University of Sussex fined £585,000 by Office for Students

[OhBuggerandArse]

The inquiry in the wake of Kathleen Stock's experience has finally been completed:

'An English university is set to be fined a record £585,000 over allegations it failed to uphold free speech and academic freedom, in a landmark ruling in the debate over student rights on campus. England’s higher education regulator found “significant and serious breaches” of free speech and governance issues at the University of Sussex, according to a draft press release seen by the Financial Times. The Office for Students press release, to be published on Wednesday, said policies intended to prevent abuse or harassment of certain groups on campus had created “a chilling effect” that might cause staff and students to “self-censor”.'

Sussex 'has reacted furiously...'

https://www.ft.com/content/d39f0db7-877a-4cf3-8c12-dd5581eecd0b?fbclid=IwY2xjawJP_1RleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHVWF1ZXM3cKbxGAvtKfecgeMyAXNae5933M9a3dru0zohKTe7Vk24foIeA_aem_HpdtsUQc6ipMGY9J5AGFWQ

Really good point!

The 'they-only-found-two-measly-little-historic-breaches' line doesn't work if as you say, thenoisiesttermagant, one of them was the very thing that prevented Stock from enjoying the academic freedom that Roseneil claims to uphold, and emboldened and protected her tormenters.

Her silence around what actually happened to Doc Stock is drowning out anything she says about respecting academic freedom.

Did you notice her use of the word 'equalities' rather than 'equality'? It's been noticed before that people who refer to the Equality Act as the 'Equalities Act' often re- or mis-interpreted what it says about women's rights, so everybody can have 'an Equality' that suits them.

It is fine by me that VCs criticise the investigation process. That is free speech at the end of the day.

But to not acknowledge that the university had an issue of any kind is beyond telling. They gave lip service at the time to free speech, yet did not do anything to stop breaches of it. Indeed their actions ie the permitted hounding of Prof Stock by staff and students emboldened by the types of documents highlighted in the investigation tell a very different story.

No acknowledgement of this deficit in that article. Just repeats of the quote someone in PR probably drafted for them.

They see this as an us and them issue and can see no wrong doing on their part. That is what concerns me most. Zero reflection.

I’m sending her to the exclusion room indefinitely

As to what happened at Sussex in 2021/2022, you have to go back a lot longer. Much of the story can be pieced together from social media posts (some of which have now been deleted) and publications.

It all started in 2018, when reform of the GRA and self-ID was on the table in the UK. The Sussex LGBT staff network officially supported self-ID. Sussex introduced policies based on self-ID. Staff were encouraged, often by activist colleagues, to introduce pronoun rounds & pronouns in email signatures, all in the name of making trans people feel better about themselves. Stock decided to speak out publicly. She was then bullied by fellow academics and students.

This rumbled on throughout 2019, then covid arrived and made everything worse as it’s one thing to confront somebody in person but another thing to get at them online.

In autumn 2021, it all escalated as it was the first term when students properly returned to campus. For a flavour of the self-righteousness of some of these students, check out this article:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10098351/Anonymous-trans-mob-defend-cloak-dagger-crusade-against-feminist-professor.html

It really was a different time and while that doesn’t excuse anything, it explains a lot.

It’s laughable that they’re still claiming that Kathleen Stock was free to carry on with her work, conveniently ignoring the fact that she needed security protection in order to safely enter her workplace. Where are the ‘academic freedoms’ when an academic has to be protected from students and some staff?! For stating biological reality. Please someone make it make sense!

But if she was tasked with sorting the mess out and given the power to sack wholesale if needed there would not be the type of PR pushback in the official statements.
It would be we fell short... this is a learing...

And how many students do a deep dive into the teaching staff involved in their courses? How many would not pick the Uni or leave mid course if staff were replaced by visiting or temp staff who were able to deliver the same materials/grading?

The problem would be that the Uni was not prepared to finance the short term cost needed to push a culture change. And by that I mean have a list of subsitutes ready start applying the bullying policy from the top down. And make it clear to students that protesting outside of the "safespace" zones would result in no Uni awards being issued. And bringing in a leader/team who are willing to push the changes through.
So the fine was a cheep option.

She / they chose to let the clock run off on the bullying and choose to still leave these staff in place.

And the Uni has a reputation risk as I would downgrade any student coming out as a future HR problem and lacking the mental flexability to use an opposing view to problem solve. So the real test will be benchmarking how many students are in quality jobs on leaving or 2-3 years out.

There are two pages I haven’t read yet, so someone else might have commented, but I think the VC back then did publically state that they supported her AND she was promoted from Dr to Professor, so she did get some surface level support.

What they failed to do was to apply consequences against those who set out to bully her and thus allowed them to go on doing it, unhindered. Universities need to start using their powers to discipline students and staff who bully others. Students who consistently harass lecturers need to be told to stop, and if they don’t, they need to lose their university place.

That’s one of the reasons a lot of problems are occurring now. There are no negative consequences for poor behaviour. Students are paying customers instead of humble undergraduates who are glad to have been offered the opportunity. It’s not a healthy position.

