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

@RedToothBrush You will see academic arrogance all the time on the HE board! Saying posters should not comment because they are not academics is common. Belittling people who are not academics is also common. Saying views have no validity because they aren’t in an Academic paper. Finding fault with people who actually run a business and have far more experience in the world of work (or just varied experience of life) than they do is common too. It’s like a world of its own and there needs to be more common sense whilst listening to other opinions and far less strutting and quoting of degrees held. It’s makes some people unbelievably myopic and unable to see another point of view. It seems to be that research is God. It knows no wrong. Sadly students have to put up with this and some of it is very poor.

Debate is healthy.

We are not having enough of it.

We are having a push to 'right think' and 'wrong think' which is at the heart of everything though and is killing debate.

I don't have a problem with academia. I value it. Very much.

I have a problem with academic arrogance and institutionalisation and a lack of academic open mindedness that comes with that.

Academia needs to recognise issues with those who value education and those that don't and that both are valuable to society and still have equally valid points to make. There's been a massive shift to looking down on the uneducated in the last few years - you HAVE to have a degree an if you don't you are somehow a failure. This isn't healthy.

We should be able to talk about uncomfortable issues. This does not mean we are 'anti' anything. We shouldn't fall into this trap of thinking that because there is considerable critism that its a 'them v us' situation. Its a desire to 'sort this shit out, cos it needs dealing with' not a 'we hate them'. Issues not individuals. Don't take it personally - its a systematic problem.

Tell me, theres not this attitude coming from a lot of middle class quarters. Tell me, that those who work in education don't have some of the worst attitudes on this. Tell me, there isn't an overwhelming trend on this. Read MN...

Unfortunately the industrialisation of education as well as the sharping rigidity of education into academy rather than through 'learning on the job' has placed power to universities that didn't have this level of influence before and I do think its showing and they are ill equipped to deal with it.

I had the same reaction as IwantToRetire.
I also disagree profoundly not just with her opinion on assisted dying, which she is 100% entitled to, but with the way she force-teams supporters of assisted dying with ultra-liberalism and gender ideologues:
Half the time [its supporters] are the same people as the gender stuff: rich liberals living in north London going, ‘It’d be nice to have a service that can off me in my penthouse.’ It’s the same basic impulse: hyper-liberalism and control of the body.”

KS and everybody else is fully entitled to disagree with the many people who have, for decades (long before 'the gender stuff'), campaigned for assisted dying, often because of their personal experience of seeing a loved one suffer avoidably. I don't know why she has chosen to disrespect sincere, genuine people who have come to a different conclusion about assisted dying. It's disappointing.

I also find it odd that she thinks that by opposing issues such as surrogacy and prostitution, we are in some way ignoring other issues:
“I’d prefer to see some of the energy going into other areas.”

Feminists are capable of thinking about more than one thing at a time - I can oppose surrogacy, prostitution AND, for instance, the shameful persecution of Dr Stock at Sussex, it's not either/or, and it's all part of the same thing: sexism.

But this is a good example of how it's possible to admire someone greatly, as I do KS, and I also think she's cool AF, but also to disagree with them on some points. It puts some constraints on my admiration for her, but there are no limits to my support for her and her right to think and teach and write whatever she wants, and no limits to my outrage at how she was treated at Sussex.

And she's also entitled to her opinion. So much energy is taken up with fighting to keep fundamental rights that the capacity to tackle new areas is compromised (not that this means nothing is happening) so I do see her point on that. I can also see her point on the brains, in that plenty of us have opposed the gender ideology line of there being "male brains" and "female brains" and it being used to argue that someone with a "female brain" born in a male body is trans and therefore that should be accommodated. But we all know that male bodies and female bodies are different, and that includes hormones. So I agree with her on that, and that those differences aren't always taken into consideration with children.

And, of course, whatever she said has been filtered through a journalist wanting people to read and share their article. The Times have been better than most on the women's rights issue, but they're still wanting to sell papers/ads etc.

I'm also uncomfortable with the slight "anti academic" vibe that's coming through on this thread. Sure, some do meet the stereotype of a "head in the clouds" type who can't be let outside their labs for their own safety (I've genuinely known a few like this!). Some are incredibly arrogant and think that no-one knows their subject like they do, especially not non-academics/muggles, and are most disparaging of any opinion other than their own. But the vast majority are just perfectly normalish people who are passionate about their chosen field. Sure, it can make you quite narrowly focused but that doesn't make you a bad person.

Academia, by definition, requires you to express an opinion, so we can't be surprised when someone does!

I do know what you mean @IwantToRetire that part jarred with me as well. We’d all love to move on and focus on other things but atm despite the various victories, the reality is this pernicious ideology has taken hold at multiple levels across multiple public, private & charitable organisations. We’re not focusing on it because we’re unaware of other issues, women are focusing on it because it feels if we take a step back it will all flood back again

It seems obvious campaigning on other issues affecting women when the definition of women includes men with lady feelings is exactly the bloody problem!

People who are activists are not necessarily correct. It’s beliefs vs the truth in many cases. People can campaign for what they want but it doesn’t make it the full truth. There are nuances in every debate.

She’s not wrong though!

Dear oh dear ... there are 2 quotes that are more that a bit of an indication of not much background knowledge of feminism. (Which isn't to say I dont respect her, but there is a real danger when the media allows someone who has got a public face, to then somehow be the all purpose go to person)

She differs from many mainstream feminists and thinks that there are “hard-wired differences” between male and female brains. “It’s a middle-class fantasy that we can just soft-power boys into being versions of girls, but boys aren’t just naughty versions of girls that need to read more books,” she says. “On average, they’re quite aggressive. They have bursts of testosterone.”

