Kathleen Stock’s union betrays her.

[MangoSeason]

Pathetic. Weak. Craven.

twitter.com/Docstockk/status/1447863827018702855?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

[thecatfromjapan]

It's completely out with the remit of a functional Union to seek a test-case of a member in order to try and enforce a non-legal definition of transphobia - particularly when that member is subject to extreme harassment in her workplace.

A functionsl Union would defend their member - and by inference, all their other members - from the curtailment of their right to free speech in the workplace by a group of extremists.

And they are extreme.

This is extreme behaviour.

Don't normalise. Don't munimise.

Even if you think they are 'your side'.

[thecatfromjapan]

So, no, 'taking a stand against transphobia' is not what this Union is doing right now.

What they are doing is undermining trade unions.

[WeeBisom]

The problem is the union isn't being clear. They want a strong stance on trans inclusion AND a strong stance on academic freedom. But what does trans inclusion actually mean? If it means not harassing trans students then there are already policies in place, and no academic has the right to engage in such behaviour. It's not academic freedom to behave in a harassing way. But Stock isn't harassing anyone, so this can't be what they mean. But if trans inclusion means going along with trans identity theory as it's set out in queer/postmodern theory then there is an obvious clash between trans inclusion and academic freedom. Not every academic (particularly in analytic philosophy) agrees with or believes in postmodernism or queer theory. They have a different theory about gender and transgenderism. So I'm really struggling to understand what the union is trying to say here.

[merrymouse]

So, no, 'taking a stand against transphobia' is not what this Union is doing right now.

I honestly don’t think somebody who genuinely believed that trans people are vulnerable and cared for their well-being would be encouraging the belief that suicide is an understandable reaction to disagreement.

I can’t think if any other situation where this argument is made.

[secular111]

@RedDogsBeg

UCU has a long history of enabling members to self-identify, whether that is being black, disabled, LGBT+ or women.

So, UCU were fulsome in their support for Rachel Dolzeal, weren't they? They rallied the troops to condemn the abuse RD received and explicitly stated that RD was right, they did didn't they?

Rachel Dolezal is an American white female, so I very much doubt that UCU or the members who support its transracialism stance would have much interest (or influence) on the abuse she received.

Now replace RD with a white middle-class male, and preferably a UCU member and you'd have to speculate what support the UCU would provide. I imagine it would certainly be a statement-of-support, as UCU promotes transracialism and it documents that support and makes it available through its web site.

[secular111]

@CorrBlimeyGG

A union taking a stand against transphobia is a good thing, no? No one here condones transphobia, do they?

It would be useful if you could quote anything Dr. Stock has said or written that you deem transphobic.

Perhaps something in Material Girls? I have my copy to hand, and I no doubt so do you, even if second-hand.

So take a flick through and quote me the page and paragraph number of any transphobic phrase or sentence from it.

I mean if think she transphobic, how would she be able to write 320 pages without writing something transphobic?

[thecatfromjapan]

PS Serious unions take their members' money and they lobby for change.

Indeed, in order to be serious and be taken seriously, they conduct research and communicate with their members.

They focus on issues that are proven to be of direct and immediate intwrest to their members' working lives.

They do this because that's how you win gains for your members.

And winning gains of direct interest to your members is how you get taken seriously as a Union.

What they don't do is portray themselves as unserious fools by 'taking a stand' by publishing a letter for social media likes.

That makes them look incredibly silly.

So silly, no-one is going to take them seriously.

It's what children do. Not organisations that take money from members and aim for actual, real power and actual, real change.

Honestly.

It's so stupid - just stupid - I could cry.

[jenny5000]

I'm furious too. Not only does this mean that many GC academics have or will lose Union protection, it also brings trade unionism generally into further disrepute. And this at a time when they're desperate to recruit new members!!

[thecatfromjapan]

I'm almost weeping as I follow this on Twitter.

The number of muppets who can't see that there is a huge difference between serious political activity and this idiotic social media-inspired virtue-signalling.