From the Reddit thread, posted by Eresh:

The alternative to free speech is letting the loudest or most violent or most influential group win by default because they stop other ideas being aired. Which some would say is fine as long as it is their ideas winning. Until it isn’t.

Is that DARVO, or just a stunning lack of self awareness?

MariedeGournay

Did you notice her use of the word 'equalities' rather than 'equality'? It's been noticed before that people who refer to the Equality Act as the 'Equalities Act' often re- or mis-interpreted what it says about women's rights, so everybody can have 'an Equality' that suits them.

The people who mostly pluralise it are the ones who read and take on propaganda from Stonewall, Mermaids and Co.

Youre right, but then it was reported by the BBC only last December that they are trying to cut 300 jobs:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyv3jn92d4o

Also reported in October that they are actually losing money on UK students which is not being made up this year by fees from international students:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3e9g79xz29o

So I suspect the finances for this financial year will not be pretty reading.

Just read the DM article. The hypocrisy is breath-taking, quote from 'Rio' who, tbf, did identify herself

'It's cloak and dagger, but that's not the way we want it. The masks, it's not meant to be threatening. It's just for the protection of people that want to be vocal.

And the dressing in black? Worried about stains I imagine but not on their consciences.

'No one wants to lose their place at university, but we don't want to sacrifice our right to defend ourselves with our words.'

Stock's place at University, her right to words?

The then VC, Tickell, is quoted saying they'd investigate anyone who could be identified. I know I'm cynical but I'm sure there was a 'wink, wink' in there. How about, at least, getting campus security to see them off?

You make some interesting points about trans people in your post
RedToothBrush · Today 11:06
which I think may get lost as the discussion returns to the main topic i.e. Sussex Uni.

Briefly - I acknowledge what you say about young people being vulnerable to the cult-like allure of transgenderism, and we often express sympathy here for people who have damaged their bodies and condemned themselves to a lifetime of medical interventions on the mistaken premise that they have changed sex.

We have been told we must #bekind, but there's nothing kind about NOT intervening and saying stop, you are being sold an illusion, you'll end up physically damaged and still the same biological sex you started out in, and you may well find that you have created more psychological and social problems for yourself than those you sought to solve by transitioning.

The expression 'cruel to be kind' comes to mind - it might seem cruel to say to a boy who proclaims he is really a girl, or vice versa - not you are not, you can't change sex, you are what you are, so how can we help you feel better about grow into the sex you were born into?

I agree with acknowledging the vulnerability of young trans people, and I think we're only doing half the job if we acknowledge it retrospectively - intervening when they are vulnerable to the trans cult but before they've taken any irreversible steps is the best way to #bekind. Or #cruel2bekind?

So acknowledging your thoughts, before I move back to Sussex😡

I have never heard of any student or staff losing their uni place or job as a result of harassing Kathleen Stock.

‘The masks, it’s not meant to be threatening’?! Not meant to be threatening, you have got to be kidding me, who the hell wouldn’t be threatened by that? It’s sheer lunacy 🤦‍♀️

Wherever people hide their faces to protest there is a problem.

It says on so many levels there's not free speech.

Adam Tickell had already been appointed to his Birmingham post when he made that statement in support of Kathleen Stock. He left Sussex at the end of that term and started at Birmingham in January 2022.

I do not agree with the ideals of Kathleen Stock. HOWEVER, UoS deserve this penalty and much more.

Students these days don’t know the difference between a literal fight and critical thinking and now the university doesn’t either! I find it sad, but mostly scary.

As an educational institution, UoS

• should know and teach the difference between theory and practise.
• know and teach that theory is there to be accepted or rejected
• know theory is part of critical thinking and critical debate which is an essential for university level education and a KEY LIFE SKILL
• demonstrate this to students who are leaving university not knowing the difference between all of the above

Imagine going to uni as student and telling your lecturer who has dedicated their life to their subject that ‘no I don’t want that on the course’? Dictating what is taught to them. Please.

The TEF and funding model of student fees has decimated the quality of university education. It’s utterly brain-drained from students dictating what they do and don’t want do or learn.

It’s difficult to #be kind to groups of people shouting, throwing things and wearing black balaclavas. They look intimidating. They look like thugs.

Interested to understand what “ideals” of Kathleen Stock that you disagree with. There’s a lot of misinformation out there.

I do not agree with the ideals of Kathleen Stock.

You mean that sex continues to exist regardless of gender identity?!

She wasn’t there at the time- she doesn’t have to defend anything at all. She is well positioned to talk about how they’ve changed and recognise freedom of speech as integral to intellectual pursuit and the essence of a university. She’s made a choice. Long may it haunt her.

@RedToothBrush and @Ereshkigalangcleg

I won’t be elaborating as I’m really not interested in a days long unpicking of this. It’s been done to death. Sorry if it disappoints folks.

You mean you don't actually know what happened nor what Kathleen Stock believes but you don't want to admit that?

Fair enough.

We all know the score.

You’re free to think that for yourself.

I am indeed. You aren't demonstrating anything different.

We aren't dumb.