Kathleen Stock has resigned

Sorry to hear that Kathleen felt forced to resign. However, now she is free to say what she wants so look forward to that. Also hope she got. BIG severance package. Solidarity Kathleen. 👊

Strong stuff from Stephen Daisley. I love this:

"You can try to force women like Marion Millar and Kathleen Stock to say the catechism, whether through law, social ostracisation, the threat of dismissal or the removal of their communication platforms. You can disrupt their meetings, bawl obscenities outside their conferences, hide their books in bookshops, run them off campus, and petition every brand with a Twitter account to disassociate from them. Some will break under the pressure but the sight of them doing so will only fortify the will of other."

This comment from Stephen Daisley in the Spectator article that littlbrowndog linked was very telling:

But the dominant, mainstream mode of trans activism prioritises censorship, bullying, intimidation and institutional and linguistic capture. These things have to be fought because they are destructive of open, pluralistic societies.

I'm furious that the university is now claiming to have supported Prof Stock, and saying they do not allow bullying and harassment, when this is patently untrue. It does sound as if they agreed a severance package. But if KS does want to continue working as an academic, what institution will have the courage to employ her?

It’s a good article. Stephen Daisley regularly writes this sort of thing and he gets the Scottish context too (re Marion).

Re Kathleen, this was pretty apt:
“It’s difficult not to consider professor Stock’s resignation and observe that the finest minds at Sussex University have resigned all at once”

Its a good article, though I think he gets a bit carried away when he claims that the best minds at Sussex have all resigned at once (surely there are a handful of decent professors at the uni!). Publishing any of the mad statements made by the terrorising students is a great idea - the more the better. And bouquets to Kathleen Stock, badly let down by her university and who stuck it out longer than most people would have done. She is an inspiration.

Isn't it more specifically that the declaration wants it to not be possible for a male to declare themselves legally female. Although IIRC, Stock has said she's not in favour of repeal of the GRA2004.

The Declaration on Women's Sex-based Rights does not include a demand to make it impossible for a male to declare themselves female. It merely notes concerns about the impact of allowing men to assert they are women.

The UK branch of the organisation behind the declaration, the Women's Human Rights Campaign wrote a submission to the UK Parliament's Women and Equalities Committee on Reform of the Gender Recognition Act where they argued that the existing law should be repealed.

AFAIK, Kathleen Stock had nothing to do with that submission and only signed the declaration itself.

Poor woman - she must have felt very threatened.

I'm angry that she had to take this action.

They think they are being edgy and intellectual and changing the world, without realising they're the living embodiment of a classic comedy stereotype from the prehistoric age of the 1980s when their fash tory scum parents were young. (Ugh. Gross.)

Try it in a private browsing window if you've used up all your freebies littlebrowndog.

It's by Stephen Daisley and it's very good, even down to a positive mention of Glinner's contributions which is rare enough itself!

I can’t read. It but anyway

It’s the persecution of Kathleen stock and Marion Miller

www.spectator.co.uk/article/marion-millar-should-never-have-been-in-court

in a week when the TRA's are desperately trying to fight evidence that they are bullies (by bullying anyone and everyone they can find) this couldn't have come at a worse time. And this week they've managed to be seen to have bullied a lesbian out of her job

I reckon the TRA's will happily gloat for a day-or-so, but then some will realise that this really has been another disastrous event in a month of calamities for them.

It's quite hard to deny your harassment campaign that has seen a woman forced out of her job is misogynist when you celebrate with 'the witch is dead'.

459 likes on the Instagram post of the harassment campaign. Gloating because their anonymity has enabled them to successfully terrorise a woman.

We see you.

Owen Jones - Intellectualism for the hard of thinking.

Professor Stock has been treated appallingly, especially by her union. It's sad to see her leave her post, I hope she has something spectacular lined up, she deserves it.

Maybe the problem with a lot of the Youth of Today does boil down to the fact that they haven't seen The Young Ones and realised that being like Rik makes you look like a twat.

With Material Girls now in reprint, her next book is guaranteed to be a bestseller.

She had long passed the threshold of evidence for constructive dismissal. So unless Sussex Seminary has come to a (big) deal, then the employment tribunal is likely to result in the biggest payout in employment law history. And I don't reckon the Seminary's indemnity insurance will pay-out; there's an expectation that they take all reasonable steps to prevent legal proceedings, and won't have done that.

