Royal Astronomical Society calls out TERFs

[FemaleAndLearning]

The diversity arm of the RAS is proudly saying it will not have TERFs giving opinions on its Twitter account.
I am truly shocked and upset that a scientific institution bloke this thinks this is acceptable.

Takes a lot to stun me these days, but this is some parallel universe shit.

It's not parallel universe shit, not is it even the first time this type of thing has ever happened.
One thing is certain though, it never ends well, and it never dies quickly.

What we are seeing is social engineering by the state, similar to the 'cult of personality' built around Hitler and Stalin.

It happened before and it's happening now.

When we're dealing with a crisis of trust in experts among the public, do you know what's a really GREAT idea? For your scientific organisation to push the single most batshit dogma in recent times and start screaming the new word for 'heretic'.

‘And yet it moves’

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_yet_it_moves

Fucking hell, this is a ROYAL scientific SOCIETY tweeting shit about t*rfs?

(Otherwise known as a woman asking a question in a meeting)
Their president should formally apologise for this divisive sexist nonsense that utterly demeans his organisation.

@donquixotedelamancha Thanks for those details. I've sent a complaint.

It was - allegedly, apparently - an old white man who was the guilty party.

(Can't lie, I want to scream DID YOU JUST ASSUME THEIR GENDER????!!!! at anyone saying this. Also, nice ageism there.)

I’m very tempted to say the phrase ‘has someone got this?’ It’s kind of a shorthand amongst a community of likeminded individuals that is saying ‘we have enough of us gathered here now, who know the score, feel the same, share the same fears and want to do SOMETHING’ I hope those of you that know this community go in with all guns blazing because this sounds like a place that’s been colonised by individuals who mistake their dogma for ‘popular opinion’ and it isn’t. It’s anti-woman, retrograde and totally unacceptable. Good luck!

AlwaysComingHome
I know, the layers of irony are quite something. Do they know there's a whole book mostly about gender heretics being threatened and silenced, and it's literally called after the person who stood up for astronomical fact against religion? I'm not on Twitter but if I were I would be tweeting this book cover at them.

Dreger’s book is excellent.

Yeah, although Dreger herself is a funny old bean. I usually have a huge amount of respect for her integrity, but she had a hissy fit on Twitter when she said that actually there were lots of genders (with, amazingly, the usual conflation between gender and sex) and when asked to explain, disappeared.

It's fascinating that they knew who not to include in the 1800s..
women.ras.ac.uk/women-and-the-ras/history-of-women-at-the-ras

Isn't it interesting that every issue trans related only seems to negatively effect women and the slur term to describe anyone who has an opinion in anyway different is a Terf but there's plenty of men who disagree with alot of the trans related issues too, how come they don't have a slur term? hhhmmmm curious indeed

I emailed them. (Outing myself here if the person I emailed happens to look at this thread buy hey ho).

Copy of email:

I was shocked to see the RAS Diversity Twitter account use the word 'TERF'. This word has been directed mostly at women and has been used to silence anyone concerned at the implications of Self ID. Helen Lewis has written an article explaining why it is indeed a slur, and a misogynist one at that.
www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2019/05/welcome-age-ironic-bigotry-where-old-hatreds-are-cloaked-woke-new-language

Gender theory is unproven and appears to be a metaphysical belief - it holds that someone is a woman (a category which up till recently was widely understood as based on sex) because of a feeling they have rather than any biological or even psychological traits. At times it conflates sex and gender and at times treats them separately, without any of its proponents explaining exactly what gender is. It is telling that the people being publicly hounded at the moment are not transphobes - people who actually feel disgust with trans people - but gender critical feminists - in other words, unbelievers.

Do you not see the irony of the Royal Astronomy Society, of all organisations, using today's equivalent of 'heretic'? When Alice Dreger wrote a book detailing the demonisation of the sex expert Michael Bailey, who ran afoul of gender dogmatists, she called it 'Galileo's Middle Finger'.

What a stance to take in today's climate, when there is already widespread distrust of experts and we desperately need a scientific
community with demonstrable integrity and trustworthiness. If you
personally have been involved in that tweet, you should be ashamed of yourself.

I must be getting astronomical and astrological mixed up again, for a second there I thought we were talking about the one that believes in science.

HRTFT
I'd be inclined to ask if they're the Astronomy Society or the Astrology Society, since they obviously believe in woo. 👿

I must be getting astronomical and astrological mixed up again, for a second there I thought we were talking about the one that believes in science.

Good job by the RAS creating a space free from needless abuse.

Good job by the RAS creating a space free from needless abuse

But they didn't did they, they actually used a needless abusive term in their statement...

What is their argument and evidence for allowing transgendered males to apply for all-women grants and positions, but excluding ordinary boring men?

Is there a lack of transgendered males in science, proportionately speaking, similar to that for women? Do they suffer the same 'mommy-track' assumptions, or the same lack of encouragement to do STEM at school, or is the overlap just the bias against being taken as seriously if your name is Rachel than if it's Richard?

Obviously they won't suffer the actual disadvantage of pregnancy and maternity leave just as an academic career should be taking off, so which disadvantages are being countered here, and is it enough disadvantage to make it legal to exclude other males from these grants?

I'd genuinely like to know some answers here, and 'because they're women yah boo sucks' doesn't seem to cut it.

What testable hypotheses does gender ‘theory’ produce?

How long until they declare that any women who have made any advances in this field, were actually men,

And make sure that they achieve better 'gender' represention by including more people with blue hair and penises.

So this was the womens group, now a gender group, who is keen to get any women only stuff filled with dicky people asap.

This is the approach where

Men who are gender conforming are #1
Men who are not gender conforming are #2 and so need help and support

Then there's a load of other people that don't matter very much and everyone knows which ones they are irrespective of what they say they are, that were only allowed in a couple hundred years ago and isn't that enough for them.

There have been quite a lot of female astronomers, cosmoligists etc in the news in the last couple of years, bbc have widened pool of 'taking heads' due to sexism accusations. I imagine a lot of people want to set things right again.

They are kind of implying that they will prioritise those with female gender id over females, and also that they wouldn't encourage old school cunty people to apply?

I think, anyway.

They have actually apologised.

The scientists at the Royal Astronomical Society have released a statement following the use of offensive language by whoever runs one of their Twitter accounts. What we're all wondering though, is what happened at conference. @RoyalAstroSoc @RAS_Diversity t.co/aZZ7vU0b3v

twitter.com/blablafishcakes/status/1146020230461890562?s=19

Excellent letter Mermoose and great points about men coming 1st and 2nd in the pile.

They haven't apologised for what was said only the way it was put.

Presumably the push to give women's awards etc to transwomen stands.