And that the descent of a Union into this kind of stupidity is tantamount to a confession of their complete vacuity and irrelevance as a serious political vehicle for the members.

Is there some kind of stupid drug that people have taken?

This is real life. It's not some Twitter spat.

A serious Union should be placing a big distance between themselves and these protesters for a start.

Because that protest is the absolute opposite of any action a serious political organisation should be doing.

And we haven't even reached the subject of a member's free speech, yet. Which is a crucial issue.

Honestly.

I despair.

[DreamingofBrie]

@thecatfromjapan

PS Serious unions take their members' money and they lobby for change.

Indeed, in order to be serious and be taken seriously, they conduct research and communicate with their members.

They focus on issues that are proven to be of direct and immediate intwrest to their members' working lives.

They do this because that's how you win gains for your members.

And winning gains of direct interest to your members is how you get taken seriously as a Union.

What they don't do is portray themselves as unserious fools by 'taking a stand' by publishing a letter for social media likes.

That makes them look incredibly silly.

So silly, no-one is going to take them seriously.

It's what children do. Not organisations that take money from members and aim for actual, real power and actual, real change.

Honestly.

It's so stupid - just stupid - I could cry.

Agree with everything.

When the heck did the grown ups leave the room?

[thecatfromjapan]

Unions are having a tough time.

Working conditions have changed - it's harder to unionise; it's harder for unions to organise for working conditions.

This just doesn't help.

OK.

I'm going to stop writing now. I know I'm going on. And possibly at a tangent from the main issue.

But I just can't get over how depressed I feel. I just want to ask the UCU how they think this is going to help all the many, many people in the workforce who desperately need a reinvigorated Union movement.

The people on zero hours contracts, in warehouses, doing driving jobs, in the care industry ...

How does this help?

[Artichokeleaves]

The absolute, bleeding obvious hypocrisy of 'we call for an inquiry' on the 'diminishing of rights and freedoms'

...... yeah, I call for a bloody inquiry too. Let's work out whose rights and freedoms are being diminished by someone impartial who still has a grip on objective reality, because it fucking well isn't male people's. This union are apparently fine with rights and freedoms being diminished so long as it's only female humans affected in the process. If I was a member and female I'd be finding another union that weren't so wholly and overtly hostile and discriminatory to people born female.

I remain staggered that people this stupid get into positions of public relations.

[Igneococcus]

In the Times now:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b2dd7b6a-2b52-11ec-a548-f9bb1ebf6985?shareToken=1150863bdc3df44692b33d9b3edb5132

[ifIwerenotanandroid]

This bit bugs me (photo). Why should the dignity & respect of "allies" be enshrined in anything? Either everyone's dignity & respect should be, or those of a particular disadvantaged group could be, but those of a disadvantaged group and their friends & not anyone else's - ??

[Waitwhat23]

@secular111 So take a flick through and quote me the page and paragraph number of any transphobic phrase or sentence from it.

Can't wait to see the answer to this....

[Alekto]

Julie Bindel tweeted:

The president of @sussexucu needs to hear from those of us that are appalled at the statement about Kathleen Stock.
[email protected]

twitter.com/bindelj/status/1447892573146726400?s=21

I think this is disgraceful. What on earth do the UCU think they're playing at?

[NutellaEllaElla]

[quote Waitwhat23]**@secular111* So take a flick through and quote me the page and paragraph number of any transphobic phrase or sentence from it.*

Can't wait to see the answer to this....[/quote]
There won't be one there literally never is because they're literally isn't any. I bet you a million quid that poster ghosts the thread.

[Artichokeleaves]

The 'dump vague allegations and run in the hope of casting some doubt on the rather ugly facts' thing is about as over as 'no debate'.

