Sally Hines is writing female out of feminism- I'm terrified

[CrazyToast]

I've just seen this on twitter. 'Female' is only something anti trans people say and is not relevant to feminism. What if feminism becomes undermined too? Are they trying to take our only weapon and safe place? Why try to take away the biological needs of women rather than add those of trans women? How can this person think they are qualified and justified in re-defining feminism to exclude something fundamental to the majority of women?

My blood ran cold when I saw it because Sally Hines is an academic receiving a lot of funding to do this research.

@Funkyfunkybeat12 it wasn't speculation, I honestly thought she was trans. There's no harm in thinking someone is trans, it isn't implicitly bad to be trans. It's bad to try to hijack a movement which protects the vulnerable, for your own gain, particularly if you know little about the needs of that group. As for why a natal woman would try to undermine women's rights to their own detriment---either she truly believes she is right, or she is using this to advance her career.

Sorry, I may have misremembered.

I went to a talk by prof Hines recently (sat on my hands throughout) and leafed through her book. So when the urine incident happened I did check her out on Twitter. I am fairly certain I saw the condemnation there:- it was at the request/insistence of Jane Clare Jones I think.

Apologies if I am wrong.

ChewyLouie
Spot on. Follow the money. Sally Hines has found herself a well paid gravy train and she's not going to give that up - even if it means advocating dangerous anti-women propaganda.

Anyone who claims 'female' is not relevant to feminism is, quite simply, declaring themselves irrelevant to feminism. Hines seems to now be a proponent of genderism, not feminism.

Follow the money. Sally Hines has found herself a well paid gravy train and she's not going to give that up - even if it means advocating dangerous anti-women propaganda.

She's beyond contempt, frankly.

waterparc she did appear to condemn it. Yesterday her true feelings came out and she sent those disgusting tweets. She is a misogynist to the bone that one. She despises women unless they were born male.

Interestingly, her dad was the author Barry Hines who wrote the book A Kestrel for a Knave. It’s a great book- very moving. Shame his daughter turned out like she did.

Male and female are not going anywhere but thanks for the heads up Sally, we will push back even harder. Because of all this nonsense I have taught my little girl - far earlier than I would otherwise have done - about male and female. “Females have vulvas. Males can’t be females”. Etc

@waterparc

She might just be a middle aged women but unlike most of us she has 100s of 1000s of ESRC funding to support her views and a prestigious position at a good university.

A professor backed by money, a university, research and media platforms, colleagues, under the banner of 'science' who is trying to erase the word 'female' and take sex away from women and feminism doesn't terrify you?

This isn't just some kid mouthing off on twitter. She's backed by one of the biggest research councils and her research is thus likely to inform policy.

We should all be terrified. Underestimating this situation is partly what got us to this point.

@Funkyfunkybeat12 Kestrel for a Knave! We read that in school.

Oh I agree with you OP. She is dangerous and very dangerous to women in academia who dare question her. She makes it her mission to destroy their careers. She’s not some loser spouting off on twitter. She has got millions in funding and a very lucrative little earner.

Having heard her speak, no, she and her work do not terrify me.

Anyone who claims 'female' is not relevant to feminism is, quite simply, declaring themselves irrelevant to feminism

Absolutely this

Yeah we read it too. I cried reading it. I cry reading his daughter’s writing too, but for other reasons.

“ I cry reading his daughter’s writing too, but for other reasons.”

;)

Op, I think your “terrified” is my “troubled”.

I think she must have had a few too many sherries at the Leeds Uni Sociology department Xmas party, but obviously she does indeed think these things.

@waterparc I hope you are right and I am wrong!

Follow the money. Sally Hines has found herself a well paid gravy train and she's not going to give that up - even if it means advocating dangerous anti-women propaganda.

Indeed. Sally is quite happy to collect woke points and a shed load of cash. Spouting misogyny is a lucrative career.

If biological sex is irrelevant to feminism, what issues are feminists campaigning on?

I'm increasingly feeling that the only mainstream-acceptable type of feminism at the moment is this kind that has no concept of structural analysis, pays no attention to biology, and doesn't try to challenge anything major about the status quo. Preferably all about the individual and with a heavy emphasis on self-reflection, not so much about how the individual experiences the world in their actual physical body. Language should be as unclear and waffly as possible; you're allowed concepts like 'patriarchy' and 'women' if you absolutely must, but you're not allowed to explain what you might mean by them, definitely not when it might start applying to actual people.

So basically: 'feminism' that doesn't explain anything and doesn't threaten anything. Which we are also supposed to accept is the most progressive form of feminism that feminism has ever known.

She's an irritant, spraying theoretical shite from her ivory tower but hopefully no policy makers or legislators are giving her any real credence.

How does she even know she is a CIS woman if female doesn't exist?

Virtue signalling twat.

Given how high profile she is, aren't Leeds University slightly embarrassed. Or is her research typical of the academic stuff they produce?

How does she even know she is a CIS woman if female doesn't exist?

Good point. Given that the word basically means a female person who doesn't identify as trans. I suppose she has the special gender feels to tell her this.

Or is her research typical of the academic stuff they produce?

As an alumna, I would say no.

what issues are feminists campaigning on

Men's sexual rights. Natch.

I think she has struck lucky and been promoted to professor through length of service. She did her PhD there and has stayed ever since. From her writing and speaking, she is not terribly bright. That's why Rosa Freedman is such a threat to her- she's nearly 20 years younger, infinitely more intelligent, and she rose to become professor very early, plus has a big profile in her area and well-respected work (so her promotion was on merit, not length of service). And I actually think it's true about the few to no publications that she is so touchy about. If it wasn't, she would just say what her pubs are and stop going on about it. However, she's quite clearly obsessed with smearing Rosa.