Kathleen Stock has resigned

[nevernomore]

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/kathleen-stock-resigns-from-universuty-of-sussex-after-trans-rights-row-h0pns6lds

I wish she hadn't. Bullies should not be allowed to win. It just emboldens them.

Kathleen Stock, JKR : they really do show that it doesn't matter how moderate you are in your opinions, or how moderately you express them, they will vilify and try to destroy you.

These people are just petty bullies. They are pretending they are doing something edgy and brave, with their clothes and their pretence of being 'unsafe' (which just goes to show the privileged and safe lives they have led if they can even claim 'unsafety') without actually having to put themselves in harm's way. Its the very definition of cowardice, performed by people who are so desperate to see themselves as brave.

Kathleen Stock is brave, Maya Forstater is brave, every woman who speaks out is brave. These people are weak and cowardly. Classic bullies seeking easy pickings.

it made me think of The Young Ones writing to the bank manager:

These are in a similar vein:

https://twitter.com/Labour_Trans/status/1226939313264394241?s=20

https://edinburghath.tumblr.com/post/163521055802/trans-health-manifesto/amp

And this spectacular article from TRA Harry Josie Giles who I believe is involved with the two groups I've mentioned above:

https://harryjosiegiles.medium.com/wages-for-transition-dce2b246b9b7

Such a shame, I hate seeing bullies win but I understand why she resigned, she was very brave to last as long as she did.

Could someone answer a question?

What is considered to be the "worst" thing professor Stock has ever said or written?
I mean in the eyes of those who wanted her silenced.
Obviously there is nothing that could ever justify death threats etc. But I want to know the full picture. I have seen her accused of transphobia, but those accusing her of it rarely provide specific examples. So what is the most "controversial" thing she has said? I want to really understand what the activists mean when they accuse her of transphobia (my suspicion is a lot of those slinging the term around don't even know what she is supposed to have said, the accusation of transphobia is enough for them - but that's an assumption based on my own bias, perhaps).

Haha Grumpy! "Give me some money you complete and utter bastard" iirc. It was comedy, not a how to guide.

Seems to have made an impression on Harry Josie Giles though, who I couldn't finish reading for laughing.

@SquishySquirmy

Being transphobic to these 'words-means-whatever-I-say-they-do' numpties just means that you think sex is real and matters. That's why they hate her.

I have seen her accused of transphobia, but those accusing her of it rarely provide specific examples Well, that's how they work. If they actually had to provide a coherent argument that made sense as to why someone is transphobic, their whole world of cards would come falling down. Because they can't.

Kathleen Stock, JKR : they really do show that it doesn't matter how moderate you are in your opinions, or how moderately you express them, they will vilify and try to destroy you.

I actually think that it's the moderate and temperate people who are particularly singled out and hounded. They represent the greatest challenge to these extremists precisely because most normal people can see that they are perfectly reasonable and compassionate individuals. Desperate lies and slurs have been levelled for the express purpose of trying to stop people from reading what Stock and Rowling have written. This is because TRAs know that the vast majority of the population could not possibly disagree with the sentiment or logic of their writing.

SquishySqwirmy I had the same thought. I looked up on Twitter last night and saw multiple accounts including LOJ’s “accuse” her of signing the Women’s Human Rights Declaration which those accounts construe as transphobic (although that point of view only works if you believe that sex-based rights are inherently transphobic). The other main “accusation” is that she is a trustee(?) of the LGB Alliance, which they regard as a transphobic organisation. But my view is the same as GCAcademic, that she was intolerable because she gained a profile as a moderate voice and was listened to.

I expect the student activists had tacit support (or more) from other Philosophy Dept staff at Sussex who stand to benefit from the recruitment after her departure.

I hope she can feel safe and happy after this. What a terrible time.

Keep it classy, Sussex students.

@ScreamingMeMeSawUs

Keep it classy, Sussex students.

400 years apart.

multiple accounts including LOJ’s “accuse” her of signing the Women’s Human Rights Declaration which those accounts construe as transphobic (although that point of view only works if you believe that sex-based rights are inherently transphobic).

Their contention, based on twisting the words, that it advocates for the "elimination of trans people" because it says they want to eliminate sex based stereotypes is laughably ridiculous.

It really shows their tactics up quite clearly Forgotthebins. Those two main accusations are exactly what the Sussex student rep who went on Daily Politics (was it?) a couple of weeks ago trotted out. Repeat the lies, shout loudly, until they are just taken as fact. Happens all the time with JKR, Maya and everyone as well. It is simply not fair.

Must admit I have not yet read Material Girls and pretty much the only words I see bandied about from Prof Stock when discussing her is the the quote with unquestionably pro-trans stance. I have seen no evidence of anything transphobic.

Owen jones and the rest are purposely misrepresenting the Women’s Human Rights Declaration either because they haven't read it, they aren't very bright or they have an agenda which means they have to misrepresent women's words in order to demonise them.

