Our friends at the Good Law Project

Jeez, does that man have any functioning active brain cells?

People like him are conflating two issues:

1. he plagiarised his thesis (and apparently many of his subsequent published research) and has lied about many aspects of his career and life. His colour is irrelevant to this because any white, male/female, [insert demographic of choice here] academic caught in this would also have been vilified and ended up being removed/resigning.
2. he was fast tracked into his role as Professor of the most prestigious chair in his field based upon his reputation, activism and public profile over race and autism, and the intersectionality of these. So in this instance, because the appointment was largely made because if his EDI/DEI {?} characteristics and this was lauded in national press by Cambridge, yes, his being black is an essential part of the discussion as to standards and protocols in recruitment, and whether they were lowered in response to a DEI agenda.

If he can’t grasp there are at least two narrative threads to these events, then he really shouldn’t every be considered as a candidate party leadership!

I wondered how long it would be before Dave galumphed in with a misjudged opinion

How bloody offensive to black academics to suggest that they shouldn’t be held to the same standards - that lends itself to people thinking “Oh, so-and-so must have got their doctorate/professorship because they were a DEI hire and the standards were lowered for them”. If you’ve worked your balls off to get to that position, how bloody awful to have it degraded in that way. Arday and his supporters are responsible for that, and arguably I’d say it’s his supporters at fault more than him.

I know this is derailing the thread, but am I alone in finding that Itchycoo Park song really sinister nowadays? It's sung from the perspective of a man seeking to persuade a girl to play truant from school and instead come with him to a park where she will be plied with recreational drugs. This is grooming gang territory, surely?

It would be more cheering if the complaint had come from a trans person and the police had refused to pursue it

Come on! Let's keep it in the real world, that's fantasy stuff!

I find it cheering that in this case a complaint was made to the police who refused to pursue it. (Arday complained to the Met about Harris's polite letters questioning some of the issues raised; they passed the complaint to Devon and Cornwall, who declined to act.)(Though it would be more cheering if the complaint had come from a trans person and the police had refused to pursue it - prominent examples of that would be good to read! Or indeed if the Met had directly declined to act.)

afcomm.org.uk/2026/08/05/jason-arday-reported-academic-critic-to-police/

Arday is gone GLP has lost again.

Confirming the trend again as soon as GLP comes on your side you are pretty much doomed long term.

No argument about feminism being trans inclusive.

It's just whether you want to include women who identify as trans and also depend on e.g single sex sport and sex specific health care and reproductive rights, or whether you want to exclude them and prioritise men.

I can explain what characteristics women have in common with other women because I can define sex, but I can't explain what women would necessarily have in common with a man who identities as trans that they couldn't have in common with any other man. That's not to say that a woman can't have more in common with a man than she does with another women, but that is a function of their shared humanity. Until 10 years ago this was bog standard feminism.

Im not interested in hearing the stats you will now come at me with relating to crimes committed by transwomen in womens spaces.

This comment just suggests that you haven't been paying attention. It's odd that so many people express confusion, but perhaps the problem is information silos. Anyway, I will try to explain.

If you read the exceptions that allow single sex spaces in the Equality Act, they apply to both sexes equally and don't refer to crimes against women.

The most common exceptions are prompted by the desire for privacy from the opposite sex when in a state of undress and these apply to women and men. You can argue over the situations when this should apply, but you can't argue that a space should be single sex because it is reasonable for a woman to object to the presence of a man and then allow men to use the space if they would prefer. It just doesn't make sense.

It is also undeniable that some single sex provision e.g. prisons, rape crisis centres, exists because MEN are a threat to women. You might wish to argue that only men who identify as men are a threat to women, but gender is not objectively classifiable, (as the police and prison services have demonstrated) so that doesn't really get us anywhere.

The Good Law Project has suggested segregation by 'lived gender', but I have no idea how this makes anyone's life less precarious and I thought I gained the right to stop 'living in a gender' around 1975.

This is quite a long post, and you may not have bothered to read it, but if you have, I hope you are less baffled by the SC decision and the EHRC guidance.

To be fair the people making it about men are the men who just cannot control their fetishes and boundary crossing.

Trans Activism is a men's sexual rights movement.

The girls and young women caught up in it are the ones trying to escape that.

The TERFs are the ones standing at the door saying 'No'.

Why any self respecting 'feminist' goes into battle for these men is beyond me.

But whilst you are here, if you could explain it that would be great.

