being raped in prison doesn't bother you? Or are these things not happening because there are no 'studies'?

Can I suggest that you trot and start your own thread? And leave this one for its intended purpose, of supporting courageous women who are not being allowed to even discuss, never mind study, the impact of trans ideology on women.

The thread does invite questions, tbf.

I've explained that if you're asking for studies relating to a group of people you need to specify who would meet that criteria, and the questioner has repeatedly refused.
suggestions - yes or no, if the evidence of negative impact related only to peopke observed to be female at birth, would you accept that as an impact on what you describe as "women"? Or would you dismiss it as not affecting the group of people you have in mind but are unable to define?

Why are we allowing this wonderful support thread to be hijacked and diverted?

Apologies, you make a good point.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, suggestionsplease. You do seem to fall into lots of logical traps.

Your US study has significant limitations as has been discussed several times.

There is ample evidence that women have suffered negative impacts in this country, as negative things have happened to them. For you, it's quite obviously a numbers game. So how many women need to experience a negative impact for it to be significant enough for you to acknowledge there is a conflict involving female sex based spaces and services?

Why are we allowing this wonderful support thread to be hijacked and diverted?

Ok, so nobody is able to cite any studies achieving statistical significance demonstrating harm or negative impacts to women as a result of gender self-recognition processes put into practice in other countries?

Where do you think the data for such studies would come from?

Ok, so nobody is able to cite any studies achieving statistical significance demonstrating harm or negative impacts to women as a result of gender self-recognition processes put into practice in other countries?

Given that women make up about 50% of these populations and so studies could access hundreds of thousands or millions of people even very small trends should be discernible in data, shouldn't they?

Contrast that with the transgender population, where general population studies show maybe 0.1% of respondents indicate that they are transgender - making it far, far harder for studies to achieve statistical significance on issues impacting them.

But yet we do have evidence for issues and real harm impacting trans people.

Statistically significant, exceptionally well carried out research utilising a survey of nearly 300,00 households across America and nearly 500,000 individual respondents, in their National Crime Victimisation Study - which indicated that trans people are over four times more likely than non trans people to experience violent victimization, including rape, sexual assault, and aggravated or simple assault.

williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ncvs-trans-press-release/

escholarship.org/uc/item/7c3704zg

I'd really like to see someone, especially Jo Phoenix, have a shot at addressing questions 1-7 I posted earlier on.

This is a thread about academic freedom, freedom of speech, and these questions are central to this theme, and whether there should ever be any limits to academic freedom for discussion, and what harms may potentially result.

Here’s some evidence for you. If even so much as a single inmate has been raped by another inmate in a female prison, this constitutes an incalculable percentage rise, because x/0 x 100 cannot be worked out.
That’s the percentage rise. Doesn’t matter what number you put in, 1 or 1000.

As I understand, new policy requires risk assessments to be developed to determine how the proposals impact on existing policy and laws, protected groups, government priorities etc and any mitigation needed. Any effort to bring in self ID will require this.

As you will be aware several countries have adopted gender recognition processes based on the principle of self-determination, and these have been in place for several years now for some - eg, Ireland, 2015.

Fortunately our government in the UK ran a public consultation instead of imposing this undemocratically as in the location cited.

The government took on board the results of the consultation, including the transparent attempts to manipulate the results coming from around the world, and decided to AVOID harm by not changing the GRA.

I think complaining about this to the government is your best option if you are dissatisfied with the outcomes of a public consultation.

Thank you for all you are doing Jo!

Sometimes I open the "derailing jar" for the derailers.
A couple of pounds per derailing post. Keep going trolls.... have dug a few times in your name already.

Can you give some examples (hypothetical since you seem to believe they don't actually exist) of what you would accept as 'evidence'? If women being raped don't count as evidence of a negative impact, what does count in your view?

Yes I'd like to know this too. What number of women would make it a problem?

That's some achievement. Over £54k in less than two days.

Wow, well done everyone and especially @ProfJoPhoenix

I have a suggestion for you SuggestionsPlease - go and listen to the Nolan investigation on bbc iPlayer. It’s exhaustively researched and absolutely shocking in the evidence it provides of women, children, gay people and wider society suffering harm as a result of the unevidenced ideology that you support.

@ProfJoPhoenix may I send you a pm about an area of academia I'm concerned about please?

Self id represents a significant change in the relationship between the citizen and the state. The state confers benefits on individuals according to their sex. I see the GRC akin to the process of being recognised as disabled or an immigrant applying for citizenship.

As self id represents a change to the current law it's not beholden on women to prove it's harmful. It's on proponents of self id to prove it's not harmful. And so far I've seen no compelling evidence. It's not good enough to say "well it works in Malta" because Malta is a fundamentally different country to the UK. We need to work through all of the scenarios that self id will affect. Single sex spaces, health, prisons, education, statistics, etc.

This is not (just) an academic exercise. Policy and law is not made on the basis of academic thought and study alone. No one in the UK has made a compelling, cogent argument for self id. They resort to attacking even the gentlest of questioners as transphobic or thick.

The troll on this thread lasted 5 minutes before implicitly or explicitly attacking the characters and intellect of other posters. I just don't engage with people like that anymore except when I'm drunk tweeting

Hmmm. Disappointed but not surprised to return to this thread this morning and see all of this.
BUT! The fundraising is AWESOME and speaks volumes.
Hope Jo hasn’t been put off communicating with us on here now. Imagine she’s pretty busy at the mo, so may not have time to work painstakingly through all the guff that’s detracted from the focus of the thread.
Happy Tuesday y’all!

That's some achievement. Over £54k in less than two days.

£54, 055 now.

Because the men who have Self-IDed are now recorded as "women", their crimes are recorded as 'women's' crimes, corrupting the data set - and gender activists go on to claim that there are 'no' problems caused by self-id.

And the sexual assaults on women prisoners by the males who identify as 'women' don't count as evidence of harm to women for reasons which are only known to suggestionsplease, who refuses to explain why these assaults don't count as harm to women from self-ID.

I am happy to consider any evidence at all - no matter what definition of women has been given, and no matter what subject criteria has been looked at.

So you are asking for things that have happened to some people? And you don't mind what, because you're not asking a specific question?

Thank you for making it clear how much we desperately need to educate on science literacy, at least...

But for the lurkers:
Ireland introduces self-id in 2015.
Big increase in the Women’s prison population in Ireland from 2015 onwards.

What on earth could have caused this?

A) suddenly and inexplicably Irish women became more criminal from 2015. Bad Irish women
Or
B) a few men with their male patterns of criminality self-id as "women" and are housed in the tiny women's estate, massively skewing the figures.

Which is most likely??

Because the men who have Self-IDed are now recorded as "women", their crimes are recorded as 'women's' crimes, corrupting the data set - and gender activists go on to claim that there are 'no' problems caused by self-id.

Anyway, I have been delighted to be able to do some gardening for Professor Phoenix tonight in the legal action she is bringing against the OU and to see she has over £53,000 gladdens the heart. Courage calls to courage, Jo!