Never forget Owen jones thought that the international network of powerful lesbians story was a must read. An article which Pink news later retracted and reached a settlement on.

Their contention, based on twisting the words, that it advocates for the "elimination of trans people" because it says they want to eliminate sex based stereotypes is laughably ridiculous.

Isn't it more specifically that the declaration wants it to not be possible for a male to declare themselves legally female? Although IIRC, Stock has said she's not in favour of repeal of the GRA2004.

I believe she's in favour of the GRA2004 largely as it stands, but with the maximal retention of sex-based exemptions, so the "legal fiction" of being female is clearly limited, and does not extend to stuff like female shelters/prisons.

I think those positions can (just about) tally.

Part of the issue is that TRAs think the GRA2004 is stronger than it is, and think that it makes males fully legally "female". So Stock's moderate "enforce the current law" position is seen as being an attempt to "remove rights".

University of Sussex, where freedom of speech died 28/10/21.

The Flat Earth Society must be kicking themselves for not employing more aggressive tactics.

What a time to be alive.

@ScreamingMeMeSawUs

Keep it classy, Sussex students.

How lovely. Such a stand for tolerance, compassion and empathy.

With Material Girls now in reprint, her next book is guaranteed to be a bestseller.

She had long passed the threshold of evidence for constructive dismissal. So unless Sussex Seminary has come to a (big) deal, then the employment tribunal is likely to result in the biggest payout in employment law history. And I don't reckon the Seminary's indemnity insurance will pay-out; there's an expectation that they take all reasonable steps to prevent legal proceedings, and won't have done that.

I suspect, with the recent support from The Prime Minister, the Chief Constable of Jo Shiner will be under some considerable scrutiny.

I think this will doom the UCU.

And the Seminary students? Well, a degree this academic year in any subject will be worthless, as it will be accompanied with the likely question 'and what did you do to protest the bullying of Dr. Stock?' and its alumni will be tainted by this scandal for years-to-come.

Timing of course is everything. And in a week when the TRA's are desperately trying to fight evidence that they are bullies (by bullying anyone and everyone they can find) this couldn't have come at a worse time. And this week they've managed to be seen to have bullied a lesbian out of her job.

I reckon the TRA's will happily gloat for a day-or-so, but then some will realise that this really has been another disastrous event in a month of calamities for them.

Maybe the problem with a lot of the Youth of Today does boil down to the fact that they haven't seen The Young Ones and realised that being like Rik makes you look like a twat.

Owen Jones - Intellectualism for the hard of thinking.

Professor Stock has been treated appallingly, especially by her union. It's sad to see her leave her post, I hope she has something spectacular lined up, she deserves it.

in a week when the TRA's are desperately trying to fight evidence that they are bullies (by bullying anyone and everyone they can find) this couldn't have come at a worse time. And this week they've managed to be seen to have bullied a lesbian out of her job

I reckon the TRA's will happily gloat for a day-or-so, but then some will realise that this really has been another disastrous event in a month of calamities for them.

It's quite hard to deny your harassment campaign that has seen a woman forced out of her job is misogynist when you celebrate with 'the witch is dead'.

459 likes on the Instagram post of the harassment campaign. Gloating because their anonymity has enabled them to successfully terrorise a woman.

We see you.

I can’t read. It but anyway

It’s the persecution of Kathleen stock and Marion Miller

www.spectator.co.uk/article/marion-millar-should-never-have-been-in-court

Try it in a private browsing window if you've used up all your freebies littlebrowndog.

It's by Stephen Daisley and it's very good, even down to a positive mention of Glinner's contributions which is rare enough itself!

@MrsMadderRose

Maybe the problem with a lot of the Youth of Today does boil down to the fact that they haven't seen The Young Ones and realised that being like Rik makes you look like a twat.

Definitely this.

They think they are being edgy and intellectual and changing the world, without realising they're the living embodiment of a classic comedy stereotype from the prehistoric age of the 1980s when their fash tory scum parents were young. (Ugh. Gross.)

Poor woman - she must have felt very threatened.

I'm angry that she had to take this action.

Isn't it more specifically that the declaration wants it to not be possible for a male to declare themselves legally female. Although IIRC, Stock has said she's not in favour of repeal of the GRA2004.

The Declaration on Women's Sex-based Rights does not include a demand to make it impossible for a male to declare themselves female. It merely notes concerns about the impact of allowing men to assert they are women.

The UK branch of the organisation behind the declaration, the Women's Human Rights Campaign wrote a submission to the UK Parliament's Women and Equalities Committee on Reform of the Gender Recognition Act where they argued that the existing law should be repealed.

AFAIK, Kathleen Stock had nothing to do with that submission and only signed the declaration itself.

Its a good article, though I think he gets a bit carried away when he claims that the best minds at Sussex have all resigned at once (surely there are a handful of decent professors at the uni!). Publishing any of the mad statements made by the terrorising students is a great idea - the more the better. And bouquets to Kathleen Stock, badly let down by her university and who stuck it out longer than most people would have done. She is an inspiration.