"I am certain that the stats will tell you that the harmful impact of this rhetoric is greater than the actual harm to women by transwomen"

@avilsdedvocate Please give us those stats then, if you are sure.
We'll read your stats, if you read ours. But you already said you don't want to read our stats. That's hardly fair.

This board is where so called 'feminists' wanted all the threads discussing 'men who think they are women' to be shoved and then other 'feminists' moan that they can't use this board when there is a whole 'feminism' board that is totally empty just waiting for you/them to go and discuss things that you want to discuss. So crack on.

But no, men do not have the right to use female spaces just because they say so. Also if they could stop turning up to work dressed in their fetish gear that would be grand.

Love Small Faces
Thanks for the earworm

😂 and Face from the A team was an honorary member

Facism is a tiny religious sect founded in 1968 by a young man living in a London squat. He had Itchycoo Park by the Small Faces playing one night after he'd taken LSD, and the rest is history.

avilsdedvocate
I also refuse to hate people who are trans or have gender dysphoria. I know you lot dont believe in it. You dont always have to experience somethinh to believe and support it. I do it every day.
Im not interested in hearing the stats you will now come at me with relating to crimes committed by transwomen in womens spaces.

I don't hate trans people.
I have had what is referred to as gender dysphoria.
I have experienced it, and believe that children experiencing it deserve love, support and- crucially - the truth that they can never change their biological sex.
I don't have any stats about crimes committed by transwomen in women's spaces to give you.
It is sufficient to know that transwomen shouldn't be in women's spaces, regardless of what they get up to there.
For me, it's a matter of principle, not of statistics.

Can I still be one of what you call 'you lot' despite not conforming to what you seem to think 'you lot' all think?

We’re only making it about men because other “feminists” insist on centring them to the detriment of women and girls. We can’t even have our own fucking rights movement without entitled men barging in to take it over and simpering women handing it to them.

fascinating, do post an actual argument backed up with facts and evidence if you feel like it

I think you've mixed up 'disagreeing with' and 'hating'. I don't hate people I disagree with, just as I am a feminist who is not anti-trans - I think transpeople should have exactly the same rights as everybody else, no more, no less.
That's fair, isn't it? Not anti-trans at all.

I disagree with you about this board being 'the same point over and over' but given that it's called the Feminism: Sex and gender discussions board, it's logical that it will have a lot of discussions about sex and gender.

I think anybody with an interest in society and people and rights and wrongs is likely to be interested how such a tiny percentage of the population, who already enjoy all the same human rights as anybody else, has managed to have such an extraordinary influence on so many aspects of society - the media, education, medicine, legislation, politics, medicine..

I can't think of any other minority group in society has achieved such a high profile, and such disproportionate influence in such a short time, can you?
It's a fascinating topic.

It also has practical implications in everyday life for women, so there are practical as well as theoretical reasons for it being discussed a lot.

But if you don't want to join in those kinds of discussions, you do you
That said, you did join in, didn't you?

Even 30 years ago a person with an intellectual disability could be an academic if they could do the work to meet the required standards.

That's the context.

What's changed in recent years, what Stock is talking about, is that people who could not meet the standard because of intellectual disability are seen as needing to be helped through with accommodations as a matter of equity.

It's like a rugby player with a congenital abnormality. That might make playing to a professional level difficult or unusual, but if the person can in fact play at that level, they can be a professional rugby player. But imagine if his disability was such that he was too slow, or was too fragile to be tackled, and we said teams had to mitigate this as a matter of fair access.

That is what Stock is talking about, and it's not just about pushing some academics beyond their abilities. It's a massive issue with how they understand access, equity, and the role of the university.

Tbh you lot are making it about men!
Tired of debating but being feminist and trans inclusive/ally are not mutually exclusive.
I am a feminist.
I also refuse to hate people who are trans or have gender dysphoria. I know you lot dont believe in it. You dont always have to experience somethinh to believe and support it. I do it every day.
Im not interested in hearing the stats you will now come at me with relating to crimes committed by transwomen in womens spaces. I know.
When you assess risk you need to weigh up the severity and likelihood of harm. I am certain that the stats will tell you that the harmful impact of this rhetoric is greater than the actual harm to women by transwomen.

They don't think they are individualists at all. They are identarian, which the see as a kind of collectivism. Identities replace class.

Anti-racism operates within that framework as well.

I aim to please 😘

Feminism is about women and girls. Sorry if you mistakenly thought it was about men. I can quite understand why you would, given the amount of energy given over to what men want everywhere in society.

However I think all people have rights to live as they wish. Including trans people.

So what is your opinion on single sex spaces? And women's categories in sports and awards?