Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Letter from academics concerned about the Cass Review

136 replies

MidsomerMurmurs · 15/04/2024 07:25

Sally Hines et al have written a letter…
https://uncommon-scents.blogspot.com/2024/04/letter-from-academics-concerned-about.html?m=1

Worth a read, both for the quality of its argument and for the list of signatories.

https://twitter.com/lecanardnoir/status/1779535066944634919
When your letter against the Cass Review is signed by Andrew Wakefield, then some alarm bells ought to go off that you are on the wrong side

https://twitter.com/lecanardnoir/status/1779535066944634919

OP posts:
Thread gallery
20
RethinkingLife · 15/04/2024 09:53

There are many, many sensible academics across a wide variety of fields. Part of that sense is reflected in avoiding an area that is known to destroy careers and can be financially ruinous.

RedToothBrush · 15/04/2024 09:56

WhatsTheUseOfWorrying · 15/04/2024 09:32

I won’t be thanked for this, but…I really think this is another example of posturing academics, many in frankly Mickey Mouse social ‘sciences’, parading ‘Dr’ in public and expecting to be thought some sort of maven.

AFAIC this just shows why we should ignore academics unless they work in core disciplines and have genuine standing: someone like, say, Professor Robert Winston.

See what I find depressing is that I'm a media and history grad. My degree is actually useful in terms of marketing and understanding target audiences and a huge part of my degree has been applicable in terms of being able to critical disassemble the bollocks using my understanding of propaganda (which is part of advertising too btw), politics and history. Its all about holding power to account. It also covered ethics in media and technology change again which has proved to be useful.

Yet media is always regarded as a mickey mouse degree. The reality is there are good media degrees and there are terrible ones.

A lot of these academics are doing stuff that isn't applicable and useful to the real world. Its just a pet project that no one else is ever going to give a shit about. And no one is looking at this and asking questions about its real world value and how many experts we need in certain fields.

Also, even though I am an arts grad, I am capable of learning and understanding at least the basics of bias in research, methodology and quality of research to a point where I know where something is utter bullshit. And I wouldn't go around questioning the methodology of Hilary Cass because she clearly knows what she's doing because I understand that!

Studying media and history also goes into a lot about understanding the quality of sources and bias. It does it in a different way but it is very much about understanding people with differing views and where this might be problematic to your understanding. It covers politics and propaganda in examining sources.

For supposedly clever people, even in completely unrelated fields, they are undeniably academically illiterate. Some of them are historians and media specialists and they aren't applying any level of quality analysis that I would expect even from those fields using the methodology applicable to those fields.

I go back to my point about good degrees and terrible degrees and it not just being the subject thats the problem.

These are people who have hidden in academia for years and years and no one has questioned their presence there.

They need to.

We are living at a time where there still this thing which Nigel Farage termed as 'the liberal elite' who are out of touch with reality. This sentiment has political traction and unfortunately the calibre of academics who spout bullshit like this only serves to help this. The far right damn well can capitalise on this nonsense. Just yesterday I was talking to a parent of a kid in my sons class and she was saying she was contemplating voting Reform. It makes me despair.

The centre ground really needs to take a look at this and start to have a clear out of grifters in academia and grifters in the charity sector who are there for no ones benefit but their own pay packets. Its not just embarassing, its politically dangerous in a number of ways which go way beyond the Cass Review.

TheCountessofFitzdotterel · 15/04/2024 10:09

Ereshkigalangcleg · 15/04/2024 09:22

The fact that their challenges are so laughably feeble just makes the report end up looking stronger.

To an extent, but it's allowing the spread of disinformation by trans rights activists.

I see your point.
But it’s not as if Billy Bragg et al would have thrown up their hands and admitted they were wrong, they would either have ignored it or picked another one from the menu of Cass-dismissing options, eg It Doesn’t Tell Us Anything We Didn’t Already Know.

EdithStourton · 15/04/2024 10:11

RethinkingLife · 15/04/2024 09:33

Testing Treatments is one of the best guides you could ever read or listen to on this. So straightforward and I recommend it to everyone.

Free download of the book and audiobook: https://www.testingtreatments.org/

English: https://en.testingtreatments.org/

I have a long journey coming up so that is one to download!

Topofthemountain · 15/04/2024 10:13

Dr Hane Maung seems to have packed an awful lot into his relatively short life if you look at his LinkedIn.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 15/04/2024 10:19

I see your point.
But it’s not as if Billy Bragg et al would have thrown up their hands and admitted they were wrong, they would either have ignored it or picked another one from the menu of Cass-dismissing options, eg It Doesn’t Tell Us Anything We Didn’t Already Know.

Fair point, and there was a bit more flailing around before TRAs settled on this position as they seem to mostly have done, so first you had people who were normally in agreement on "trans children" praising the "important" review and saying it has been "hijacked by terfs to claim something it doesn't say" and blaming the "toxic debate" on women like JKR.

