Academics criticise traffic light 'safe space' badges at transgender conference

[stumbledin]

The conference title was "Thinking Beyond: Transversal Transfeminisms"

Delegates attending the one-day forum at Roehampton University, south west London, were invited to wear different coloured lanyards to ensure they did not feel emotionally overwhelmed by sharing ideas.

Those wearing red badges did not wish to engage with their fellow academics, while those in yellow did not want to be approached and would only communicate if they made the first move.

Green badges were worn by attendees open to conversations.

Academics could change the colour of their lanyard depending on how resilient they felt at different points of the conference.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/09/22/academics-criticise-traffic-light-safe-space-badges-transgender/

The original report was in the Times but because of paywall I have used this link. Think the Times had more detailed.

I am more upset by the idea that anyone should think this has anything to do with feminism.

I can't imagine getting funding to go to a conference where you didn't intend to talk to anyone.

I wonder if anyone actually chose the red or yellow lanyards?

Reports like this reconcile me to the possibility of human extinction caused by climate change.

while those in yellow did not want to be approached and would only communicate if they made the first move - digressing somewhat, but I need these purely to stop my neighbours talking to me!

What on earth is Transversal Transfeminisms?

I was invited to submit a paper at this conference! I was half-tempted, but knew they would never accept anything gender critical. I kind of wish I'd gone anyway, but I don't think my blood pressure/sanity would have held up...

Going from the comments in the Times, I don't think anyone thought it was actual feminists.

Share token hopefully: www.thetimes.co.uk/article/academics-see-red-over-safe-space-traffic-light-badges-at-roehampton-university-meeting-x6mfb2p7m?shareToken=1a7f2592791fddfcada2dcbbcca68976

"What is a woman?" (badge immediately changes to red)

"Hss inclusive feminism gone too far?" - presumably the debate was over whether or not women should be included in feminism or not.

"delegates were asked to wear the lanyards for safeguarding reasons" - more evidence that some people do not understand what safeguarding is.

Absolute Rubbish! I have only ever encountered this before in workshops with Autistic adults who may be feeling overwhelmed.
I'm going to red dot this message as I cannot cope with any answers that might disagree with me 🔴

I’d like to know if I get to have a red lanyard so that colleagues and students don’t approach me? . Am absolutely in favour!

Interesting how they believe the red dot will protect them from feminists. Somehow I feel that the likes of Julie Bindel's attacker would not be held back by a red dot. Could it be that feminists are - gulp - non-violent?
🤢
(sorry that's the closest my phone gets to a green dot)

Mumsnet were clearly ahead of the curve on this- these aren’t emoticons at all. We are supposed to use them at the end of posts to signify whether or not we are open to replies.

My first thought was that the article was meant to be published on April 1st.

There aren't enough FFSs in the world.

Just read in the comments
"What happens is two yellow badge wearers want to speak to each other?"

This can be my brain teaser for the morning.

I thought Biggs summed it up beautifully:

In an academic conference in a university — where freedom of speech is fundamental — it is really inappropriate. It suggests the normal discourse of intellectual life is somehow threatening to people’s safety.

A yellow badge meant: “I will approach you if I wish to speak.”

Wearing a yellow badge would indicate a staggering level of entitlement and self-importance.

Surely that goes against the entire concept of academia? Surely ideas need to be challenged and debated? Otherwise it’s not really “academia” and you’re just shouting into an echo chamber?

Or maybe that’s just hilariously naive? I admit i’m not in academia.

Can you imagine if that happened at other academic conferences?

“I’ve just written a paper that asserts that eating toenail clippings cures cancer, and no I will not be accepting any constructive criticism or debate”

I also quite like the idea of having a “fuck off” lanyard though

Reports like this reconcile me to the possibility of human extinction caused by climate change.
We won't die out due to climate change, most of us (the human race) will die off long before that point.What with mass sterilisation and body mutations happening around us.
A master race if people who think will be the only ones left if it continues.

Surely that goes against the entire concept of academia? Surely ideas need to be challenged and debated? Otherwise it’s not really “academia” and you’re just shouting into an echo chamber?

There is now a significant number of younger academics who see themselves as activists rather than as scholars. They see their role as expounding certain ideological positions rather than to provide rigorous, reliable research which can then be properly debated. I am very worried about how this is all going to pan out, worried not just for the sector but what this means for society at large.

We won't die out due to climate change, most of us (the human race) will die off long before that point

I think it may be around the same time - 8-10 years. The climate crisis will have made it so hot we can't go outside (or so wet we can't stay inside) so getting hormones and/or surgery will prove difficult, and so will be divorcing your parents or putting any legal challenges through court.

If we can't talk to each other for risk from 'literal violence' whilst the planet burns we really do deserve everything we get.

Very glad this has been picked up by the media and glad that Michael Biggs has been quoted.

Running an event in this bizarre and sinister way is very much confusing an academic conference with an emotional support group of an unhealthily paranoid kind, (having security on the door ), or some kind of authoritarian political rally where anyone’s ideas can’t be safely and peacefully questioned. DARVO.

All universities already have security measures. So they can only logically have booked this extra security to protect any feminists that might turn up.

Because the only recorded assaults and aggressive threats between these two groups have been by male-born trans people aggressing on female-born feminist people. (Eg Look up Maria McLachlan being attacked at Speakers Corner- if you want to know more) this does not mean they are ‘both as bad as each other’ or ‘six of one and half a dozen of the other’. If that is Roehampton University’s response to Male on Female violence, to get security in to protect men, then we have something really shocking happening.

Academia stands or falls on informed debate. So sacred cows that cannot be questioned have no place in academic discussion, they are the cause of rot which stops progress of ideas, gathering of evidence and freedom of thought and expression, assembly and publication.

If academia stops being able to ask questions then it rots away and the whole of society will suffer for lack of progress.
All of society is then vulnerable to being led by authoritarian politics and superstition.

Already it’s as getting though in some academic disciplines on specific topics, students can’t be said to be being educated at all, just indoctrinated or inculcated. It’s very dangerous for all of us whether we are connected with universities or not at all.

Universities need to be much much tougher on enforcing freedom of speech for academics and students. Are they inspected against protecting freedom of speech and if not why not?

They briefly covered this on BBC R4 yesterday morning just before 10am, where it was treated with levity. David Spiegenhalter (prof of statistics) said great, statisticians all stare at their shoes at conference anyway so it will be popular with them.

I can see, as a PP says above, it may be good for workshops with autistic people, but for academic conferences surely it's a worrying example of function creep.

That's so funny.

We should all have those all day, every day. I can think of a fair few staff members and students I could flash a red card at.