University of Sussex fined £585,000 by Office for Students

I'm now quite interested to know what the University think they could have said in defence.

I suspect the OfS found they didn’t feel Sussex had anything to say on the matter beyond “We are liberal and progressive and trans inclusive/we’re on the right side of history/TERFs are bad/[something about pronouns]/BE KIND”.

You'd not need to hear much more of that before you started to develop a migraine, I should imagine.

Ha, I was too kind. Jo Phoenix has given the VC's mess of contradictions an F!

https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/news-blog-and-events/press-and-media/university-of-sussex-fined-585-000-for-free-speech-and-governance-breaches/

https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/media/hcllzxwx/university_sussex_free_speech_case_report.pdf

Not sure if this has already been posted the OFS blog and the report itself. The blog also gives a link to how to report any other free speech issues that students/staff may have with other Unis regulated by the OFS.

Apologies if posted elsewhere.

Good 🎉

Thank you for your reply @Windscreenviper

There are so many such injustices, I had to google Connie Shaw:
Gender-critical student suspended from university radio after posting interview with detransitioner – The Free Speech Union

Does this mark the beginning of free speech and healthy debate returning to university campuses? I hope Uni of Leeds is paying attention regarding the treatment or Connie Shaw.

Sussex appealing this would be Wilde suing Queensberry for libel level stupidity.

Phoenix on Roseneil’s comments.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1904806273863790885.html

😂 I’m all good. @Spring025 summed it up perfectly.

@AccidentallyWesAnderson Sometimes you don’t get what you want. But hope got something. Redirect all questions to @Spring025

The VC said elsewhere that they had not had a substantive meeting with the OfS, which is not the same as no meetings.
The OfS may have found the meetings they did have with Sussex sufficiently substantive to get the information they needed.

Looking forward to hearing about the phone-in!

I think it's clear the ideals are that you can't change sex. It really doesn't take a day to unpick as it's biologically impossible to change sex - but I guess the PP doesn't want to get into it because it's very difficult to argue with scientific fact. I think the 'unpicking' refers to the requirement to have to try to explain your irrational beliefs, self delusion and clutching at straws - and who would want to get into that?

I saw this on the BBC and came to look for it on here. Great news.

It was Maya Forstater versus Peter Tatchell in case anyone is interested

I don’t, that’s why I’m asking.

What ideals of hers, that you don’t agree with, take a day to articulate? Does anyone else think this is an unreasonable question?

In the time you’ve waffled on displaying such avoidance techniques a politician would be proud of, you probably could’ve just answered. I’m betting it wouldn’t take a day.

@AccidentallyWesAnderson You said Shouldn’t really take a day to state what ‘ideals’ of Kathleen Stock you disagree with?
Since you are doubtful it takes a day, then you’ve assumed to know what they are. I am uninterested in satisfying your curiosity of my view, as I am in arguing.

We both support the free speech. There’s some common ground.

I don’t disagree with her ideals though, so why would I go ahead, and with what?

‘Very keen’ is over egging it a bit. Just curious as to why typing out what about Kathleen Stock (who forms this thread)’s ideals you stated you disagree with but would take the best part of a say to (not) explain entails. Can’t say I’m too shocked though.

I heard a snippet of the VC ranting about the unfairness of it on the BBC radio 2 news at 12 today. She said they hadn't been spoken to, that it was a trawl of documents, and they only found one which was a problem.

I thought it was 2, but anyway, of course it didn't cover what the document said.

Jeremy Vine had a phone in about the case at 1pm but I was out of the car by then so missed it but it's probably on iplayer at some point if anyone wants to listen to it.

I think are things fundamentally wrong with English law eg breach of the peace even 100 years ago is all about how those around will react to something (same with laws (or lack of laws) on nudity and same with a lot of "hate" speech laws.. When the law is based on how upset the recipient or viewer will feel that is not good law in my view. It is the law of the mob really. However they will not be changing in any time soon.

I think most of us know the basic - if you say or write "I am going to kill you because yo believe in XYZ" that is an illegal threat whereas if we say "You will burn in hell because the bible says so" or "Men are objectively superior to women" or that " person has XX chromosomes" that is in most contexts not illegal.

You don’t need to state anything for me. You do appear very keen to talk about it, so I’ve said go ahead. I won’t be joining you in that, because I don’t want to. Sorry you’re dissatisfied with that as a reason.

Why do I need to state what you said for you? I didn’t say I disagreed with Kathleen Stock.

You said you didn’t agree with KS’ ideals but didn’t have the day’s long unpicking it would take. Think anyone would agree to summarise what it is you don’t agree with wouldn’t take a day. Why don’t you have a bash?

I know I’m free to state it, that’s why I stated it although you are managing to evidence this yourself.

Very much agree @TizerorFizz

@AccidentallyWesAnderson If you know how long it takes, then please don’t let me stop you. You’re free to think I can’t articulate something I stated.

@Thatcat The whole expansion programme in the 60s and through to the 90s was about widening participation and ensuring the new comprehensive schools sent dc to university. It’s just really about the tipping point. When are we sending too many full time students? I’m all for post 18 learning but we need a better variety and the university numbers cap was removed in 2014. Fees tripled to pay for it. Then all the expensive accommodation gets built and debts increase, both for students and many universities. We need to reverse and have more options for middle academic young people.