Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Sally Hines accuses Professor Rosa Freedman of being mean on Twitter

156 replies

OrchidInTheSun · 25/11/2018 01:16

Hines says she's copied in her university and the ESRC into tweets about her. She's very cross. So cross that she can't spell Rosa's name properly - it's Freedman, not Freeman.

Here's her tirade
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1066446520575250435.html

OP posts:
Thread gallery
15
LangCleg · 28/11/2018 23:00

Someone take away her phone ffs, I almost feel sorry for her.

No, no! I'm having such fun lollygagging!

toriap2 · 29/11/2018 06:52

Ooohh, and there I am at the bottom. You cut off my no doubt witty and sensible reply though 😁😁

hackmum · 29/11/2018 07:34

We undermined the professional standing of someone who can’t even spell her own job title. It’s like shooting fish in a barrel.

AngryAttackKittens · 29/11/2018 07:37

Of course she did. She isn’t open to the idea that a thousand reasonable tweets asking pertinent questions might mean that a lot of people have valid disagreements. Cults don’t allow questioning. Fundamentalists don’t allow doubt.

I mean, she calls GC people questioning her (very silly) comments evil bigots and flouncing - nothing happens. She adjusts her perspective in response to the feedback and indicates so publicly - potentially gets an actual barrage from culty people who if she flounces may be inclined to follow with balaclavas on and smoke bombs at the ready.

It's easier to keep on believing that the thousands of people disagreeing are wrong, and quite possibly safer.

R0wantrees · 29/11/2018 08:13

Telegraph review of Woman's Hour 'Sex & Gender' series:
'How Woman's Hour exposed the tensions at the heart of the transgender debate'
by JEMIMA LEWIS

Gender is such a hot topic – more of an inferno, really – that it’s easy to get your fingers burnt. Last March, Woman’s Hour presenter Jenni Murray wrote a long, nuanced article arguing that trans women who grow up male don’t experience the world in the same way as natal women. For this, she was publicly rebuked by Stonewall, accused of transphobia and added to the student union blacklist of Wicked Old Women.

Now it’s the turn of her co-presenter, Jane Garvey, to slap on a hard hat, grab a hose and dash into the burning building. All this week and last, Garvey has been hosting a series of debates on gender, trying to understand the conflict between feminists and trans activists, and – a genuine public service, this – render it comprehensible to the average listener. One of the weirdest things about this argument is how hard it is to understand. Every single one of us has personal experience of sex and gender; yet the subject has become so encrusted in jargon that only the most obsessively interested parties can follow the conversation.

“What are sex and gender?” Garvey asked at the start of the first debate, last Monday. Sociologist Sally Hines cleared her throat and attempted clarity. It didn’t last long. “Sex, I would argue, is a very complex mix of chromosomes, hormones and genitals… So we are talking about biological factors, but we’re not talking about anything at all which is straightforward…. We are talking about a complex mix of factors which, especially in the West, have often been seen through a binary framework.”

You could practically hear Garvey’s eyeballs rolling in her head. I share her impatience with the self-important verbosity of gender politics. And if Garvey sometimes seems exasperated by her trans guests, who can blame her? They keep refusing to take part in a proper debate – insisting on recording their interviews separately from the enemy.

This Monday’s discussion was supposed to be about how to improve communication between the two sides. But Bex Stinson, head of trans equality at Stonewall, refused to appear in the studio with her opposite number (Helen Lewis of the New Statesman) on the grounds that the debate was too toxic. The mad circularity of this argument – I won’t try to have a civilised conversation because the conversation is too uncivilised – was especially baffling because Lewis is one of the gentler critics of the trans lobby.

She already believes that trans women are women, deserving of the same rights and respect as other women. Yet, said Lewis, because she doesn’t subscribe to every element of trans doctrine, Stinson apparently regards her as a dangerous bigot. And “if she’s saying that about me”, added Lewis cleverly, “she’s saying that about – I would say – 95 per cent of Woman’s Hour listeners.” That’s how to win a debate: speak plain English, know your audience – and above all, be in the room." (continues)

www.telegraph.co.uk/radio/what-to-listen-to/womans-hour-exposed-tensions-heart-transgender-debate/

Melamin · 29/11/2018 09:32

That was good -

The 'mad circularity of this argument' has been exposed in their Womans Hour refusals and it is there for everyone to hear for themselves.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.