Trans/gender activists/ideologists/believers complain of being cancelled.

[ArabellaScott]

And censorship.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/anti-trans-views-academia-kathleen-stock-sussex-university/

Good, deserve all they get. Nasty bullies

Is this chunk of verbosity claiming that when white women say they have been raped it gives white men the excuse they need to be angry about minorities?

No data, no examples. Her 'analysis' removes agency from pretty much everyone but herself as the author and some mysterious forces of 'the right'. She sees what's happening. It's very ... messianic.

If only it were actually true.

Unfortunately they are merely identifying as having been cancelled, and identifying gender critical feminists as having all the power and dictating public discourse, even though we know the opposite to be true.

I see someone else got there before me.

One year my DB gave me as a Christmas present a box of words with magnets on the back - you could stick them on the fridge to make messages or poems. I'd guess the person who wrote that has been rummaging around at the back of a cupboard, found similar, decided to use it and thrown them into the air at random to make an essay.

Or used an academic bullshit generator.

Is this chunk of verbosity claiming that when white women say they have been raped it gives white men the excuse they need to be angry about minorities?

Yes. It’s complex language to dress up age old patriarchal blaming women for men’s actions and using race theory to make (other!) white women the biggest problem of all. Dreadful professional victims.

It’s basically what white liberal-identifying people have done with the Karen trope they appropriated (from African American women) in a more verbose form.

Ah, diddums. My heart bleeds for them (not).

«No data, no examples. Her 'analysis' removes agency from pretty much everyone but herself as the author and some mysterious forces of 'the right'. She sees what's happening. It's very ... messianic.»

Yes @AutumnCrow it is a very odd way to write.
I don’t understand what half of it is supposed to mean, but the effect is not that I’m awestruck. I’m just flabbergasted that it is printed.
Which most likely was not what the author was aiming for.

Sobs

There was an update to a thread the other week about Laura Favaro who is taking City University to an Employment Tribunal. She had interviewed a range of academics about gender and Alison Phipps was one of her participants who raised ethical concerns about her research.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4776028-dr-laura-favaro-is-taking-city-university-to-an-employment-tribunal

I can see why many people might want to give Alison Phipps a wide berth after this.

Ahhhh, yep, I remember now!

'The opening salvo came from Alison Phipps, a Professor of Sociology at Newcastle University. She outed herself as one of the participants in the research, an experience which she “now thoroughly regret[ted]”, she said in a vituperative Twitter thread, as it made her feel “violated” and “incredibly exposed”. “I apologise to the trans community for participating in this research, which is going to cause damage,” Phipps concluded, without telling us why she didn’t withdraw her consent after such an “excruciating” encounter, or why she waited until the findings were published in a widely-circulated magazine to raise her concerns.'

https://thecritic.co.uk/cancel-culture-in-academia/

It was completely ridiculous. She’s a profession in sociology. She’s not some poor, vulnerable research participant. She’s the epitome of ‘interviewing an elite’.

She didn’t like the results and wanted to purify herself on twitter when the TRA backlash came.

Didn't Lavery pull out of the debate with Helen Joyce citing safety concerns? It was played out as GC people were the dangerous ones (although never explained exactly how). I interpreted that as 1) needed a face saving out because he was going to Germany his arse handed to him and 2) worried about the backlash from his side but couldn't say that so 1).

It now seems he's fallen for his own lies and/or found another 'most marginalised' depth to plumb.

The ability to use a whole lot of words endlessly while making no discernable sense is also becoming a real feature of this political movement.

Tbh, given its intellectual roots… that’s inevitable.

Judith butler is a truly dreadful communicator. She writes and speaks to obsfucate rather than elucidate.

Give me a D! Give me an A! Give me an RVO!

They know exactly what they’re doing, this is such ugly smirkily narcissistic behaviour. Imagine if one of them had to actually confront the baying mobs and extremely personal harassment they organised for Stock!

And yeah if the view that women are to blame for racism by objecting to being raped isn’t gaining traction beyond Oxfam, then that seems a cause for celebration and also… not that surprising?

It’s also really odd how they are all so fixated with Kathleen Stock. As if she was the evil mastermind who damaged their careers. They did a very good job of that themselves, in full view of anybody who cared to look. I feel slightly sorry for the junior and aspiring academics but why were they not better advised by their academic mentors? If you’re verbally attacking, defaming and/or harassing others, then that’s not going to help you in your career, is it?

Sorry, 'Germany' for some reason was autocorrected. It should have been Austria 'get'!

It’s also really odd how they are all so fixated with Kathleen Stock

i think it might be because Stock uses actual logic and proper thinking in her work and is a lucid, funny writer (especially for an academic!)

Is there a word for imposter syndrome when actual imposters have it? Anyway, if that word exists, I suspect that it would describe what Hines feels when confronted with Kathleen Stock.

Kathleen Stock has been given a profile way above anything those who defamed her could dream of. Partly because of the way their behaviour thrust her into the spotlight. Reminds me of Vader, killing Kenobi 😁 None of that would have done her any good if she didn't have the wit, brains, talent and charisma that she has. She seems to be thriving despite them and I think that sickens them.

A good excuse to share a fabulous essay.

https://newrepublic.com/article/150687/professor-parody

This might look like a comic act, but it's a very authoritative scholarly critique of Butler, and scholars still refer to it. Martha Nussbaum is one of the world's most eminent philosophers of ethics & aesthetics.

The really ridiculous thing about Prof. Phipps complaints is that SHE is still in a job. I didn't see black-masked feminists invading her campus with signs saying "Phipps Out." I didn't see flares & smoke bombs set off and lines of [non]students on her campus protesting Phipps' presence ...

It's just classic DARVO.

I saw the title of this thread and thought, Weren't YOU the ones baying 'NO DEBATE' and hounding Kathleen Stock from her job?

My sympathy is so limited as to be invisible.

And also, for cancelled people they seem to be doing okay on the employment front.

Yes, they’re doing OK on the employment front but not as many people take them seriously anymore. Phipps was riding the identitarian wave, with titillating glimpses of her private life and an adoring fan base on Twitter. Her book came out at exactly the right time. Does she still receive the same level of professional respect and attention? I wonder if she ever gets pushback when she gives her lectures on the ‘far right connections’ of the ‘GC movement‘. My guess is no because why engage with someone who is prepared to come after you for mild and polite criticism, as she seems to have done with Favaro? Phipps was also a prominent critic of Stock and most academics I know think that what happened to Stock was a disgrace.

does the testing for chromosomes , still hold for eg the xx,xy ? so even if you think your x then via a genetic test it will be what your genetics are ?