I suspect, with the recent support from The Prime Minister, the Chief Constable of Jo Shiner will be under some considerable scrutiny.

I think this will doom the UCU.

And the Seminary students? Well, a degree this academic year in any subject will be worthless, as it will be accompanied with the likely question 'and what did you do to protest the bullying of Dr. Stock?' and its alumni will be tainted by this scandal for years-to-come.

Timing of course is everything. And in a week when the TRA's are desperately trying to fight evidence that they are bullies (by bullying anyone and everyone they can find) this couldn't have come at a worse time. And this week they've managed to be seen to have bullied a lesbian out of her job.

I reckon the TRA's will happily gloat for a day-or-so, but then some will realise that this really has been another disastrous event in a month of calamities for them.

University of Sussex, where freedom of speech died 28/10/21.

The Flat Earth Society must be kicking themselves for not employing more aggressive tactics.

What a time to be alive.

Their contention, based on twisting the words, that it advocates for the "elimination of trans people" because it says they want to eliminate sex based stereotypes is laughably ridiculous.

Isn't it more specifically that the declaration wants it to not be possible for a male to declare themselves legally female? Although IIRC, Stock has said she's not in favour of repeal of the GRA2004.

I believe she's in favour of the GRA2004 largely as it stands, but with the maximal retention of sex-based exemptions, so the "legal fiction" of being female is clearly limited, and does not extend to stuff like female shelters/prisons.

I think those positions can (just about) tally.

Part of the issue is that TRAs think the GRA2004 is stronger than it is, and think that it makes males fully legally "female". So Stock's moderate "enforce the current law" position is seen as being an attempt to "remove rights".

Owen jones and the rest are purposely misrepresenting the Women’s Human Rights Declaration either because they haven't read it, they aren't very bright or they have an agenda which means they have to misrepresent women's words in order to demonise them.

Never forget Owen jones thought that the international network of powerful lesbians story was a must read. An article which Pink news later retracted and reached a settlement on.

It really shows their tactics up quite clearly Forgotthebins. Those two main accusations are exactly what the Sussex student rep who went on Daily Politics (was it?) a couple of weeks ago trotted out. Repeat the lies, shout loudly, until they are just taken as fact. Happens all the time with JKR, Maya and everyone as well. It is simply not fair.

Must admit I have not yet read Material Girls and pretty much the only words I see bandied about from Prof Stock when discussing her is the the quote with unquestionably pro-trans stance. I have seen no evidence of anything transphobic.

multiple accounts including LOJ’s “accuse” her of signing the Women’s Human Rights Declaration which those accounts construe as transphobic (although that point of view only works if you believe that sex-based rights are inherently transphobic).

Their contention, based on twisting the words, that it advocates for the "elimination of trans people" because it says they want to eliminate sex based stereotypes is laughably ridiculous.

Keep it classy, Sussex students.

SquishySqwirmy I had the same thought. I looked up on Twitter last night and saw multiple accounts including LOJ’s “accuse” her of signing the Women’s Human Rights Declaration which those accounts construe as transphobic (although that point of view only works if you believe that sex-based rights are inherently transphobic). The other main “accusation” is that she is a trustee(?) of the LGB Alliance, which they regard as a transphobic organisation. But my view is the same as GCAcademic, that she was intolerable because she gained a profile as a moderate voice and was listened to.

I expect the student activists had tacit support (or more) from other Philosophy Dept staff at Sussex who stand to benefit from the recruitment after her departure.

I hope she can feel safe and happy after this. What a terrible time.

Kathleen Stock, JKR : they really do show that it doesn't matter how moderate you are in your opinions, or how moderately you express them, they will vilify and try to destroy you.

I actually think that it's the moderate and temperate people who are particularly singled out and hounded. They represent the greatest challenge to these extremists precisely because most normal people can see that they are perfectly reasonable and compassionate individuals. Desperate lies and slurs have been levelled for the express purpose of trying to stop people from reading what Stock and Rowling have written. This is because TRAs know that the vast majority of the population could not possibly disagree with the sentiment or logic of their writing.