University of Kent survey

Yes, incredibly naive. Whatever you do about gender roles, clothing etc, you can't get away from reproduction.

This seems to be a common, though utterly bizarre, idea.

Oh I agree with you gasp0de. But I think perhaps she believes if we weren't so aware of it in the brave new world, sexism would reduce. I don't.

societies that are aware of physical differences between men and women

Every society in the world, throughout time, and in fact not limited to humans - a great many other species are aware of these too.

I'm depressed that I share a professional field with one of those researchers. Disagreement is good i guess.

Looking at her other work, presumably she believes that societies that are aware of physical differences between men and women inevitably impose gender role boundaries on behaviour, and police those gender roles with violence. So that if sex is just the way we feel, there is an opportunity to reduce gender role imposition on each sex.

I think that's phenomenally naive and not particularly helpful - violent policing of gender roles that includes some males in the oppression of women isn't IMO an advance - but I guess that might be her stance.

GCmiddle, they were very insistent that anyone wanting to know more about the purpose of the survey should PM them so that it was kept private. Which looked suspicious in itself.

And which also showed that it hadn’t occurred to them that if they PMd one MNer, she could immediately share the info with everyone else.

Thanks for the links. I’ve looked through it as far as I could (I was moving through the pages without answering until it stopped letting me do that). I think it’s methodologically weak, but that is not really a complaining matter. If people want to complain, I would focus on the ethical issues – ie that the methodological weaknesses are so significant, that it renders the survey findings unusable. This is an ethical issue because you are basically wasting people’s time. Also, it's an ethcial issue that the assumptions and biases of the researchers are obvious, and offensive. I didn’t see the participant information sheet, which with online surveys is often the front page – that should explain the purpose of the survey. They do say in the de-brief sheet, but it’s too late by then, as participants have already wasted their time. the list of organisations they give in the de-brief sheet only concern trans issues. Why did they not signpost participants to gender critical organisations?
There are two researchers involved, one from Reading University and the other University of Kent. The Reading researcher is a Post-doc research assistant and the Kent researcher is a PhD student. As it’s clearly branded as a Kent study, the complaint should go to Kent.

Or perhaps they meant would you start disco dancing ... freak out , c'est chic

'researchers' with no understanding of feminists and a strong bias against feminists, survey feminists. They needed to do research before jumping to a survey based on preconceived ideas.

I was furious with that question because I have very definite views on the sexual immortality of pornography which are founded on a 100% secular basis. However having calmed down I could have answered "strongly disagree" and continued. Abortion and pornography were never raised again.

The question was intended no doubt to establish if there is a link between strong religious opposition to sexual freedom and opposition to gender ideology.

Therefore you (general you) could all have truthfully answered "strongly disagree" to that question and cheerfully answer every other question in as an extremist Terven position as you fancied. So their survey would actually show there is no link whatsoever with extremist religious views and extremist Terven views.

"Extremist" used for purpose of making examples work.

I posted the point about the ambiguity/ possible insulting nature of the "no cervix" question on the thread that got pulled later , and someone responded to say they would look into it which suggests it hadn't crossed their minds

A lot of the other questions were similar.

And Mikey's interests don't seem to have broadened beyond conspiracy theories looking at his Twitter so I'm not sure I buy his protestations.

They basically think the women on here are bigoted right wing and thick.

Pity they didn't bother reading the board before posting their ill-informed poorly scoped research effort

I did like the "would you freak out if.." question

Did they mean would you be concerned , worried , frightened ?)

Or perhaps they meant would you start disco dancing ... freak out , c'est chic

Both of the names in that screenshot are easily found (but I won't link to them) both have pronouns in their Twitter bios, one is interested in "socially situated language processing".

This is interesting.

www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/11426/socially-situated-effects-of-social-and-cultural-context-on-language-processing-and-learning

you'd think someone who identifies as an expert in conspiracy beliefs wouldn't create a survey to confirm their own conspiracy beliefs

'People that don't menstruate or don't have a cervix should be able to identify as women'.

So a women who has had a hysterectomy? Or do they mean men?

Surely this is a joke?

Can someone PM me the details. Happy to write in to complain

Thanks, @Clymene. That final page is infuriating so probably just as well I didn't see the whole thing!

Oh I can’t see it on the website either @Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g. Annoying!

Try this

I missed this but would be very interested to see the questions they asked. In psychology it's good practice to use pre-existing validated scales where possible, sometimes modified slightly to fit a particular research topic, so it might be that they have appropriated some existing psychological scale for group identification or some such and not given enough attention to the appropriateness of those scales in the context which they are using them. However, this sort of thing should absolutely be flagged to the Research Ethics Committee as it does sound biased in its approach and naive of the potential harm and distress they could cause to their participants.

I wonder if this was the one I tried to complete and found so poor that I gave up. Seems like that was a few weeks ago. Are these things multiplying? I think there are quite a lot of year 12 EPQs on gender.