Selina Todd, threats, security, wrong side of history my arse

[janeskettle]

Prof Selina Todd, a historian who specialises in the lives of women and the working class, said that she has now been provided with “routine security” to ensure she is not attacked {by TRA's}

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/01/23/oxford-university-professor-given-security-guards-lectures-threats/

Female historian needs security guards on campus (Oxford) to accompany her to lectures because of threats.

And we're the aggressive orthodoxy!!! I don't bloody think so!!

FWR used to be the home of nuanced debate

Nappy

Are you suggesting that challenging the grim ideology which has produced the current dystopia is not sufficiently nuanced? I notice you have not given a single concrete example of why Murray's analysis is flawed. Equality of outcome is impossible As, I have already stated, it is freedom of speech which faces a serious existential threat in the 21st century And increasingly, the political divide is between those who wish to defend it and those who want to dismantle it.

But have there been any repercussions for those issuing or whipping up threats? There really should be - the college should be protecting their staff.

It’s like not muzzling a bitey dog and telling everyone to stop being so damn delicious to dogs.

Hi Bovary
Do you agree with everything he says in his chapter on women?

Bovary my concrete example of why I dislike some, not all, of Murray’s analysis comes from the many interviews he has done where he says that women have equality and that anything else goes too far. He conflates feminism with the woke TRA agenda. He also mentions innate differences between men and women in skills and temperament. As a feminist and especially as a feminist who is critical of imposed gender norms, I cannot agree with this analysis.

Nor do I like suggestions that Selina is especially harshly targeted because she is white. Plenty of women of colour have been similarly targeted including Raquel Rosario Sanchez and Allison Bailey. It can be even harder for women of colour because they already face barriers in the form of racism.

I should say that the second paragraph of my post relates to comments you made rather than something Douglas Murray said.

Nor do I like suggestions that Selina is especially harshly targeted because she is white.

Reality

Please do not attribute things to me which I have never said and do not think I notice that this is a recurrent tactic with some posters and it clearly highlights the inherent weakness of their argument.

Just listened to Prof Todd, who was indeed excellent (BBC Sounds app, Today programme at 1hr 42m)

I was waiting for the ‘opposite side’ to be given their say. Didn’t come. There has been quite a shift in BBC attitudes over the last couple of years I think.

I should say that the second paragraph of my post relates to comments you made rather than something Douglas Murray said.

Quote them.

I doubt anyone can actually support this - but then I’ve just seen a video of a Woman in the US ranting about the Clinton’s murdering people and putting them into sausages and some biscuit having a secret pedophile logo (it was a smiley face) and babbling on about the illuminati.

I was waiting for the ‘opposite side’ to be given their say. Didn’t come. There has been quite a shift in BBC attitudes over the last couple of years I think.

Perhaps the usual suspects, Sally Hines etc. weren't available?
You're right though, there has been a shift. A year ago BBC allowed McKinnon (I hope I'm allowed to 'deadname' in this instance?) to dictate which guests they could have on the same programme as McK. To be fair, that wasn't Radio 4.

Interesting isn't it that the Guardian and the BBC have yet to cover this news story. You can guarantee they would if the professor in question was black or a Muslim
@RealityNotEssentionalism

Shame on you. I didn't say that You need to apologise for falsely attributing another poster"s words to me

Reality has just falsely attributed words to me that I never wrote. To anyone reading this, check back on this thread and you will see who is telling the truth.

Oh, yes, you are right. I am really sorry. It was just who said that. Apologies again.

I have reported your post

MrsSnippyPants
I was waiting for the ‘opposite side’ to be given their say. Didn’t come. There has been quite a shift in BBC attitudes over the last couple of years I think

Yes, but have a look at the BBC News page-- not a peep! You can, however, read about country music, and whether or not it recognises it's roots. Guess they needed to make room for that, sure.

