Campaign of bullying and intimidation at Sussex University vs Professor Kathleen Stock

[Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g]

Absolute disgrace. Posters on campus calling for her to be sacked. Academic colleague tweeting that he agrees with this. twitter.com/FrancescoFv37/status/1445727937660076032?t=-Di7mRf5sznFvvzww8UI2w&s=19 I saw a tweet saying there was a burning in effigy. Can't confirm this but nothing would surprise me now. Time for Sussex staff, students and alumni to put their heads over the parapet.

My neighbour wakes me up at 11pm every night shouting down the street that Im a bitch, police also say he has not committed any crimes. Guess thats just how it is in Gillead.

Glad that the VC spoke up for her on the Today prog and that Justin Webb made the rather pointed comment about the failure of the local MP, Caroline Lucas, to defend her.

I've always thought Caroline Lucas was one of the better politicians. So disappointed in her now.

That's quite a funny response from she/her 101 civilian worker there. Considering the mountains of non hate crime rubbish they do keep I suspect she/her was a bit biased.

@MargaritaPie

Saw this on social media. Someone reported students to the police for expressing concern regarding Prof Kathleen Stock.

tl dr- the police say the students have not committed any crimes.

Once again the disingenuous spinning by you MargaritaPie the students were not expressing concern regarding Professor Stock they were deliberately targeting, harassing her and demanding the University fire her.

I do note that the Police in that missive confirm that offensive opinions and views are allowed under UK Law, therefore the views and opinions expressed by Professor Stock that some students appear to deem offensive are equally allowed, or did you fail to understand that in your rush to victim blame yet another woman in your misogynistic hate campaign?

@MargaritaPie the inconsistency is astonishing isn’t it, given what the police are doing to Marion Miller

The harrassment of Dr Stock is unacceptable.

I don't have the URL handy but I do have this if it helps

Sorry wrong thread.

I also see a certain CEO of an "anti-bullying" charity was all over Twitter calling Stock and other women names, tagging the university into outrageous lies about her and generally gloating about "baiting" women. Is there no requirement under Charitable status for execs not to directly undermine the purpose of the organisation?

A bit off-topic, but just to help judge his general attitude to women, someone on Twitter pointed out one of his previous grumps.

Anger at hospital's ban on men in breast screening clinic waiting area

'It implies that men are there for the wrong reasons. The point is there is no reason for it'

twitter.com/DiageoLiam/status/967365867712532481

Once again the disingenuous spinning by you MargaritaPie the students were not expressing concern regarding Professor Stock they were deliberately targeting, harassing her and demanding the University fire her.

At least try to maintain accuracy. The OP says there was a "burning effigy" of her. If that is referring to the photo on the Instagram page then it's actually just a sign that says "Stock Out" with a blue smoking flare thing (the thing you might see at gender reveal parties) on the ground next to it. Not quite a burning effigy.

@MargaritaPie

I don't have the URL handy but I do have this if it helps

Given that tweets have been removed for stating simple, biological fact while others threatening rape and violence towards women left up, I'd say it proves the square root of fuck all without context.

What we must never do is to examine the actual words of the person being denounced, for to do that might lead us into wrong-think:

twitter.com/rebelyarns/status/1446048884699148291

@MargaritaPie

Once again the disingenuous spinning by you MargaritaPie the students were not expressing concern regarding Professor Stock they were deliberately targeting, harassing her and demanding the University fire her.

At least try to maintain accuracy. The OP says there was a "burning effigy" of her. If that is referring to the photo on the Instagram page then it's actually just a sign that says "Stock Out" with a blue smoking flare thing (the thing you might see at gender reveal parties) on the ground next to it. Not quite a burning effigy.

Did I mention a burning effigy?

Did you see the signs demanding the University fire her?

Did you read the so-called 'Mission Statement' on that Instagram Account?

Gender reveal parties? You mean announcing the sex of the baby, yes? Can't be a gender reveal as gender is, so we are told, invisible, ephemeral and ever changing. As for setting off flares, you must go to some very strange parties, are you going to use that excuse for the TRAs who set off flares in the shadow of Grenfell, it would be up to your usual standard of forever excusing violent thugs after all.

The Guardian had an article about this calling the protesters "campaigners" and included a sentence with deliberately mangled syntax that tries to distort what Stock is saying. You can always rely on The Graun to throw women under a bus.

@AlfonsoTheDinosaur

The Guardian had an article about this calling the protesters "campaigners" and included a sentence with deliberately mangled syntax that tries to distort what Stock is saying. You can always rely on The Graun to throw women under a bus.

Maybe the Graun is trying to appease the 5 protesters who gathered in force with their Stella cans yesterday outside their office to object to Catherine Bennett's article in the Observer (you know, the one that said women need safe spaces to stop things like murder happening).

According to intrepid reporter Vic this made them all very sad and unsafe. Anyway, the PN thread which was treating it with the gravitas of a report from the West Bank gave me a giggle this morning.

