Kathleen Stock on BBC Woman's Hour today

I am cringing if that’s true re the honarary doctorate and using the title Dr 😬 oh my.

Let the BBC Feedback Programme know what you think too. It's on Thursday at 4.30 pm and repeated on Sunday evening. This week they will be covering the Nolan podcast.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/1WbP92b6YbpP9j4mwwbtc9Q/contact-us

Times article about WH interview:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/e132935a-3cc4-11ec-9bef-aa3112940013?shareToken=b3eb063b247f6397d6cb7debe5990926

Oh dear, Liam has protected Liam’s Twitter account.

Seems Liam doesn’t like being on the receiving end of the kind of bullying Liam likes to dish out to others. Oh the irony.

And no, Liam shouldn’t be calling himself “Dr Liam” with just an honorary doctorate.

The change in editorial policy at the BBC is very clear. Emma Barnett allowed to do her job, and she did it brilliantly. She has clearly done her research - referred to KS's book with knowledge of content and skilfully brought out (I think for the first time?) the whole "trans-lesbians" madness, allowing Kathleen to discuss it explicitly.

I've also sent feedback.

www.bbc.co.uk/contact/comments

I sent the BBC a compliment about the interview. They should be able to see that any one who complains has no basis in fact....
I love that this is all coming out... Best of luck for the future, Professor Stock, we're backing you all the way.....

Liam Hackett that should say.

Surely the vitriol and hate demonstrated by Laim Hackett against women must call into question his suitability as a role model for children - let alone talking to them about bullying? I've seen some nasty misogynistic twitter accounts but in between the numerous selfies there were some incredibly vicious posts about women.

I went back to have another look as I found it hard to believe that a leader of a children's charity would actually behave like that and amazingly he's suddenly protected his tweets. Maybe he's another male with the need to monitor women speaking? Hopefully all the the screenshots will be accompanying a complaint to the Charity Commission?

When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.

Apart from anything else, who has the gall to think an honorary doctorate means you can go around calling yourself Dr?

I guess I have my answer...

Really good interview by Emma Barnes and well done Professor Stock.

Obviously Liam has blocked me so I can't read his cross tweets. Self-reflection doesn't appear to be a core strength though

This I think says he has honorary from Sussex

I keep X-posting with you @HoardingSamphireSaurus!

The man has no concept of self reflection at all. Or maths. Here's another one of his Twitter missives:

Taking a break from Twitter. Some of the vitriol I’ve been sent here lately from people 2-3x my age is disgusting. Telling me to take my own life and making the vilest and slanderous comments about me, how I look, my job. Not here as an outlet for people to spew toxic venom at.

Really, Liam, you are being bullied by 90 year olds on Twitter, are you?

I genuinely feel sorry for people who are that angry with life, they spend their time vomiting their toxicity over anybody they can. But Twitter isn’t important enough to me to put up with such vulgarity.

And your messages to Kathleen Stock are the fragrant hiccups of peace and tolerance, are they?

Final bit of rank hypocrisy:

Healthy boundaries are like kryptonite to toxic people.

@Aber77 if she'd seen them being silenced, that would have put her off far more.'
I am very much in favour of free speech but I don't think students should be allowed to intimidate university staff in this way...the demos were against Kathleen Stock as an individual and that is not acceptable at her place of work.
Why should taxpayers fund students to bully academics?

And totally without self awareness

I genuinely feel sorry for people who are that angry with life, they spend their time vomiting their toxicity over anybody they can. But Twitter isn’t important enough to me to put up with such vulgarity.

Hi Liam, I see you monitor us, you mention us a few times. I hope you feel better for vomiting up that bile about DocStock. It doesn't reflect well on you, or your employer, or your charity. You seem to have forgotten the fear, the bite of bullying and become what you once decried. For shame!

twitter.com/DiageoLiam

Hackett is a nasty bully from the evidence of his own twitter account.

We can support her by buying her book "Material Girls". Out now in handbook and the paperback version available for pre order.

The man calling himself 'Dr Liam Hackett' on Twitter. What does he have a PhD in?

I've looked online and I can only find reference to an honorary doctorate.

God all these jumped up men with egos the size of planets. I followed all those links from Hackett's wiki page saying that he advises the UN - the first one (ironically) goes to Commission on the Status of Women: Raising Our Voices, the 2nd one is a 404 error, 3rd, the server can't be found and 4th a dupe of the 2nd 404 error.

Liam is a man whose realised that charity can be an excellent vehicle for self promotion. His charity had an income of £550k last year and staff costs were £350k. There are 6 members of staff, only one of whom receives remuneration of over £60k according to the Charities Commission.

Quite the gravy train

We were at Sussex open day and saw the demo too. We didn't find it threatening - it felt rather toothless to us - the demonstrators were standing in a straight line and even with the chanting and the masks looked a bit lack lustre. DD's take was that they're idiots, but have a right to demonstrate. She made a good point, as the University can't and shouldn't stop students demonstrating - if she'd seen them being silenced, that would have put her off far more. Threatening and agitating for violence against Kathleen Stock would of course be very different, but the leaflet we picked up wasn't saying anything like that. I wish I'd kept it now!

I did keep it. It didn't threaten or incite violence but it was defamatory, and badly written.

While I would agree that the line of protesters themselves weren't particularly hostile, it is the nature of their protest that was. So if they had been protesting about lack of action on climate change, university policy on LGBTQ+ rights or the visit of a world leader we would not have had a problem. The fact that it was directed by name, at a single member of staff, who has protected characteristics, in her own workplace was what made it hostile. DS understood the difference.