Murray’s analysis comes from the many interviews he has done where he says that women have equality and that anything else goes too far. He conflates feminism with the woke TRA agenda. He also mentions innate differences between men and women in skills and temperament. As a feminist and especially as a feminist who is critical of imposed gender norms, I cannot agree with this analysis

I have some sympathy and agreement with what Murray says. Once equality of opportunity has been achieved, in terms of legal rights and protections.....then I'm not sure it always wise or good thing to do to enforce further 'equality'.

Beyond particular group characteristics......are actual differences.......some of which result from, or are the consequences of biology and sex, and some which are the consequence of individual character, personality, circumstance, faith or background.

How much further do you think we should go in enforcing 'equality'?
That's where we now find ourselves with the TRA agenda. Equality meaning 'sameness'. Equality means TWAW; and should therefore be given legal access to women's intimate spaces, services and sports. Equality must be enshrined in law and women have to accept this - after all they have been long enough privileged; compared to poor trans women.

Is it right to elect a Labour leader purely on the basis of sex, rather than choosing who you believe to be the right candidate for the job?
Can, and should, we legislate for and/or admonish people's thoughts and feelings and choices? Which is what we are starting to witness now - with people actively not being permitted to express certain views or opinions, or have them heard.

Does equality mean that as a white woman you are necessarily privileged, and so should just shut up and listen to & accept what the 'woman of colour' has to say, no matter how much you disagree with it ( we have people posting here now & then who ascribe to this belief)?

Feminism can take many forms.......and the equality drive has long dominated the conversation....for obvious reasons.....My feeling is that we also need to honour sex based differences where they occur, and afford them some dignity and protection too.

Oh, yes, you are right. I am really sorry. It was just who said that. Apologies again

No, I didn't quite say that; not in the way you are reporting it, anyway - My point related to the lack of reporting of this matter in either the Guardian or the BBC. Perhaps I expressed myself in slightly clumsy manner....which I've attempted to rectify above.....

Sally Hines has tweeted to mock Selina.

What a nasty piece of work she is. One of the things I find incredible is that Hines and those like her are so dim that they can't even grasp the importance of free speech for their own self interest: their tiny little brains can't compute the fact that today it might be Selina Todd, but tomorrow it might be them. One wrong step and they become the Enemy, targeted with threats and harassment and abuse. How can a university professor be so stupid as to not realise that?

As for the utter uselessness of Jo Grady and the rest of the UCU leadership, I have no words, frankly. What on earth is the point of them if they can't stand up for colleagues who are threatened with violence in their own workplace?

Selina isn’t whining about being the poor wee victim and hiding her tweets like sally does. She is a class act and very brave. Sally is just ludicrous and an embarrassment.

No, I didn't quite say that; not in the way you are reporting it, anyway - My point related to the lack of reporting of this matter in either the Guardian or the BBC. Perhaps I expressed myself in slightly clumsy manner....which I've attempted to rectify above

Part of the problem is that transgender activists and allies so often use race, and alleged racism, to bolster their shaky position.

I was waiting for the ‘opposite side’ to be given their say.

But who would the other side be in this story? An academic has been threatened by some students and needs security guards. Who are the other side? The thuggish students who are threatening her? The people who support the thugs who are threatening her?

Sarah Ditum and Jane Fae represented the 'two sides' on Nick Ferrari's programme yesterday, but the one thing they both agreed on was that violence and threats of violence are never acceptable. There is no reasonable 'other side' to this story.

There is no reasonable 'other side' to this story.

Thinking about it, the 'other side' is actually the university. Why have they just given Selina Todd protection rather than getting the police involved to deal with the threats of violence?

My point related to the lack of reporting of this matter in either the Guardian or the BBC.

Justhadathought I understood what you were getting at. But I think here it's who the perpetrators are, not the victim, which is important. The 'pro trans' lobby can do no wrong as far as the Guardian and BBC are concerned, so when they do do wrong, they ignore it. If a far right group had been attacking Selina Todd, they'd have been on her side.

If Selina was ‘Stuart’ they would report. Women are bottom of the pile.