EdithStourton · 15/04/2024 10:21

The centre ground really needs to take a look at this and start to have a clear out of grifters in academia and grifters in the charity sector who are there for no ones benefit but their own pay packets. Its not just embarassing, its politically dangerous in a number of ways which go way beyond the Cass Review.
@RedToothBrush FWIW I totally agree. There are grifters in the charity sector who really need to be told to stick to their charities' core aims.

DialSquare · 15/04/2024 10:22

Ereshkigalangcleg · 15/04/2024 09:41

I won’t be thanked for this, but…I really think this is another example of posturing academics, many in frankly Mickey Mouse social ‘sciences’, parading ‘Dr’ in public and expecting to be thought some sort of maven.

I don't know why you think you won't be thanked, it seems dead on accurate to me! I can't use the MN thanks feature because I'm on the app though.

I use the app but I've always got a version of MN open in safari so I can go in and thank people.
So if anyone has received thanks from me, you now know I made a special effort to do so!

Dumbledoreslemonsherbets · 15/04/2024 10:27

RedToothBrush · 15/04/2024 09:56

See what I find depressing is that I'm a media and history grad. My degree is actually useful in terms of marketing and understanding target audiences and a huge part of my degree has been applicable in terms of being able to critical disassemble the bollocks using my understanding of propaganda (which is part of advertising too btw), politics and history. Its all about holding power to account. It also covered ethics in media and technology change again which has proved to be useful.

Yet media is always regarded as a mickey mouse degree. The reality is there are good media degrees and there are terrible ones.

A lot of these academics are doing stuff that isn't applicable and useful to the real world. Its just a pet project that no one else is ever going to give a shit about. And no one is looking at this and asking questions about its real world value and how many experts we need in certain fields.

Also, even though I am an arts grad, I am capable of learning and understanding at least the basics of bias in research, methodology and quality of research to a point where I know where something is utter bullshit. And I wouldn't go around questioning the methodology of Hilary Cass because she clearly knows what she's doing because I understand that!

Studying media and history also goes into a lot about understanding the quality of sources and bias. It does it in a different way but it is very much about understanding people with differing views and where this might be problematic to your understanding. It covers politics and propaganda in examining sources.

For supposedly clever people, even in completely unrelated fields, they are undeniably academically illiterate. Some of them are historians and media specialists and they aren't applying any level of quality analysis that I would expect even from those fields using the methodology applicable to those fields.

I go back to my point about good degrees and terrible degrees and it not just being the subject thats the problem.

These are people who have hidden in academia for years and years and no one has questioned their presence there.

They need to.

We are living at a time where there still this thing which Nigel Farage termed as 'the liberal elite' who are out of touch with reality. This sentiment has political traction and unfortunately the calibre of academics who spout bullshit like this only serves to help this. The far right damn well can capitalise on this nonsense. Just yesterday I was talking to a parent of a kid in my sons class and she was saying she was contemplating voting Reform. It makes me despair.

The centre ground really needs to take a look at this and start to have a clear out of grifters in academia and grifters in the charity sector who are there for no ones benefit but their own pay packets. Its not just embarassing, its politically dangerous in a number of ways which go way beyond the Cass Review.

100% agree.

My only question is why this list of signatories are still employed.

I work in the private sector and people have been fired for far less. Making a public pronouncement on something like this, denigrating the work of actual medical experts, using such anti science bullshit, is surely gross misconduct at least. And that's before you get to the actively supporting destruction of safeguarding and child sterilisation.

KellieJaysLapdog · 15/04/2024 10:30

Topofthemountain · 15/04/2024 10:13

Dr Hane Maung seems to have packed an awful lot into his relatively short life if you look at his LinkedIn.

Thanks for that - I went to have a look.

Does this mean he must have voluntarily given up his GMC registration? No sign of him on their website.

I realise some people decide medicine isn’t for them fairly quickly but giving up after just one year of being a registrar seems pretty odd? Any MN (medical!) doctors about?

Letter from academics concerned about the Cass Review
Letter from academics concerned about the Cass Review
Letter from academics concerned about the Cass Review
Dumbledoreslemonsherbets · 15/04/2024 10:30

These academics really think they can do whatever they want and get away with it. If this is what they're doing publicly you've got to wonder how they're abusing their positions behind closed doors.

I increasingly think the university sector in this country deserves to fail and start again only with decent academics with integrity and brains, like Jo P.

KellieJaysLapdog · 15/04/2024 10:38

This made me LOL.