[FlyingOink]

@prudencepuffin

I think this is a flashpoint and Posy is right that if it goes through, it will affect what anyone is allowed to say or teach at any university in the future. If they can railroad Professor Stock - they can railroad anyone. The people involved in this campaign need seeking out and charging with criminal offences. It is NOT OK to try to terrorise people and force them out of their jobs - why does this even need saying.

This.

[merrymouse]

This bit bugs me (photo). Why should the dignity & respect of "allies" be enshrined in anything? Either everyone's dignity & respect should be, or those of a particular disadvantaged group could be, but those of a disadvantaged group and their friends & not anyone else's - ??

It's very odd isn't it.

[secular111]

I haven't got a share token for the link below, but The Times has picked-up on UCU's documented support for transracialism;

Members can identify as black, disabled or female, university union insists

It's old news; the UCU has been backing transracialism for years now. It does though give a clue to how the UCU would see Dr. Stock as a threat; what if she turned her gaze to transracialism with a follow-up to Material Girls?

[OldCrone]

@ifIwerenotanandroid

This bit bugs me (photo). Why should the dignity & respect of "allies" be enshrined in anything? Either everyone's dignity & respect should be, or those of a particular disadvantaged group could be, but those of a disadvantaged group and their friends & not anyone else's - ??

The 'allies' are the ones they're really scared of. Many of the most extreme TRAs aren't actually trans.

[RoseAndGeranium]

Why is UCU’s support only for those seeking to identify into marginalised groups? Are trans men and black people who have decided that being white is actually more for them somehow less worthy of respect?

[KarenHL]

What is happening to Stock is despicable. I'm thinking of writing to her, to remind her she is not alone. I imagine her situation feels lonely and quite scary. She must be an immensely strong woman to have endured so far.

One of the things @Sicario mentions early in this thread (quoting UCU) absolutely sickens me though - this idea that people can identify into another race, disability, sexual orientation, or sex.

As Rachel Dolezal found, no matter how sympathetic to lifelong experiences another may have because of their race - you can't identify into another race. I am fascinated by Maori and Indian cultures - no amount of research, listening to music (I love Bhangra) attempts to live as a person of Maori or Indian heritage, will make me a different race - and will (rightly) massively offend those who are. I apologise if I express myself badly, I am not a person of colour and am not going to try and explain your lived experience - it would be completely inappropriate.

However, I am disabled, and am disgusted+livid that others may seek to appropriate how (literally) f'ing shit my life is, in so many respects because of it - especially when they are able to opt back in to their non-disabled life at any point. If I could hand over the pain, lack of mobility, the shitty meds that don't work (+ side-effects) and frustration (rare syndrome - no UK specialists in the condition as a result) I would love to - bitter? Moi?

Again, I see my gay friends and the heartbreak they've often had in their lives - rejection, bullying and discrimination - often from those who should have their best interests at heart. This suggestion that someone can opt in, or claim equal oppression is almost sending me stratospheric.

And then, the last. This notion that people can somehow undo biological fact, and identify as another sex. Identify how you damned well please, dress as the opposite gender if you please - but it cannot make you change sex. I have been raped in the past, I was also (separately) in an abusive marriage for nearly 20 years - and currently have an aversion to men, no matter how pleasant they might be. I have some lovely work colleagues who are male, but I frankly can't stand to be around them for extended periods as I feel so uncomfortable around biological men. We do have unisex toilets at work, but this is down to lack of space, not ideology (and we can use disabled loos if we want more privacy).

Ugggh! Apologies for the rant.

[Whatiswrongwithmyknee]

I'm going to stop writing now. I know I'm going on. And possibly at a tangent from the main issue.

But I just can't get over how depressed I feel. I just want to ask the UCU how they think this is going to help all the many, many people in the workforce who desperately need a reinvigorated Union movement.

The people on zero hours contracts, in warehouses, doing driving jobs, in the care industry ...

The majority of those people are female. So when you publically declare that you give not on tiny shit for females then you really have solved the problem of how to help haven't you? You just don't, It's a much easier job if you only have to protect the rights of half of the workforce.