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.

Query - "Earlier this year, Julie Bindel, a prominent feminist, claimed she was “lunged at” by a trans woman after an event at Edinburgh University."

Isn't there video footage of this? And eye witnesses? So it's not "claimed".

I have just had a disquieting thought. At the moment each attendee can choose the colour of their badge. What if in the future you are assigned a colour based on your level of 'threat'? It is already happening on Twitter where people can be banned (red), blocked (yellow) or free to post (green).

Is this the same conference where Kathleen Stock's writings were shown as an example of hate speech?

That will work well for colourblind people.

Just to say that I have my red badge on today, so I’m ordering HQ to remove all content from this web site because I feel triggered.

@Germ1360

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

My thoughts exactly!

But hey, let's open up sex segregated spaces and sports and mutilate kids and refute biology and as long as we stick a red sticker on it we can't be challenged - genius!

Why, yet again, are GC women being sold as so dangerous that an academic conference needs a security guard and badges that shut up debate?!

Coffee- Because they can't refute our arguments.

I work in this sector. This is my daily reality. Mind blowing stupidity being indulged and supposedly educated people refusing to think critically. Pray for me.

There was a thread about this conference just after it took place. I think there were only about 16 delegates.

statisticians all stare at their shoes at conference anyway so it will be popular with them.

I guess they'd need colour-coded shoelaces rather than lanyards.

What a pile of shite. I've been to many conferences. You only engage in debate if you want to. But i guess that won't get anyone a special snowflake award!

Isn’t one of the functions of attending a conference to talk to other delegates , exchange ideas and views , debate etc .

Leaving side the fact that I think this was a conference where barely a dozen people turned up...

Presumably none of the speakers can give a talk/present a paper in case someone in the room has a red or yellow badge?

Safeguarding? . What, because words are ‘literal’ violence? Wtf??

Yep, because safeguarding is all about not challenging people or their behaviour!

That will work well for colourblind people.

Inclusivity and diversity!

Haven't found the other thread yet but here's one from January when the call for papers went out.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3468102-Thinking-Beyond-Transversal-Transfeminisms-conference?pg=1&order=

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

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

This is exactly it.

If you are espousing an ideology which topples at the merest hint of any challenge, even a basic question about terms (and your most important terms, at that), you have to employ some kind of mechanism to prevent it.

This is just the 'scholarly' version of NoDebate, no platforming, bomb threats, rape threats and doxxing.

It's not about them being fragile, it's about them having a dangerous, anti female ideology masquerading as progression.

Fortunately, it's human nature to keep digging when someone frantically tries to take away your spade.

Found it. Susan Matthews attended and wrote an article on Medium.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3691664-University-implements-high-security-due-to-MN-feminists

"Pupils, do not approach me, I'm having sensitive photocopier issues."

What, like the dog leads?
Could I just wear a tabard with "do not approach until after 11"?
Brilliant.
I hope the W1a writers are taking notes.

It's not about them being fragile

Absolutely, it is the opposite, it is aggression - “don’t you dare question me!”

Human extinction will occur when we're all wearing "Do Not Approach Me" badges and thus the species will die out.

Absolute madness. I cannot being to understand how we even got to a place where this kind of shit is considered acceptable.