Kathleen Stocks' article begins:
"Something is afoot in academic philosophy. Beyond the academy, there’s a huge and impassioned discussion going on, around the apparent conflict between women-who-are-not-transwomen’s rights and interests, and transwomen’s rights and interests. And yet nearly all academic philosophers — including, surprisingly, feminist philosophers — are ignoring it."
This conflict is given a particular sharp illustration in the UK at the moment, where both major political parties currently support changes to the Gender Recognition Act, to make it easier for people to legally ‘self-identify’ as a particular gender, without any prolonged psychological or medicalised intervention. It looks likely that this act of self-certification will be all that is required to legally ‘become’ a woman or man; no change in lifestyle, clothes, or physiognomy, or any period of living ‘as a woman’, or the lack of it, will be relevant...." continues here:
medium.com/@kathleenstock/academic-philosophy-and-the-uk-gender-recognition-act-6179b315b9dd
She has also included in another article,
"Anonymised responses from other academics to my articles on sex, gender, and philosophy
Here are some responses I’ve received, unsolicited, from fellow academics, since I published this and this. Each is from a different individual, with the discipline area named at the end. They are reproduced here with permission"
medium.com/@kathleenstock/anonymised-responses-from-other-academics-to-my-articles-on-sex-gender-and-philosophy-f1cc0db04554
and written "Arguing about feminism and transgenderism: an opinionated guide for the perplexed"
medium.com/@kathleenstock/arguing-about-feminism-and-transgenderism-an-opinionated-guide-for-the-perplexed-eabd8208469f