I wish the Guardian would stop pandering to these people. It is clear that no amount of bus throwing will ever satisfy them.

[quote NecessaryScene]I also see a certain CEO of an "anti-bullying" charity was all over Twitter calling Stock and other women names, tagging the university into outrageous lies about her and generally gloating about "baiting" women. Is there no requirement under Charitable status for execs not to directly undermine the purpose of the organisation?

A bit off-topic, but just to help judge his general attitude to women, someone on Twitter pointed out one of his previous grumps.

Anger at hospital's ban on men in breast screening clinic waiting area

'It implies that men are there for the wrong reasons. The point is there is no reason for it'

twitter.com/DiageoLiam/status/967365867712532481[/quote]
I remember that. Also that he tends to throw hissy fits if bad ladies on this august forum mention him...

@prudencepuffin

I`ve also sent a friendly email. The standard of debating at universities seems to have fallen through the floor, not to mention the standards of acceptable behaviour. Must be very hard for academics who dare to show an independant point of view. Good for the Vice Chancellor though.

Not only this, a number of their own policies cover the legal duty of care to ALL the university community, the guidelines around appropriate social media use, 'tone', and core values, e.g.:

"The University is committed, through its core values of kindness, integrity, inclusion, collaboration and courage, to treating all people with respect and dignity; to challenge any form of bullying, harassment, discrimination, intimidation, exploitation or abuse..."

A double edged sword for some, perhaps, but I would hope that the definition is not that generous towards pitchfork waving /flare lighting mobs.

@MargaritaPie

Once again the disingenuous spinning by you MargaritaPie the students were not expressing concern regarding Professor Stock they were deliberately targeting, harassing her and demanding the University fire her.

At least try to maintain accuracy. The OP says there was a "burning effigy" of her. If that is referring to the photo on the Instagram page then it's actually just a sign that says "Stock Out" with a blue smoking flare thing (the thing you might see at gender reveal parties) on the ground next to it. Not quite a burning effigy.

I am the OP. In the interests of accuracy, please acknowledge that I said in the OP that there were reports of this but I couldn't verify them. As things have turned out, this seems to have been a misunderstanding of the image showing the flare, which is also very intimidating.

You seem to accept that if there had been a burning effigy this would have been reprehensible. I have attached an image of an effigy of a Spanish female politician which was hanged on a tree at a protest earlier this year. I hope you will condemn this. twitter.com/Slatzism/status/1363334647002910723?s=20

There have been other similar incidents, at least one involving a guillotine. Shameful threats of violence and attempts to intimidate women (and I do mean women - adult human females) who speak up in defence of our very hard-won rights.

At least try to maintain accuracy. The OP says there was a "burning effigy" of her. If that is referring to the photo on the Instagram page then it's actually just a sign that says "Stock Out" with a blue smoking flare thing (the thing you might see at gender reveal parties) on the ground next to it. Not quite a burning effigy.

Presumably you will apply the same criticism to people who claim that a woman endangers lives when she asserts that sex sometimes matters.

Kathleen Stock has NEVER debated the validity of trans lives.

If anyone claims that, they are idiots. No one can debate the validity of another person's life. One can debate the validity of their choices, their morals, their values, their decisions etc but not their existence.

You don't need to be a philosophy professor to work this one out:

• I'm the Emporer Napoleon
• No you're not. You are Colin from Accounts.
• Oh! So you're denying the validity of my existence.
• No. You are Colin from Accounts.

@Jaysmith71

You don't need to be a philosophy professor to work this one out:

• I'm the Emporer Napoleon
• No you're not. You are Colin from Accounts.
• Oh! So you're denying the validity of my existence.
• No. You are Colin from Accounts.

But apparently very difficult to understand if you work in the History of Art department.

@merrymouse

At least try to maintain accuracy. The OP says there was a "burning effigy" of her. If that is referring to the photo on the Instagram page then it's actually just a sign that says "Stock Out" with a blue smoking flare thing (the thing you might see at gender reveal parties) on the ground next to it. Not quite a burning effigy.

Presumably you will apply the same criticism to people who claim that a woman endangers lives when she asserts that sex sometimes matters.

Indeed, and all the claims of denying existence and literally killing.

I’m glad that Sussex Uni have had the courage to stand up for Prof Stock, at least. Just watched a programme about 17th century witch hunts and it’s chilling to see that independent and courageous women like Prof Stock and J K Rowling who dare to say what pretty much everyone thinks but most don’t dare to say outside the the circle of friends and family are still being targeted by men. Now it’s their careers, reputations and personal life which is being targeted, but the tactics are exactly the same as those who accused women of witchcraft 400 years ago. Lie, bully, slander, accuse, play the victim. How have such a tiny group of transwomen managed to get control over such large swathes of the media?

How have such a tiny group of transwomen managed to get control over such large swathes of the media?

Same old same old reason - sexism. Men are happy to be told that women didn’t need rights anyway.