Hard-left academics ‘plotted gender ID witch-hunt’ on colleagues

I think we are arging the same thing. Kids are being taught what to think, not how to think. That is not a university level education

I’d argue that the problem is that it’s very much become about teaching everyone how to think rather than equipping people with the tools to think critically for themselves.

If this is what universities have become, then burn the whole lot to the ground. They are no longer serving their primary purpose, to teach young people how to think.

A friend told me recently that she was bullied into approving an ethics application for a student who wants to do trans identity research with primary school children with no parental consent involved…

And that the midwives at the same university are very angry because someone has decided to change all the language on the website to be trans inclusive/gender neutral. It’s all childbearing people now.

The atmosphere is coercive across the sector.

IME Moray House is a difficult place to work where people whose faces and ideas don’t fit are not treated brilliantly. It has been for some time.

About three years ago I tentatively discussed Michele Moore's book (with others) with a lecturer in sociology and criminology who's also occasionally taught gender topics.

She said that she knew of university lecturers locally who were really panicked about joining Moore on various things not even linked to what she was writing about ("inventing transgender children") asking her opinion on "how it would look."

She could see the sexism in the idea of being "born in the wrong body" but could also see that the title was "inflammatory."

Unfortunately she's a peri menopausal mum friend and we've rarely been able to have a much needed deeper discussion about this.

Which is needed as I've seen she's been involved in zooms with Sally Hines et Al.

The rot has been there for a long while and it will be hard to dig it out.

Sigh. Most of that is a quote but the new improved MN has removed my line of asterisks marking the end my words and the start of the quote.

This Natacha Kennedy? archive.ph/oSr7F#selection-773.0-789.248

Ms Kennedy, who describes herself on Facebook as a “stroppy, bolshie transgirl with attitude who hates the Tories with a passion”, refused to comment. She represented Goldsmiths during trans awareness week in February.
It confirmed that she was an employee but would not explain which department she worked in or why she appeared to be listed twice in the staff directory: once as Mark Hellen, in the department of educational studies, and secondly as Natacha Kennedy, who is named in equality and diversity reports. Both profiles appear to be active.
It also remained unclear why an academic paper on Ms Kennedy’s specialist subject of transgenderism in children, published by the Graduate Journal of Social Sciences in 2010, cited two co-authors: Natacha Kennedy and Mark Hellen.
Neither Ms Kennedy nor Goldsmiths would clarify whether the paper was by two individuals or the same person. A spokesman said: “Goldsmiths prides itself on its inclusive community and is committed to the values of freedom of speech within the law.”

There was a very interesting thread recently about how authoritarianism is a behaviour trait, not a political affiliation. That's why it affects both sides of the left/right political spectrum.
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4311625-Interesting-interview-about-authoritarianism-R4-Helen-Lewis-Karen-Stenner

Thanks, came to post this. Now off to read.

Shereen used to lecture in primary/ eyfs education (she still
Does I think but was severely curtailed by the university.)

My point isn't really the point of the thread, but the other Times article found a grand total of two reading lists that had been altered and spent the rest of the space grumbling about academics complaining about their FoI fishing campaign. I'm deeply unhappy with UCU and Jo Grady! But I do know universities and the current government is seemingly determined to undermine them.

One of The Times comments mentions Natasha Kennedy, who was up to these sort of tricks back in 2018.

Seem these type of people never bore of their witch hunts
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/eb941d92-b2ec-11e8-8fb1-ac438dd6af00?shareToken=e7bd3be1dffbc6286c63b494932c2aaf

I wouldn't take the Times's word on this. It's part of their whole Tory-supported campaign to destroy universities' credibility

I always find this kind of comment pointless. Essentially you're accusing the Times of making up the story: of inventing quotes from non-existent documents. If indeed it had done that - which would be pretty outrageous from serious journalists - then the consequences would be severe. The UCU would likely sue, for a start. Not liking the Times's agenda is one thing; accusing them of deliberate invention is quite another.

I'd like to know why you find it 'malevolent'?

I used to be on an equality and diversity committee in FE/HE. They've always been over-reactive. It's the nature of the beast. I remember in the past, long before trans issues were even thought a out, the chairwoman of our group told us we needed to sit in the refectory at lunch time and take notes of who was discussing certain issues of concern to her. Initially, she seriously couldn't see anything wrong with it. They just seem to get lost in issues and lose a sense of perspective. And if the whole committee thinks the same, (and honestly any rational people have already left!), they just cement the view that what they're doing is fine.

And during the entire time these arguments have 'raged', not a single person has described what a 'psychological sense of your gender' entails.

Exactly. And it's "literal violence" to even ask.

I wouldn't take the Times's word on this. It's part of their whole Tory-supported campaign to destroy universities' credibility

Universities don't need help from the Times or the Tories to do that. They're doing a much more effective job of that than the Times or Tories could ever do. 😂

The universities don’t need the Times help with this. They are a national joke entirely through their own efforts. For so many reasons.

Arguments over gender identity theory — or whether a person’s psychological sense of their gender is at least as relevant as their biological sex — have raged in recent years on campuses.

And during the entire time these arguments have 'raged', not a single person has described what a 'psychological sense of your gender' entails.

Not one.

Surely there are enough sensible grown up critical thinking academics who will find this behaviour completely shameful in the name of Universities?

If you read the thread below, you'll see that there's a general climate of fear in academia meaning that some academics are too afraid even to speak out against what looks like a resurgence of PIE.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4607207-just-when-i-thought-academia-couldnt-sink-any-lower

That article is about UCU rather than the universities themselves for the most part. The second half of it is about the Edinburgh branch which has definitely abandoned any critical thinking around gender.

I don’t think trying using the ‘Tory-supported campaign to destroy universities’ credibility’ line to shut down scrutiny of any of the many ways in which the UK HE system is extremely dysfunctional is helpful really.

Surely there are enough sensible grown up critical thinking academics who will find this behaviour completely shameful in the name of Universities?

You'd have to hope so, but where were they when Kathleen Stock was being hounded out?

Surely there are enough sensible grown up critical thinking academics who will find this behaviour completely shameful in the name of Universities?

I wouldn't take the Times's word on this. It's part of their whole Tory-supported campaign to destroy universities' credibility - look at the concurrent story on reading lists, which is both ridiculous and malevolent.