Women's rights general conversations - Thread 6

[Kucinghitam]

Continuation of Thread 5.

There is so much excellent information and so many active discussions on FWR that I wondered if it would be useful to have a thread to sort of "cross-fertilise" between them - airing little thoughts or vignettes that wouldn't themselves merit their own thread, to highlight other posts/threads of particular interest or to point to notable developments on fast-moving threads so that casual observers know where to look.

(For example, "the X thread has meandered onto a fascinating discussion of Y" or "Poster P's amazing analysis on thread Z might have relevance to the scenario in thread W" or "Has anybody noticed this recurring theme that keeps coming up??" or even "Random bloke asked me to smile while I was choosing onions in the supermarket, grr"- that sort of thing).

Jonny is claiming Dr Sheeren Benjamin sent him threats. He's a member of staff.

😃 autocorrupt changed his name to 'Jenny'.

Poor Johnny. Believes the gender studies students because they’re “educated”.

And yet another book to add to my terfshelf!

He is also claiming to have reported the threats to the police. I think his behaviour online today (generally) towards colleagues must cross the line on workplace harassment. It’s very poor. I hope that Shereen Benjamin is getting support - the UoE has been immensely disappointing until now, and I fear the equivocation will continue. Edinburgh Academics for Academic Freedom praised the university for ensuring that the event went ahead, but it feels like a very low bar. Men like Jonny need to know that they can’t get away with it. They will melt away as soon as they face consequences: he has proved it’s not ideological as he doesn’t understand the issues. He has just picked a side for sport.

I wonder if the threats were 'stop libelling me or I'll take legal action'. I wouldn't be surprised if he's received threats of violence though. I'd be astonished if they'd come from any of the academics involved in 'Sex & Gender'. I don't understand why he'd seem to intend give the impression that they had

I know right! I really can't fathom it - you could imagine a high-up person ignoring all the lowly trivia when it looks like a bit of routine work stuff, but by the time there's a court case and you know you're appearing as a witness??

This is the thing that really astonishes me. I'm at a pretty middling level at work and that kind of complacency and negligence would get me in really serious trouble on a day to day basis, let alone if we were in court about something that I was involved in. Just can't imagine it. Even from the point of view of my own pride and dignity as a person, I can't imagine standing in court saying "yeah, like it was kind of my job but was I really supposed to read that? Me? Hang on, let me get my glasses here and I'll have a quick scan...no, funnily it never occurred to me at any point that I should be on top of this before coming to court! How would I have guessed that?"

It’s a shame the tribunal isn’t being streamed live by a major media organisation, it appears to have completely peaked the judge over the course of the absurd and at times simply incredible “evidence” of OU employees and managers. Hope Jo Phoenix doesn’t have to go to appeal to win this.

I have so much to do but can’t stop reading the tribunal thread. Frozen pizza for tea, I reckon.

I'm making proper pizza, but not reading the thread to make up for it! 😛

Has anyone read this book or is familiar with the author?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=eve+cat&crid=3RD1MSJZEKC32&sprefix=eve+cat%2Caps%2C82&ref=nb_sb_noss_1

I skimmed a review somewhere and bought it. But I've just read a few bits and skimmed again and think I might not enjoy it. Any thoughts? Anyone make me an offer for the hardback edition?!

I might be missing something, but she seems (from skimming) to be using terms like AFAB, and I reckon I've read enough of anything like that this year.

Something wrong with your link there, @angelico53 - it just takes me to the Amazon homepage.

It's the book Eve by Cat Bohannon. There's been a thread or two and, I think, some comments upthread. There's been several articles in the Guardian about it. Bohannon states that transwomen are women. So, there may be genderwoo in the book......somehow!

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Eve-Female-Drove-Million-Evolution/dp/B0BWK9FLTT/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1EPPEBGEAQFT9&keywords=eve+cat+bohannon&qid=1697143723&sprefix=eve+cat%2Caps%2C75&sr=8-1

soz. Oh I see Icake has it already.

As I just read someone saying on another thread a moment ago, once they say that, I kinda lose all interest.

That's a shame. I'd seen the book and read the preamble on Amazon and was thinking about getting it but evolution has not made men change into women so that's a nope from me. I'm disappointed because it looked so interesting.

you'd be welcome to have it, MM.

The fragility of some people, not tras for a change (a letter out).

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/13/ireland-embrace-zombie-song-rugby-world-cup-stirs-debate-lyrics

I hope Dolores is having a good old laugh about this somewhere.

Perhaps hamas should give it a listen?

Just dipping into the Jo Phoenix thread (it's too fast moving for me to follow properly or keep up with) but the OU's witnesses are just incredible. How insane that women have to go to employment tribunals to defend themselves against this stuff. How on earth do these people get taken seriously in the first place? Apparently criticising legal advice as "misleading" "crossed the line". They really can not tolerate any dissent at all without having a fit of the vapours. Absolute children with far too much power.

The threads are a lot to keep up with, but I really recommend at least reading the Tribunal Tweets thread unrolls if you can - they are a lot shorter.

I just tried. It must be my poor branes, but I couldn't make head nor tail of it.

This Jo Phoenix case, like the previous cases I've followed on FWR, reveal a common thread to me.

Which is: When the Brave Warriors for The Right Side of History get to broadcast their Truths of Sword-of-Goodness-yet-Delicate-Fragility in court, they all sound disturbingly like the TRSOHers that were in the Old Place.

Very true.

There is a knack to it, and its hard if you jump into the middle of a case (or, as with this morning, the middle of a witness). But I suspect a big part of your difficulty in making sense of it is that this particular witness makes no sense at all. And speaks entirely in content-free word salad, so whoever is tweeting today has my sympathies - abridging it in a way that conveys any meaning can't really be done because there is no meaning (apart from increasingly sulky 'dunno' and 'can't remember', and the odd 'wasn't me').

Yesterday's is probably easier to follow.

They're the literal Peter Principle. With a slosh of Dunning-Kruger thrown in.

But I suspect a big part of your difficulty in making sense of it is that this particular witness makes no sense at all.

Typo for witless. @BinturongsSmellOfPopcorn ?