Whoever does she mingle with?! Such an insult to all the women who have spent years campaigning around male violence. And have done and are still doing work on this

She would like feminists eventually to move on from the trans fight into issues such as surrogacy or prostitution. “There are lots of ways women are being systematically oppressed,” she says. “I’d prefer to see some of the energy going into other areas.”

Doesn't she see how at the very least how rude this makes her seem in totally ignoring the number of activists and groups already doing this.

Maybe as someone who has spent all their life in academia it has all passed her by.

And of course if the reported had done research they would have challenged her.

But I now see it is Rosamund Irwin who has been around long enough to know better.

My particular passions in history are the development of American Liberalism and a passion for military history (I don't like battle orders etc I like the social history side of it - think more band of brothers than generals) as well as learning family history and the lived lives of my various ancestors (and of friends). It's a great leveller in understanding people and who you are and where you come from and how you can't actually escape it.

I also love politics and part of my media degree was about recognising propaganda.

So I was completely fucked from the beginning on what I was ever going to think on this subject as a whole!

Unfortunately, I have to agree that a lot of academics are arrogant and self-important (not all, by any means, but far too many). IME a lot of historians roundly despise 'amateur historians' regardless of the accuracy and thoroughness of their work. I had one start to snigger at the title of a book by a despised 'amateur', until I pointed out to him that it was a very apposite quote that anyone with a decent knowledge of the topic would recognise.

At the same time they want on about 'subaltern voices' (what the plebs say) and 'speaking truth to power', by feeling very threatened by both when presented with them in reality.

NAAALT, obviously. Just a sizeable proportion, often with glossy woke credentials. Military historians, not so much.

ETA, 'norovirus media' 🤣🤣🤣

“I think there’s contempt in universities for ordinary people’s attitudes … on race, immigration or feminism.”

Stock disagrees with critics who have called the Trump administration transphobic.

Stock is unpredictable in her views. She differs from many mainstream feminists and thinks that there are “hard-wired differences” between male and female brains.

While many feminists have no time for Jordan Peterson, Stock — who has two sons and a daughter — almost defends him. “He was quite good for boys — an acceptable father figure,” she says.

Her next book will be opposing assisted dying. “It’s going to be a disaster,” she says of Kim Leadbeater’s bill. “It’s like a spidey-sense — you just know.

Blimey, I think that is the first time I've read an article by anyone where I agree with the gist of every word.

As a result of all of this JK Rowling has been forced to clarify that she does not actually believe in magic.

You can believe in magic and still think gender woo is bollocks 🙂

This caught my eye.

"Yet only one colleague publicly backed her: a military historian who she has never spoken to. He put a sign on his door which read: “I stand with Kathleen Stock.” When she left, she asked that the flowers be given to him."

Bolding by me.

If someone had asked me to guess what the one colleague who put that note on their door was like, I would have guessed history a possible subject that they taught and I would have thought that they were more likely to be male. I do wonder how much backlash he got for having that sign?

ETA
"But her background in philosophy played a role too. “I didn’t believe in the power of words utterly to change reality,” she says."

Bloddy hell. I just made the connection - it's magic spells! All this 'words create/change reality' is just a belief in magic bloody spells!

I thought it was also interesting that she talked about this “going out of fashion”. I’ve long since thought that nothing will kill this ideology stone dead faster than it being “out of date”.

Men in women’s sports and prisons might be the things that peak people, but time - and quite possibly medical scandals when the puberty blocker chickens come home to roost - will be the things that finish this ideology off.

Thank you. Her comments about the types of girls who self-harm, who previously would have cut themselves but now are using binders and having double mastectomies, are interesting. The difference with the latter scenarios is that adults (who consider themselves to be progressive) have enabled and championed the latter scenario. It's quite horrifying really.

Archive version

https://archive.is/aHyCB

Pleased to see her described as a heroine to many feminists and a heretic to transgender ideologues rather than the usual framing.

Thank you for share token.

I imagine that they think the same as they did before, with an additional grievance that the law is wrong and transphobic.

Interview with Kathleen Stock in the Sunday Times:
https://www.thetimes.com/article/2ca51974-d212-49ef-8272-1404cabff034?shareToken=07fa31aa1a6f8da8681803a00d1e0ebd

@MarieDeGournay I think it lies at the heart of some issues we have in the uk. We love policies. We let them multiply like topsy but we don’t know what to do with them. Universities seem to be well intentioned but spineless when it comes to challenging what’s going on when it’s clearly wrong. Maybe Sussex and Brighton should merge. Might save some money.

Absolutely agree, TizerorFizz , Sussex in the early 2020s gives the impression of being totally out of control, as the hounding out of KS showed.
Not only was the official university strategy not being followed, but random pro-trans policies were popping up all over the place, and being enforced by threats and harassment.
It sounds like dystopian fiction, doesn't it?

@MarieDeGournay I was a school governor for many years. One thing that was drummed into us was that policies, with no monitoring, evidence of success or otherwise and essential follow up, are just words. They are largely meaningless documents to satisfy SLT and regulators. The real work and skill is making sure they make a difference and are actually adhered to. Any numpty at Sussex could see the policies just sat in folders. Where was the monitoring process? Where was any action based on objective evidence? They had evidence all around them that the policy wasn’t working. SLT ignored what they published and let individuals plough on. What then happened was harassment and they didn’t bother to monitor that or act on evidence either.

So what use are policies if nothing happens as a result of them ? None.

We seem to be reaching and hopefully soon passing Peak Drag and increasingly, in the UK, Peak Pandering to Unreasonable

Except, the BBC has recently abolished Hard Talk (revered programme with viewing figures of 70 million worldwide) as a cost cutting measure while commissioning a second series for a comedy about drag queens sharing a flat (viewers something like 30,000 for the 2nd episode).

If the BBC has any influence over this then we’re a long way from peak.