Stonewall survey

[worstofbothworlds]

We got a message round to take part in this - it's the usual guff - but I put under gender "my sex is female, gender is a socially imposed construct" and also told them that women can't "be themselves" in academia. Will they care do you think?

If you haven't had a link then the survey link is here www.snapsurveys.com/wh/s.asp?k=149907370564
However you need your institution code and name so you'll probably have to search on your University web pages for that. On ours it was under "equality and diversity" but maybe try HR as well, or News.

As I said on the general chat thread, I don't know any out lesbians or bi women who are academics at my institution though there are a small number of out gay men. But some of this may be subject specific as it's not a theoretical debate in my branch of STEM (or at least nobody in my department specialises in it - it is I know possible to research this area in my discipline).

I get very fed up with straight people in EDI meetings mansplaining about LGBT issues as if (i) they are experts and (ii) there are no LGBT people in the room. And then when somebody gay explicitly states their sexuality the reaction is "Oh, but you don't look as if you are...", with the person saying this not getting why such a reaction is not acceptable.

Thinking about this, among my colleagues at other universities (i.e. those I collaborate with/go to conferences with in my actual field, rather than those in my department who I don't do research with) lots are out as gay/lesbian.

So either our university/department is very closed off in terms of revealing your private life (not that surprising) or it's easier to talk about your private life off-site (what goes on conference stays on conference) or our university really is a bad place to be out.

Anyway on the survey I said I thought our university was an OK to be out as gay but not sure on lesbian or trans - given I don't know who is, seems likely they are here but not out. Except of course as already noted, as someone who is straight how would I know?

yet - because he's an entitled wanker, in a nutshell.

user9 - YY! Or worse 'oh, I could never have known,' said as if it's a compliment. I saw someone say this recently to a colleague of mine and her face was a picture!

because he thought he was having a conversation in which he must be the most disempowered one.

I think this is quite a good illustration of why I don’t like the language of ‘privilege’. It’s an extension of commodity models of power (cf. empowerment) that seeks to locate (dis)advantage in the bodies of individuals. Privilege and power become aspects of some essential identity that can be counted up, compared and ranked.

We’re all busy ‘checking our privilege’ and not examining the practices and structures that actually cause some people to experience disadvantage or which enable certain people to succeed much more easily than others.

I just don’t see the value in the contemporary rush to (re)embrace identity politics.

We’re all busy ‘checking our privilege’ and not examining the practices and structures that actually cause some people to experience disadvantage or which enable certain people to succeed much more easily than others.

Hear, hear! We're teaching not just Thatcher's children, but her grandchildren.

To be fair, when I do draw attention to the structural a significant number lap it up and you can hear the penny drop.