Kathleen Stock on BBC Politics live

[MrsSlocombesPussy]

They are going to be covering this on Politics Live

For reference (in answer to own question), it was the Women's Declaration of Sex Based Rights and this is the clause Amelia said meant Stock was endorsing the "elimination" of trans people. (Amelia keeps using that word. I do not think it means what Amelia thinks it means.)

^c) States should “condemn discrimination against women in all its forms, agree to pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating discrimination against women’’. (CEDAW, Article 2).
This should include the elimination of that act and practice of discrimination against women which comprises the inclusion of men who claim to have a female ‘gender identity’ in the category of women. Such inclusion erodes women’s rights to safety, dignity and equality.^

You can't argue with stupid. Logical arguments won't work here when gender ideology is based on tautology and cognitive dissonance.

The thing is, if you just switched on the wireless of an afternoon and heard an unchallenged accusation that Prof Stock was calling for the elimination of a group of people, you would think that that sounded like a pretty awful thing to do and you probably wouldn't be terribly surprised at people being outraged.

The fact that this spurious and ludicrous accusation goes unchallenged is the problem.

The BBC is clearly not impartial.

Amelia seemed erm to struggle with words

Is ''I can't read properly'' a defence to slander?

Seems like a case of, "You say I stink, I say you stink, so nerrr!"

The declaration speaks of the elimination of 'woman' as a category, so the response is "you want to eliminate transwomen as a category," which directly contradicts the premise that TWAW, and establishing that Transwomen are in themselves a category is precisely what Stock is saying.

University? Would struggle to build an Airfix Millennium Falcon.

Just seen on Twitter that the university of Sussex got 10 points on university challenge last night 🤣🤣🤣🤣

@littlbrowndog

Just seen on Twitter that the university of Sussex got 10 points on university challenge last night 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Were all the questions on biology?

@yourhairiswinterfire

So because they can't find anything Kathleen has actually said or done wrong, they're just completely making shit up...

Putting words into a woman's mouth and then attacking her for what they're pretending she's said. Absolute fucking bullies. Pathetic.

Could this be a model maybe? Recalled from first term, first year of Linguistics. I keep thinking about it and now keep compulsively reading through it with a sinking feeling.

www.goodreads.com/quotes/789880-i-don-t-know-what-you-mean-by-glory-alice-said

@littlbrowndog

Just seen on Twitter that the university of Sussex got 10 points on university challenge last night 🤣🤣🤣🤣

That's what happens when students go to University to instruct their Professors in how to think rather than to open their own minds to knowledge.

"Elimination of discrimination against women" so if Amelia translates that as eliminating trans people what does that say?

Is she saying the quiet bits out loud?

Well conversely I say I can discuss my identity as a woman and if you choose to co-opt that identity you don't get to stop me speaking out having made a conscious decision to hold this debate on my turf (pun intended).
Nicely said Bread

I see the women's declaration is fast becoming TRA folklore on Twitter, repeating a big enough lie and all that. One bright spark interpreting it as a call for "genocide".

#IStandWithKathleenStock is trending and all the TRA accounts I can see in it are aggressive, immature, patronising, rude, thick as mince or all of the above. It's totally beyond me.

we do not have a common language for debate

What a rubbish cop out. The fact that everyone was able to communicate and then a bunch of people turned up with nonsensical words or turned known words into a vague mush of meaning doesn't mean a debate can't happen. Imagine if someone turned up in the House of Commons and started speaking in tongues and the Speaker said that the proceedings would have to be abandoned because there was no common language for debate.

@nauticant

we do not have a common language for debate

What a rubbish cop out. The fact that everyone was able to communicate and then a bunch of people turned up with nonsensical words or turned known words into a vague mush of meaning doesn't mean a debate can't happen. Imagine if someone turned up in the House of Commons and started speaking in tongues and the Speaker said that the proceedings would have to be abandoned because there was no common language for debate.

Timandra Harkness pointed out that was exactly what Prof Stock was trying to do in Material Girls, which was a small victory considering. I didn't know of her before today but will be looking her up.

"Student Officer Amelia says Stock wishes to "eliminate" trans-people".
"Amelia (TW) says academic freedom is about research, not freedom of speech"

Amelia is really no better on her research skills than she is on free speech, is she?

Was she able to produce evidence for Prof Stock's alleged elimination wish?

so now we are being told that women do not know how to define what a woman is.
Only people who can are men !

Women are stupid and want to eliminate TW's and so men must eliminate women first.

The only people who know the truth are the penis havers..........

Amelia didn't seem that bright. I can't see that many people will be swayed by her (lack of) argument...

The declaration says there should be
"...a policy of eliminating discrimination against women. This should include the elimination of that act and practice of discrimination against women which comprises the inclusion of men who claim to have a female ‘gender identity’ in the category of women."

Amelia thinks this is saying that trans people should be eliminated. Amelia's comprehension skills appear to be poor. Saying that men should not be included in the category of women just because they say they have a female 'gender identity' doesn't mean that anyone wants to 'eliminate' those men. Just that people can't change sex.

I'm thrilled to read that Timandra Harkness is on the side of reason. With her profile of a media person involved in technological futurism I would have expected her to go along with the rest of her crowd. Good on her.

Timandra Harkness pointed out that was exactly what Prof Stock was trying to do in Material Girls, which was a small victory considering. I didn't know of her before today but will be looking her up.

Timandra Harkness was published on the subject of Kathleen Stock today on Unherd: unherd.com/2021/10/the-hounding-of-kathleen-stock/

They can't point to any of her own words to back up the campaign against her, so the current tack is to say she signed the declaration by whrc and is a trustee of lgba.

The bit of the declaration amelia most objects to must be this
the elimination of that act and practice of discrimination against women which comprises the inclusion of men who claim to have a female ‘gender identity’ in the category of women. Such inclusion erodes women’s rights to safety, dignity and equality.^

She termed this as eliminating trans people in law. If our government followed this then I guess it would mean repealing the gra (which i dont support as it happens) but it would not mean repealing the protection for ppl with the pc if gender reassignment, or the elimination of trans people as a category in law. It would stop trans women being subsumed into the category of woman in law.

This is the basic problem though. It seems plain and obvious to me that if you change the concept of woman to mean 'feminine identified person', 'person who adopts the social role of woman' or 'person who feels like a woman' then you further entrench the type of sexist assumptions about what the sexes do, think, feel, what role they can occupy in life & how they shld behave. But to ppl with this belief system that is transphobic and threatens how they see themselves. So then is becomes impossible to work out together how to provide what trans ppl and women (and everyone) need without doing that, because there's no shared language or shared starting point.

This is by a tra and explains what they find so wrong about the declaration for anyone interested.
chican3ry.medium.com/the-whrc-declaration-explained-part-1-5ded6522aa33?sk=2748953b335719703763468e0ab3aaa8

What the Cambridge academic said (runciman?) Was a cop out, but it was quite good that he said it because its true. Clever people discussing all kinds of tricky things on podcasts and in print are shot scared of this. They daren't touch it. He's right that it's partly because there is no shared language , but partly it's obviously also because (which he didn't say as such) people are scared for their career, social circle, and physical safety.

The politicians said nothing useful, except it will be clear to the audience that everyone has been v v scared to talk about this.

It's sooooo telling that they are not engaging with what she actually says. Instead they are picking on a document she read and signed in 2019, but otherwise isn't involved in.

Let Amelia speak! Because noone believes me when I tell them a little the ‘quality’ of the debate...