Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Cambridge University LGBTQI+ students: we are not attempting to silence free speech, we just want to deplatform Helen Joyce

211 replies

snurtifier · 18/10/2022 10:11

Helen Joyce has been invited to talk at Gonville & Caius College next week. This has provoked the usual outbreak of virtue signalling and the following response from "college LGBTQI+ officers". It is pretty much the full bingo card. Warning: contains complex mental gymnastics.

Dear all,
It has come to our attention that Gonville and Caius college, and the Divinity faculty, are hosting a speaker event on the 25th of October platforming Helen Joyce. This event has also been promoted by the Fac Bio to natural sciences, medic and vet med students. The title of the event is ‘Criticising gender-identity ideology: what happens when speech is silenced.’
Helen Joyce is a ‘gender critical’ activist, whose work largely focuses around anti-trans rhetoric and trans-exclusionary radical feminism. “Gender identity ideology” is frequently used as a dog-whistle for transphobic sentiment, cloaked in the language of free speech and scientific inquiry. It goes without saying that this kind of rhetoric is fundamentally against what we as LGBT officers stand for, and we are unanimously disgusted by the platforming of such views by Caius and the promotion of the event by the various faculties. Transgender identities should not be put forward as a subject for debate, and their existence is not an “ideology.”

Colleges, and the wider university, have a duty of care to their students, no matter their gender identity. By inviting speakers with inflammatory and bigoted views to speak, the staff involved are allowing transphobia to proliferate within the university, lending it a level of credibility, and crucially, potentially putting transgender students in harms’ way. Transgender people are an at-risk minority group – according to the Stonewall School Report 2017:
92% of trans young people have thought about taking their own life;
84% of trans young people have self-harmed; and

45% of trans young people have tried to take their own life.

Further to this, just days before the event was announced, the Home Office published the past years’ statistics on hate crimes in the UK, which revealed that transphobic hate crime has increased by 56% from last year, with 4,355 reports being made in England and Wales. In light of these statistics, the platforming of a speaker with these transphobic views takes on a particularly alarming salience.

Freedom of speech, of course, is protected in law; Helen Joyce has the right to speak as she pleases. The core of the issue we take is with the senior staff and fellows who have chosen to platform this speaker, which we consider a violation of their duty of care. To invite a speaker whose publicly expressed views include advocating “reducing or keeping down the number of people who transition” both legitimises active transphobia and also alienates and hurts transgender individuals on a personal and emotional level. Furthermore, the fact that this has been promoted to medical students, who will inevitably treat transgender patients in their future careers, presents a further risk to trans individuals not just in the university, but in the wider community, with the potential for wide-reaching and long-lasting harm.

This is not an attempt to silence free speech, but rather, us exercising our own right to that speech in the face of an event which is, in our view, not only irresponsible but actively harmful and cruel to the transgender students at Cambridge. Trans people deserve a university experience as comfortable, safe, and joyful as everyone else, and the University should take an active role in ensuring that – a role that they have, on this occasion, failed to fulfil. It is for these reasons that we implore Gonville and Caius to reconsider their decision to platform Joyce.
If any individual feels unsafe, upset or troubled by this event, please talk to someone – your college LGBT officer, an SU representative, a college or university counsellor, or a charity helpline. We have attached some resources at the end of this letter.
With love and solidarity,
The college LGBT officers

OP posts:
oviraptor21 · 30/10/2022 19:24

Thank you @CrossPurposes

I agree with @MangyInseam that you shouldn't need a protected characteristic to be protected against a hostile environment.

It will be interesting to see if ghe involvement of the Free Speech Union and the new Alumni for Free Speech makes it more difficult for universities to bow to the student "no debate" mentality.

GwenniMcKinney · 30/10/2022 23:40

I’m a very long time lurker and have been wanting to join the discussion for some time. This weekend I came across this interview by spectator TV with Helen Joyce, from a few days ago. She articulates and draws together all the threads of the debate and explains in such an understandable and factual way, towards the end she addresses being cancelled and her response

ScrollingLeaves · 31/10/2022 08:45

GwenniMcKinney · Yesterday 23:40
I’m a very long time lurker and have been wanting to join the discussion for some time. This weekend I came across this interview by spectator TV with Helen Joyce, from a few days ago. She articulates and draws together all the threads of the debate and explains in such an understandable and factual way, towards the end she addresses being cancelled and her response

Thank you for that Spectator TV interview with Helen Joyce.. I had not seen it before and she does explain the problems around gender identity very clearly and succinctly.

