Oxford PhD student on radio 4

[Boomboom22]

Did anyone else hear that PhD student on radio 4 be so horrificly offensive about Kathleen Stock
Apparently as a lesbuan and a woman she's never been oppressed.
It was a nasty misogynistic bloke and I am complaining to the Oxford media office, his supervisor and the BBC. It is completely disgusting that someone can say these things on radio 4. OK she challenged him a bit but he should not be awarded a PhD from our best institution if he hates reality.

What programme was it?

Was it a bloke bloke or a bloke identifying as a woman? I will have a listen. Horrified about the whole thing; the only positive is that the Oxford professors are fighting back (finally) and it's getting press attention.

this is depressing. I am going over to the UK to do a professional course soon (after years of saving and negotiating leave with my employer): I am a GC lesbian and I wonder how the student community will be.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4807882-40-oxford-dons-sign-letter-in-support-of-kathleen-stock?page=3&reply=126232460

yes, discussed on here. with link

Anyone have a link to the programme?

There are GC students at Oxford but unfortunately the purple haired loons have the loudest voices.

[email protected]

To make the uni aware. I have asked his supervisor to be made aware.

The link is on the other thread. I think really it would be beneficial to keep discussion on that thread.

What thread?

40 Oxford dons sign letter in support of Kathleen Stock www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4807882-40-oxford-dons-sign-letter-in-support-of-kathleen-stock

Read first few pages but couldn't see the link.

The letter is great news, about bloody time though.

It's the 40 Oxford dons' letter one

It's OP posted a link to the interview.

I never cease to be amazed that these "students" are allowed to spout offensive derogatory comments without challenge.

Hopefully they'll make a better job of it on R4 PM tonight.

Hopefully they'll make a better job of it on R4 PM tonight.

Not if it's Evan Davis, they won't

There's lots of interesting context on that thread about the phd student concerned.

It was The World at One, about 31 minutes in: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001lyq7

I heard this and was shocked and in fact it was so bad I feel having it identified on its own thread is important because this is about the BBC totally failing to stop an individual making totally slanderous comments about someone. eg claiming KS doesn't think trans people should exist, and other complete rubbish.

The BBC presenter was useless. I thought they allowed him to rant on because they would then give her a chance to speak. But instead some wishy washy academic made some bland statements about free speech, and quite honestly in terms of KS reputation didn't help by sort of cooing Kathy (I think he called her) as it made is sound like academic friends just closing ranks.

Truely awful.

I thought we had got past the stage where trans activists could spout untruths and the media just let them do it.

Please listen via the link given above because until you hear it you couldn't image that this could said - email address can be found here https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/158jK9v9k27T4cSTdm52vlC/contact-us

(sorry thanks to some mad programming by mumsnet you cant post an email address because it assumes the @ is to identify a FWR poster so says the emails address is an error - doh)

Every time I say to myself "I'll listen to the opposing view, maybe I'll get some light".

And every time I'm disappointed, no light, just heat.

This guy, another permanently angry, defaming every GC, this time Stock, last time JKR, next time likely Riley Gaines.

The same mindgames, obfuscation, warping and weaponisation of language.

If Kath Stock really does have her appearance pulled, this will be a dark day for everyone. Yes, even the TRAs, because the mood of zero tolerance will ramp up across the board.

I've just had a listen and on balance, I think he just sounded ranty and angry. Aside from saying she (by implication from his tone) all women and all lesbians had never been oppressed, the biggest take away of his position was the peak of his anger at the idea that she says trans women are not women. There will be plenty of listeners who will be rather baffled at the idea that women have never been oppressed (I can't imagine any radio 4 listeners being unfamiliar with the suffragettes) and who are also starting to wonder if trans women are women, in the light of all the sports discussions.
So although he misrepresented her as trying to stop trans people existing, the silence and the comments from the following guest just highlighted how odd his vitriol for her sounded.
I'm pretty sure anyone listening to that who had no interest in the subject at all would have concluded that he didn't really make any sense and it was probably a good win for free speech that she can attend the university to be a part of an academic conversation.

Yes. He clearly stated that the oh-so-frequent references to gender critical people not wanting trans people to exist means that they don't accept the mantra that "trans women are women".

So not accepting that mantra means we are trying to erase trans people from existing. This is interesting, because accepting that mantra does mean that the female sex is erased, at least linguistically, because if transwomen are women, then being a woman can have nothing to do with being of the female sex and so there are now no words to refer to that vast demographic group which used to exist.

It's good to see that clearly stated so we know what the battle is about.

I think I know what the solution is but I don’t know if the victims would be interested?

Sue for liable. Let this person prove in court that all the horrible things they say are true or else it is liable.

Question, would you do some gardening to help facilitate this? Court cases are expensive but in the end the loser usually has to pay the winners fees.

I think when it’s a clear cut case of liable we should all help the victim sue whoever it is, the press or an individual or an organisation or whoever. I used to dislike the idea of suing someone but I just think to many women have put up with far too much already and it’s time to do consider legal action.

I agree. Just stop it with the libels and slander.

God, the lawyers must love the cash cow that is this uncivil war.

Well I’m a man and not a feminist and even I am absolutely disgusted at the way women have been treated, locked up beside violent men, slandered and abused for having an opinion, it’s just awful really so even I, a right wing male would contribute to a feminist suing a slanderer for liable.

I think a women’s organisation like for women Scotland should start a fund for suing and I would even donate. If they only start cases where a lawyer says it’s a near certain win (which let’s face it with the utter lies and slander some people throw around like confetti these days it shouldn’t be hard), the victim gets the compensation part of the settlement (minus any contribution they would like to make as a thank you for the help) and the organisation gets its legal fees outlay paid back by the settlement as the loser usually has to pay the winners fees back to them. With the fees back the organisation can then take another near 100% win case. Rinse and repeat until slanders get the message that making up lies about someone isn’t acceptable.

Once people know the organisation is serious about suing then suing might not even be necessary as most people would likely take it all back and issue a public apology if threatened with legal action and they knew it was serious.

It’s harsh and I wouldn’t normally suggest something like that but I’m really at my wits end with this now. I hate to think how women must be feeling.

Think of it like a no win no fee setup for slandered feminists;)

'gender critical people not wanting trans people to exist means that they don't accept the mantra that "trans women are women".

We need this spelled out. A lot. This is exact what they are calling 'genocide'.

There's nothing more to it. If someone says that it's not possible to change sex, trans activists take this as 'erasure' and equate it to a will to 'deny the existence of trans people'.

It's nonsense. Nobody denies that people exist who call themselves 'trans'.

What we don't agree is that anyone claiming a 'trans' gender has a special ability to change sex. That's it. That's all.

Oxford students are so dumb!

Hmmm, I think it was Sarah the presenter who was pushing the generation thing - she introduced this idea, and insisting on it with the academic even after he said it was nothing to do with age. Seems that was her axe to grind...