Times article on academia

[SuperLoudPoppingAction]

www.timeshighereducation.com/depth/researchers-are-wounded-academias-gender-wars

Does anyone have a share token?

Among other experiences, my interviewees described complaints to and by management, attempts to shut down events, no platforming, disinvitations, intimidation, smears and losing career progression opportunities, including being blocked from jobs.
Others spoke about being physically removed from events, alongside receiving torrents of abuse online that even included incitements to murder. One criminology scholar said her experience was “a continuum of hell”, while a law scholar claimed “the impact has been huge [and] is going to last a long time”.

These were experiences by "GC" feminists about the side that Phipps is on.

She's a fine one to talk about trauma from having her ideas challenged. She hasn't lost a job Ffs.

This view, together with the belief that “cis women have more power than trans people”, led genderist academics to refrain from forthrightly denouncing some transgender activists’ aggressive tactics towards feminists. These include threats and ideations of extreme violence, which, as well as being pervasive on social media, appear to be increasingly condoned at universities. For example, last year, a London School of Economics postgraduate student conference paper described a scene in which feminists critical of genderism “scream for mercy”. <a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20220915033149/web.archive.org/web/20210623205221/https:/gi422conference.com/trans-endemics-embodying-viral-and-monstrous-threat-in-times-of-pandemic/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">The paperr* then described the potential threat: “I hold a knife to your throat and spit my transness into your ear”, concluding: “Are you scared? I sure fucking hope so.”

Yeah but no debate, this hurts my feelings

It's referencing her book.

Maybe Dr [?] Phipps should apologise for writing her book ... Because, y'know, just anyone can read it and quote from it, which is obviously literal violence.

What a pity books don't have an automatic "T**fblocker" so only the ideologically pure may read it. Damn books: they are an imperialist white supremacist transphobic technology.

Isn’t it amazing how none of these actual academics did so much as look on their participant info sheet and contact the ethics chair about the research malpractice and their discomfort with being asked about their professional activities and positions?----

with people who cannot discuss their own areas of research teaching in universities, no wonder some students are so horrified if anything comes close to making them examine their opinions.

God forbid a student ever quotes her book and disagrees with it.

THATS THE WHOLE POINT OT LLF ACADEMIA.

Anyone would think they’re doing assassination by twitter because actually they are uncomfortable at anything but validation and affirmation and they know that, had they reported this misconduct through channels they absolutely understand, the research ethics chair would have investigated and learned that there was no misconduct.

So they whinged to each other. And then took to twitter when someone published the findings in such a way that people might ask questions about their field and it’s practices.

Fine bunch to talk about ethics when children are being encouraged to have major life changing ops for no medical reason.

Fine bunch to talk about ethics when children are being encouraged to have major life changing ops for no medical reason.

And I can't even work out the ideological reason. If women can have male or female bodies, and men can have male or female bodies, why is any surgery required?

You may be onto something. Perhaps what is needed is some kind of academic Snapchat, instead. Auto-destructing books?

Look, all they are doing is trying to prove that we are terrifying people who cause harm.

They want us sacked, punished, ostracised, silenced.

To justify that, we have to be doing terrible things. Except we aren't. We aren't forming mobs surrounding and screaming at people. Or going to conferences to give talks about holding knives to people's throats. Or hounding people out of their jobs through campaigns of harassment.

But we must be doing SOMETHING terrible and harmful, so they have to pretend that being asked about their field of expertise and pushed on how they define their foundational concepts and what they understand about the opinions of those they accuse of being genocidal fascists, is, like, a really traumatising and terrible thing to have been done to them. Because we must be doing SOMETHING harmful.

And who knows, maybe they genuinely did find that emotionally difficult. I mean, if they are only talking and publishing amongst those who ' all think the same thing, basically', they may genuinely never have had to defend their views before and it genuinely was upsetting for them to find out that they cannot.

From an ethics review perspective, the researcher proposed to interview established academics in the humanities and social sciences (an elite group) about their professional activities (and their twitter activities are part of that - they are identifying themselves as academics on there for a reason).

I just don’t buy any of this crap about deception and trauma. They’re using concepts of victimhood to prevent anyone looking at all critically at their activities. It’s sinister. These are not vulnerable research participants being asked about sensitive topics. They are academics - many of them very senior and experienced - being interviewed about their work.

I mean, I love that ' I wasn't prepared for a debate' comment in that sulky exchange between the two interviewees.

You are an academic, debating, exploring and defending your ideas should be your bread and butter. Whether 'prepared' or not, you should be able to cope with that, both emotionally and intellectually.

But look at that tacit admission that you failed at this. And instead of reflecting on what that says about the robustness and thoroughness of your ideas, or reflecting that perhaps only talking to people who agree with you, and publishing in journals that are only read by people who agree with you, has perhaps not exposed you to the challenge that your work requires to grow and develop, you instead react like a sulky child and attack the person whose questions exposed the weakness of your ideas and ability as an academic.

Pathetic.

I just don’t buy any of this crap about deception and trauma. They’re using concepts of victimhood to prevent anyone looking at all critically at their activities. It’s sinister. These are not vulnerable research participants being asked about sensitive topics. They are academics - many of them very senior and experienced - being interviewed about their work.

I completely agree.

It's like infant school children.

"Look, look, I can jump this high, I can, watch, watch, watch"
<does pathetic jump and falls over>
"I WASN'T READY!!"
<tantrum ensues>

😂

As a former humanities academic, I don’t think I’ve ever met an academic who want ready to debate their field of interest at any moment. No prep or notice required!

Or, in many cases, to debate, pretty much anything. Whether they had anything useful to add or not! 🤣

Actually not just ready. Eager to tell everyone and anyone about their research.

Yes, yes! @SudocremOnEverything shall I tell you all about what I'm writing right now ... You've all got a spare couple of hours, haven't you?

No?

<flounces off>

Exactly.

and I’m sure you are all set for explaining why any competing theories/perspectives/approaches are problematic/just plain wrong. At any moment. 🤣

Seriously. This is like telling the world you live and breathe baking, going on bake off and complaining they asked you to make cakes because Paul Hollywood said your sponge was a bit claggy.

One of the conclusions that I draw from the article is that there's a gap in the academic gender studies market for a gender critical journal. Since none of the existing journals accept GC papers?

They're absolutely terrified of being identified as collaborators, so they have to claim they were tricked into participating.

Sickening bunch of cowards.

Last year I wrote a letter to the president of the university I attended, saying this about searching for truth being undermined by too much of a political/activist approach. This was after the umpteenth idiotic email they'd sent out about activist issues that actually had no relation to university life.

He replied to me and basically said what you've both described here - that people in these communities had said they find it so important what the university is doing and that he thinks this is the purpose of the university.

I have told my child who is applying to universities this year that I do not recommend she attend there.

Yes!

I think that Laura Favaro is exceptionally brave, given the current climate; I wondered who would be the first to stick their head above the parapet and now we know.

I don't discuss anything about this in the family, not since my sister in law had an extended fit of rage, looming over me and screaming into a face about what a bigot and a "homophobe" I am.

I can barely imagine what it's like to be out in the world with it, students and lecturers to harangue her in person, the likes of the Guardian doing character assassination pieces and of course, the ubiquitous Twitter mob, with their rape and death threats.

I'm full of admiration for her, I really hope that her career doesn't grind to a halt and more so, that she remains safe.

The project design was so clever and, I thought, very balanced as well.
Really characterised the best of sociology- investigating and analysing a tension in our social world.