Baaaaaa · 06/11/2022 21:36

ideasmirrour · 20/10/2022 23:01

Maybe if they didn't always use 50,000 words, when 20 would do, these ideas would be less likely to misinterpreted.
**
No doubt the full nuanced magnificence of Derrida is misunderstood by the peasants, however as a peasant I think that philosophers who dick around with concepts questioning objective truth (which then become mainstream), can reasonably be accused of inspiring the current harmful denial of objective truth by social justice activists.
**
Ideas as viruses. This is where it led. He might not have anticipated it or wanted it but he is in part to blame.
**
He did also wang on far too much about violent hierachies and binaries of oppression which seem frighteningly familiar.

A key point here might be that he doesn’t in fact “deny objective truth”. And “Violent hierarchies” — isn’t the entire point of gender critical feminist thought that the hierarchy between men and women is both a “binary of oppression” and essentially* *a violent one? One of the essential core aspects of Derrida’s thought is that binary oppressions are not just symmetrical intellectual games, but asymmetric relationships of real oppression, involving violence, political, social and economic control - eg of men over women. The very point that gender critical women make against transactivists who pretend that oppression is not real and the binary opposition of sex doesn’t exist.

Ditto the binary sex/gender, which gender ideology tries to pretend is interchangeable and meaningless — deconstruction, in contrast, argues the complete reverse. It’s not “postmodern”. The feminists who were most influenced by Derrida were eg. Cixous, Kristeva and Luce Irigaray, who are also regarded with horror by gender ideologists, for the crime of suggesting that men aren’t women and vice versa (all three now also derided as proponents of the dreaded “essentialism”; and for the crimes of “erasing queer and trans folx” by holding to the notions that women exist, bodies exist and we are also uniquely oppressed by men on that basis).

One of the reasons Derrida’s thought isn’t expressible in twenty words is that it isn’t remotely reducible to some pop-culture caricature of “well he said there’s no objective truth!” Misrepresenting, getting wrong, or repeating misleading caricatures of ideas (especially without reading and understanding them), is one of the aspects of gender identity ideology that we rightly excoriate. We shouldn’t be doing this either. It makes no sense to complain about gender ideologists simply repeating inaccurate caricatures just because they fits in with their biases, if feminist women who should know better do the same.

Your key point was that Derrida can't be blamed because he is misinterpreted. I do dispute that, but my key point is not whether or not he is misinterpreted but that the core ideas he instantiated whether misinterpreted or not have enabled and given legitimacy in part to what is currently happening. I am not using Derrida, Foucault and Buttler to justify anything myself. I am criticising gender ideologists not the source material so any "caricature" is how the ideas have evolved with gender ideology not what the original ideas were.

Carl Marx is quite inspiring and had some great insights but communism was a deadly shit show.

GwenniMcKinney · 10/11/2022 23:36

Bumping this thread as the video from this event is now available

Itisbetter · 11/11/2022 01:04

Thank you for posting the link.

TheBiologyStupid · 11/11/2022 01:30

GwenniMcKinney · 10/11/2022 23:36

Bumping this thread as the video from this event is now available

Wonderful - thanks, Gwenni!

ScrollingLeaves · 11/11/2022 08:15

GwenniMcKinney · Yesterday 23:36*
Bumping this thread as the video from this event is now available

Thank you @GwenniMcKinney I have just watched that. She explains points so succinctly and clearly.

It was interesting that there was heckling going on when she was trying to explain about how children are being used by adults, and potentially being sterilised, to validate their idea that their own trans identities are innate.

beastlyslumber · 11/11/2022 09:02

Was just reading about how so many alumni have been in touch to say they're withdrawing their money unless Joyce gets a full apology.

TheClogLady · 11/11/2022 09:17

That was brilliant. She’s so calm and reasonable yet holds her ground magnificently. Of course the activities people engage in ‘at night’ is relevant to understanding their safeguarding risk in the day time!
Women have never been free to do prostitution/porn/stripping at night and work with kids in the day, so it’s not as if this is a special rule brought in for drag queens or trans people.
Even a long-ago-history of posing for perfectly-legal, soft-porn images can come back to haunt a woman in her professional career (one of many, many reasons to discourage young women/university students from doing Only Fans et al).

So glad they have a good quality recording of everything Helen said as it will be useful evidence that not one trans life was erased the day Helen Joyce was allowed to speak at a university!

AuntMunca · 11/11/2022 18:14

Thanks for the link, Gwenni. I've just watched. I find Helen very engaging to listen to. She has so many insights and is able to explain them so lucidly. It's shameful that, as far as I know, the BBC has never had her on but I expect she's regarded as far too controversial (also far too clear and rational) to be allowed to talk about her book.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page