Sally Hines

[WandsOut]

https://x.com/sally_hines/status/1836778288112370076?s=46

"I wish I knew whether the high profile GCs who have a political and policy background and a level of legal knowledge, and yet repeatedly use mantras such as ‘sex based rights’ and ‘GC beliefs as protected’ are wilfully engaging in disinformation practices or are wildly ignorant.

The first is shocking and the latter pitiful. I’m not thinking about the shock jocks and grifters such as KJM, but GCs with a policy, research and/or academic role. Do they make things up knowingly or get things very wrong?

I’m not talking about theoretical or political understandings or perspectives which are to be invested and believed in - or not. But substantive factors. For eg, whether or not there should be ‘sex based rights’ is an opinion, a normative question.

Stating that these rights exist though is wrong. And this is why there is so little GC research published in academic journals. It’s not silencing, it’s incoherence and falsehoods. The ideal public arena for GC thought is the shock, and tease, tabloid opinion pieces.

But if one wants to be active in research, policy…

You really can’t go around just making things up and get a reputable publication. You can fool the Tories and you can be used by the far right, but you can’t get past Reviewer 2"

Is she fucking stupid?

Goady, wrong and repellent.

Is she fucking stupid?

yes.*
next question?

*the good thing is the more she writes the more people are exposed to her utter two-short-planks-ness

www.mygwork.com/en/my-g-news/university-professor-faces-criticism-after-asking-if-transphobic-lesbians-can-be-shaggable

Homophobic and lesbophobic too it seems!

one of the replies says something like "the only sex based rights in the UK is that of male primorgeniture"

WTF.

we know that the male heir can claim to be a transgender woman and still inherit titles, money, properties. But the oldest daughter cannot claim to be a transgender man and insert herself into the "natural" order of inheritence / heirship. And of course because it benefits men, nobody gaf about it.

notwithstanding that the entire thread is a load of guff, this one really stood out.

herriotts.wordpress.com/2018/10/13/the-usual-suspects-sally-hines/

"Pregnant men"

Whenever I think who her Dad was I feel sad.

She’s not Barry Hines daughter is she????

She's such a nitwit

I remember discussing in tutorials in uni about 'sex based rights' in the 90s. It was in the context of industrial relations provisions for female people.

Is she fucking stupid?

Indubitably.

Yes, she is.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Hines

oh god no. I had never made the connection. Is it really Barry?
(he taught my mum when she went back to uni in her 50s)

Imagine making up the vaguest most feelings-based philosophy of all time and then accusing everyone else of being incoherent ...

Occasionally some trans activist will pop up and say "nobody's saying sex doesn't exist!" But this sort of screed shows once again that there are plenty of people who, at the very least, consider sex to be of no social importance.

I've seen some ironic posts from the TAs in my time but this one has got to take the biscuit.

Accusations are always admissions with the gender-addled, personality disordered and those who've been on the wine...

I was very kind and helpful, I posted this link:

https://www.lewissilkin.com/en/insights/gender-critical-beliefs-in-the-workplace

... and advised Sally to read it, so's not to make such a fool of herself in future.

"I wish I knew whether the high profile GCs who have a political and policy background and a level of legal knowledge, and yet repeatedly use mantras such as ‘sex based rights’ and ‘GC beliefs as protected’ are wilfully engaging in disinformation practices or are wildly ignorant.

Maybe they're just pissed all the time, what do you reckon, Sally?

Obviously provocative obviously attention seeking given the claims.
Eitherway who cares it doesnt matter, theyre just wasting our time.
If only we had just ignored these people IW etc, we would have got so much more done and this would have been over so much quicker.
When they said NO DEBATE we should have just said fine, and got on with it.

Instead we have spent 6 years trying to be reasonable with the unreasonable,
trying to convince the genuinely deluded, pleading with the sociopathic and engaging with those whose only aim was to point score.
It has demoralised, weakened and distracted us.

The mothers among us recognise the dynamic, we have been engaging with toddlers in ageing bodies who have been rebelling against us in one form or another.

As the adults in the room we should have ignored them from the get go and worked around them, thats the one thing they cant stand

Highly enjoyable word salad

Sex-based rights are enshrined in the Equality Act (and before that, in the Sex Discrimination Act and the Equal Pay Act). Is she really not aware of that, or is she just a massive troll?

I can never quite believe that Sally Hines is real, and not a Titania McGrath type character invented to make online wokelords look stupid.

I think I've seen it argued that the Equality Act doesn't give you rights only protection from discrimination hence there are no sex based rights. The usual linguistic slight of hand.

You are not alone there!

What would be a short hand term for the enforceable right not to be discriminated against on the basis of one's sex?

Fucking hell. I bet he is spinning!