Our favourite genderology professor from Leeds does it again.

[HerFemaleness]

twitter.com/sally_hines/status/1110614526142095362

''A woman, for me, is someone who feels that they are a woman.''

Then somebody asks Sally if she feels like a woman. To which Sally replies

''Well I don’t feel strongly that I’m not so yes.''

And then Vulvamort wins the internet with this.

''So, to recap:
You don't feel like the thing.

But you don't feel strongly that you're not the thing that is a thing because it feels like a thing.

So you've concluded you ARE the thing.

Having earlier said: the thing is anyone that feels they ARE the thing.
Which you don't.''

But that aside - is there anyone here who has a clue what Hines could possibly have meant by 'Before the Enlightenment the female skeleton didn’t exist'. I mean, it's such a bizarre thing to say that she must have 'meant' something by it.

Ask her if she feels strongly that she's not an idiot.

She means it wasn't conceptualised in exactly the same way. There's a bit of confuzzlement among postmodern types between things existing and things being thought to exist.

And of course it is sheer hypocrisy given the transing of historical figures. I wonder if Sally has ever pointed out that James / Miranda Barry can't possibly have been trans because trans people have only existed for a few years.

I assume she is referring to the first illustrations of the female skeleton. Because obviously the female skeleton didn't exist until a man drew it. FFS.

Lol.

Oh dearie me Sally.

I should have RTFT. Fachidiot is so apt.

There's a bit of confuzzlement among postmodern types between things existing and things being thought to exist.

Not so much a fachidiot as just an idiot then?

Errol
I don't pretend to understand much of the PoMo nonsense but it seems to be very anti-materialist.

I'm thinking it's to do with their idea that reality is brought into being by our thoughts, ideas and discourse - that's how you could say "sex didn't exist before the Enlightenment" or "sex is a white colonialist construct"

Unfortunately for them material reality does actually exist and has always existed and is not brought about by thoughts in SH and her fellow PoMo/Queer theory academics and adherent heids...

It's probably time to post a link to this again. Three hours long but worth every minute.

It might be time for the EHRC to revise its "Trans reading list". Six of the titles are by S. Hines. No wonder they're confused.

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-research/reading-lists/trans-reading-list

In Saussurian terms she means that the signified concept of a distinctive female skeleton was not recognised.

The RC Church forbad human dissection and so much was based on the work of Galen who asserted the common belief in Adam's missing rib despite this being clearly and observably false.

Vesalius blew the whole thing when he dissected humans in the 16thC

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andreas_Vesalius#Skeletal_system

This is a book all about how the world is often designed around men. And how that can lead to a more unsafe world for women.

It's literally a book about female biology.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/review-invisible-women-exposing-data-bias-in-a-world-designed-for-men-by-caroline-criado-perez-its-a-mans-world-and-women-dont-fit-rlxw8dl3m

LUCKILY IT'S TIME FOR

HOW IS SHE A PROFESSOR. HOW??????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

magicmix that was a very good post. I know exactly what you mean, and agree with you completely. You describe what it feels like very well. Once you move past that type of semi-mystical thinking mode, it becomes fascinating and bizarre to think you could every have thought that way.

I suspect there may be some nepotism at play here. There's no way she got to her position through intelligence.

Oh dear. titanic McGrath has got wind of this... her followers are being less than kind towards the professor....

What the fuck does someone have to do to bring the university into disrepute? Leeds might have been on my DD's list in a couple of years time for a social science, but I would definitely dissuade her now.

Every grad from Leeds is not a fuckwit.

Just y'know saying.

High fives Red.

High fives back.

Every grad from Leeds is not a fuckwit

Sally Hines does provide excellent piss taking grounds for when I want to wind DH up about his academic bona fides though

My poor child is waiting for me to wash her hair, but after a particularly shitty month, I really had to read every comment on that very strange woman’s twitter feed. Thank you Sally. Thank you so much. You’ve cheered me right up.

In Saussurian terms she means that the signified concept of a distinctive female skeleton was not recognised.

Ohhh - so why didn't she just say so?

However, given that her answer was in response to 'But, astoundingly, archeologists have no problem assessing the difference between male and female skeletons.' , that's surely irrelevant... the object 'female skeleton' existed before The Enlightenment, as archaeologists who have the concept 'female skeleton' can now attest.

Basically, she confirmed that there IS a biological difference between male and females skeletons, as we said all along.

This twitter thread is just mind-boggling. I can't get over the appalling racism in claiming that genderism is correct because non-Western cultures had rigid gender stereotypes embedded into their cultures.
And Sally Hines is an incoherent fool. When someone says something factual, like "gender is a social construct", she says something like "exactly!" it's like trying to argue with a toddler.

, that's surely irrelevant...

Yes exactly. I don't know what to make of that comment. From Rachel McKinnon it has become clear that there is a strong element in trans activism, of denial that men and women have different shaped bodies.

It seems to me that Sally Hines doesn't care if she's misinterpreted, and in fact seeks to be misinterpreted. I wonder why?