Brings to mind a certain Mandy Rice-Davies attributed aphorism…

’Well he would say that, wouldn’t he?’

https://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/publications/gender-affirming-hormone-treatment-for-trans-adolescents(b2c72201-5920-4769-9008-787134bc866d).html

Letter from academics concerned about the Cass Review
Letter from academics concerned about the Cass Review
SnakesAndArrows · 15/04/2024 10:42

WagnersFourthSymphony · 15/04/2024 08:06

For those of you on Xitter, this analytic takedown by Benjamin Ryan of the complaints about Cass is worth a read.
https://twitter.com/benryanwriter/status/1779003988647494097#

TLDR: they haven't read the report properly and they are talking rubbish

I’m having a hard time with understanding (and I’m using that word loosely) what’s going on on that thread.

What I think is happening is that Ben Ryan is saying that all the studies were reviewed. Some of them were so poor as to not really meet even a lay description of “study” so were disregarded. Some of them made an attempt to be scientific studies but their methodology (according to long standing means of determining such things) didn’t cut it, so their conclusions cannot be relied upon. A couple were reasonably high quality studies with conclusions that can be relied upon.

Is it that the alleged signatories do not understand that some studies - maybe ones carried out by my (or indeed Ben Goldacre’s) cat - are just not studies? Or are they saying the grading of the studies is invalid? Or that poor studies should be included and given as much weight as the good ones anyway??

RethinkingLife · 15/04/2024 10:44

KellieJaysLapdog · 15/04/2024 10:30

Thanks for that - I went to have a look.

Does this mean he must have voluntarily given up his GMC registration? No sign of him on their website.

I realise some people decide medicine isn’t for them fairly quickly but giving up after just one year of being a registrar seems pretty odd? Any MN (medical!) doctors about?

TV doctor Michael Moseley is not on the register. It's not that unusual for people who take a different career path. They've no need for the registration so they let it lapse.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 15/04/2024 10:45

Isn't Sally Hines one of these "academics" whose job wouldn't exist if everyone agreed that gender is a load of sexist rubbish we should all be free to completely ignore?

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 15/04/2024 10:47

RedToothBrush · 15/04/2024 09:56

See what I find depressing is that I'm a media and history grad. My degree is actually useful in terms of marketing and understanding target audiences and a huge part of my degree has been applicable in terms of being able to critical disassemble the bollocks using my understanding of propaganda (which is part of advertising too btw), politics and history. Its all about holding power to account. It also covered ethics in media and technology change again which has proved to be useful.

Yet media is always regarded as a mickey mouse degree. The reality is there are good media degrees and there are terrible ones.

A lot of these academics are doing stuff that isn't applicable and useful to the real world. Its just a pet project that no one else is ever going to give a shit about. And no one is looking at this and asking questions about its real world value and how many experts we need in certain fields.

Also, even though I am an arts grad, I am capable of learning and understanding at least the basics of bias in research, methodology and quality of research to a point where I know where something is utter bullshit. And I wouldn't go around questioning the methodology of Hilary Cass because she clearly knows what she's doing because I understand that!

Studying media and history also goes into a lot about understanding the quality of sources and bias. It does it in a different way but it is very much about understanding people with differing views and where this might be problematic to your understanding. It covers politics and propaganda in examining sources.

For supposedly clever people, even in completely unrelated fields, they are undeniably academically illiterate. Some of them are historians and media specialists and they aren't applying any level of quality analysis that I would expect even from those fields using the methodology applicable to those fields.

I go back to my point about good degrees and terrible degrees and it not just being the subject thats the problem.

These are people who have hidden in academia for years and years and no one has questioned their presence there.

They need to.

We are living at a time where there still this thing which Nigel Farage termed as 'the liberal elite' who are out of touch with reality. This sentiment has political traction and unfortunately the calibre of academics who spout bullshit like this only serves to help this. The far right damn well can capitalise on this nonsense. Just yesterday I was talking to a parent of a kid in my sons class and she was saying she was contemplating voting Reform. It makes me despair.

The centre ground really needs to take a look at this and start to have a clear out of grifters in academia and grifters in the charity sector who are there for no ones benefit but their own pay packets. Its not just embarassing, its politically dangerous in a number of ways which go way beyond the Cass Review.

I know someone who read jurisprudence at Oxford and trained as a solicitor at Slaughter and May. She reckons her media studies A-level is one of the most useful subjects she ever took and that some of the content should be compulsory for all secondary school age children.

KellieJaysLapdog · 15/04/2024 10:48

“Or that poor studies should be included and given as much weight as the good ones anyway??”

I think they are saying that the poor studies identify as good studies so should’ve been included and leaving them out means the so-called eminent Paediatric Consultant Dr Hilary Cass is just a cisheteronormative gatekeeping poorstudiesphobic bigot?

KellieJaysLapdog · 15/04/2024 10:50

Auto correct made my previous comment read ‘poo studies phobic’ which seems quite apt actually.

