Beyond Opposition research project?

Thanks Nonny that’s useful to hear and exactly my thinking too.

I participated in this a while ago. Probably earlier in the year. Yes the researchers are heavily involved in queer theory but I figured if I don't speak up and contribute my opinions then it's easy for biased academics to claim that the 'GC side' is tied to conservative / right wing / religious positions.

I did the survey and interview. I didn't use my real name and was glad of the opportunity to say what's really on my mind to the woman. 😂

Manderleyagain I probably spent an hour. It’s only a dozen questions or so, all open, limit of 2000 characters to each answer. I cannot see how they can possibly use it and am amazed it passes an ethics committee. It conflates three totally separate issues, doesn’t define its terms, completely strange focus on certain interactions you have. All very strange.

I offered to do an interview if they want.

And that itself was reminiscent of another survey a year ago using the same kind of framing.

Yes, this reminds me of the University of Kent survey that was spammed across the boards a couple of weeks ago by their research team. FindTheTruth has linked the MN thread.

How long did it take you workingitout?

I decided to fill it out. My views are perfectly legal and sensible so I cannot see how they could possibly misuse them to hurt me, and I wanted to show them that. Will see if I end up doxxed and exposed on twatter!

They are confusing women's concerns about males accessing women-only spaces with issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage and gay couples having children.

I don't think they're even a tiny bit confused, it's yet another way of saying feminists are aligned with the religious far right in order to discredit the GC perspective. It's embarrassingly transparent.

Kent University and Reading University posted their ill-informed poorly scoped survey on Mumsnet. thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4406835-University-of-Kent-survey

There was another thread on here recently about biased 'research' questions that assume feminists are bigots, after university phd researchers came onto Mumsnet pointing links to some awful questions. this is obviously the tip of the iceberg and they're all funded FFS.

And obv that info can be concealed.

Or mean they could trace those who gave certain answers.

Cynical view.

It said they record IP addresses so I guess they would give those to the authorities if there were a safeguarding issue they needed to report.

It didn't ask me for personal details at beginning. Just country and over 18 I think it was. Email address optional.

I didn't go all through but would be surprised if details collected at end as loads would spend ages answering open questions and then pull out at end. That would be an extremely unusual approach.

Has anyone seen the end?

What are all the references about checking for ‘possible harm to yourself or others’ about? How might they judge that you answering some questions could cause possible harm? Is this a normal research caveat does anyone know?

I assumed they meant they would retain personal details until they've read that person's submission for safeguarding purposes so that if they needed to contact the police or social services because you said you've got a body in the basement or are at risk of domestic abuse something, they'd be able to report it in a useful way.

Oops another look. Dublin. Not is USA.

Very interesting.

Don't touch it with a bargepole.

As zammo said. Just say no! And don't bother.

Other point is as usual it seems to stem from a USA perspective with no considerations whatsoever of the massively different cultures, social attitudes, history etc. It screams USA Christian right as the things linked are all on their agenda.

So it's totally useless.

Not thought about the point above, analysis difficult and open to interpretation, it's an online survey so vulnerable to bad actors/ trolls etc. And they must know that the subject leads to wide sharing on Twitter between those with certain views.

Not exactly subtle in what they are about!

• being anti abortion, concerned about impact of gender > sex, against gay rights etc comes automatically and inevitably as a package.

• it would be good to understand more about the people who feel like that, in more depth.

Note. That question. The grouping of issues.

When it comes to reporting the results of surveys, individual comments are not generally included. If they are it's those who agreed to it and not many.

The report will show the question which has different topics lumped together.

And they have a lot of leeway in how they report the answers. Enormous amount. And I guarantee they will not tease out different opinions on different topics when specified by respondent.

It's unusual / very rare for a survey to have so many open questions right from the start. Rather than yes/ no to very carefully written specific questions.

How do they intend to even start analysis and report results? Any way they fancy is the answer.

They say it's USA UK Canada because laws changed. What about Malta, Germany, Ireland? Why restrict at all? They ask where from can simple exclude responses from countries not of interest. With a note as to which countries, how many respondents, reason for excluding.

Just got to first actual question.

'How do your concerns about issues relating to sex/gender, sexualities and abortion affect where you go in your day-to-day life?'

What are all the references about checking for ‘possible harm to yourself or others’ about? How might they judge that you answering some questions could cause possible harm? Is this a normal research caveat does anyone know?

This doesn't fill me with confidence.
Prof. Kath Browne

Professor Browne is the PI on this research and she is a professor in Geography at the University College Dublin. Her work investigates sexual and gender equalities, most recently through exploring how these are resisted by what she and Professor Nash have described as ‘heteroactivism’.

It shows their bias

They are confusing women's concerns about males accessing women-only spaces with issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage and gay couples having children.

That would be intentional. They are trying to frame it as something most people would think unreasonabe to object.