RethinkingLife · 15/04/2024 10:55

SnakesAndArrows · 15/04/2024 10:42

I’m having a hard time with understanding (and I’m using that word loosely) what’s going on on that thread.

What I think is happening is that Ben Ryan is saying that all the studies were reviewed. Some of them were so poor as to not really meet even a lay description of “study” so were disregarded. Some of them made an attempt to be scientific studies but their methodology (according to long standing means of determining such things) didn’t cut it, so their conclusions cannot be relied upon. A couple were reasonably high quality studies with conclusions that can be relied upon.

Is it that the alleged signatories do not understand that some studies - maybe ones carried out by my (or indeed Ben Goldacre’s) cat - are just not studies? Or are they saying the grading of the studies is invalid? Or that poor studies should be included and given as much weight as the good ones anyway??

Ryan starts out by clarifying that the famous graphic of 'discarding 50 of 52 studies' is not from the Cass Review, it's from an earlier systematic review that was conducted by NICE.

Ryan then diverts into explaining what the remarks about the studies mean (they're standardised outputs from the GRADE tool that is used to give a formal assessment of the quality and reliability of a study).

You're spot on about the rest.

As for what is passing through the mind of the signatories aside from being driven to sign by ideology, I don't know. It does, however, prompt thoughts of

  • Lifton's 8 Criteria for Thought Reform
  • epistemic bubbles and echo chambers
  • the OU signatories to the letter about Jo Phoenix, none of whom could recollect why they signed the letter, whether they agreed with the contents or were being 'allies,' or who wrote it.

An ‘epistemic bubble’ is an informational network from which relevant voices have been excluded by omission. That omission might be purposeful: we might be selectively avoiding contact with contrary views because, say, they make us uncomfortable. As social scientists tell us, we like to engage in selective exposure, seeking out information that confirms our own worldview. But that omission can also be entirely inadvertent. Even if we’re not actively trying to avoid disagreement, our Facebook friends tend to share our views and interests. When we take networks built for social reasons and start using them as our information feeds, we tend to miss out on contrary views and run into exaggerated degrees of agreement.

An ‘echo chamber’ is a social structure from which other relevant voices have been actively discredited. Where an epistemic bubble merely omits contrary views, an echo chamber brings its members to actively distrust outsiders.

https://aeon.co/essays/why-its-as-hard-to-escape-an-echo-chamber-as-it-is-to-flee-a-cult

Lifton and others: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4382551-Live-not-by-lies-Solzhenitsyn-no-tambourines-involved?

<p><em>Photo by Jim Young/Reuters</em></p>

Why it’s as hard to escape an echo chamber as it is to flee a cult | Aeon Essays

First you don’t hear other views. Then you can’t trust them. Your personal information network entraps you just like a cult

https://aeon.co/essays/why-its-as-hard-to-escape-an-echo-chamber-as-it-is-to-flee-a-cult

EdithStourton · 15/04/2024 10:56

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 15/04/2024 10:47

I know someone who read jurisprudence at Oxford and trained as a solicitor at Slaughter and May. She reckons her media studies A-level is one of the most useful subjects she ever took and that some of the content should be compulsory for all secondary school age children.

I have a SIL who did media studies. She is extremely deft at exploding the bullshit another SIL puts out at regular intervals.

I had not previously connected these two facts.

MrsJellybee · 15/04/2024 10:58

I’m intrigued by the apostrophe in “trans peoples’ voices”. Is that a placement error or are some now referring to “Trans Peoples” in the same way as “Indigenous Peoples”?

ArabellaScott · 15/04/2024 10:58

https://philpeople.org/profiles/hane-htut-maung

TheCountessofFitzdotterel · 15/04/2024 11:01

Dumbledoreslemonsherbets · 15/04/2024 10:27

100% agree.

My only question is why this list of signatories are still employed.

I work in the private sector and people have been fired for far less. Making a public pronouncement on something like this, denigrating the work of actual medical experts, using such anti science bullshit, is surely gross misconduct at least. And that's before you get to the actively supporting destruction of safeguarding and child sterilisation.

I do find that strange that universities don’t take a stronger line on academics behaving badly on twitter with their institutional affiliation bringing their university into disrepute. For instance when they are drunk and abusive. Academics do get a lot of unearned respect (I used to be one so I can say that….) and I don’t think responsible behaviour in public social media is too much to ask; they have the option of doing it in locked down accounts or anonymously if they don’t want consequences.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 15/04/2024 11:08

MrsJellybee · 15/04/2024 10:58

I’m intrigued by the apostrophe in “trans peoples’ voices”. Is that a placement error or are some now referring to “Trans Peoples” in the same way as “Indigenous Peoples”?

Maybe it's just that people who like to get creative with pronouns also like to get creative with punctuation.

Swipe left for the next trending thread