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

@AccidentallyWesAnderson Sometimes you don’t get what you want. But hope got something. Redirect all questions to @Spring025

😂 I’m all good. @Spring025 summed it up perfectly.

Phoenix on Roseneil’s comments.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1904806273863790885.html

Sussex appealing this would be Wilde suing Queensberry for libel level stupidity.

Does this mark the beginning of free speech and healthy debate returning to university campuses? I hope Uni of Leeds is paying attention regarding the treatment or Connie Shaw.

There are so many such injustices, I had to google Connie Shaw:
Gender-critical student suspended from university radio after posting interview with detransitioner – The Free Speech Union

Thank you for your reply @Windscreenviper

Good 🎉

https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/news-blog-and-events/press-and-media/university-of-sussex-fined-585-000-for-free-speech-and-governance-breaches/

https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/media/hcllzxwx/university_sussex_free_speech_case_report.pdf

Not sure if this has already been posted the OFS blog and the report itself. The blog also gives a link to how to report any other free speech issues that students/staff may have with other Unis regulated by the OFS.

Apologies if posted elsewhere.

Ha, I was too kind. Jo Phoenix has given the VC's mess of contradictions an F!

I suspect the OfS found they didn’t feel Sussex had anything to say on the matter beyond “We are liberal and progressive and trans inclusive/we’re on the right side of history/TERFs are bad/[something about pronouns]/BE KIND”.

You'd not need to hear much more of that before you started to develop a migraine, I should imagine.

I'm now quite interested to know what the University think they could have said in defence.

Quite!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Stock

Stock is acknowledged as a prominent gender-critical feminist. She has opposed transgender self-identification in regard to proposed reforms to the 2004 UK Gender Recognition Act, and has argued that allowing self-identification would "threaten a secure understanding of the concept 'lesbian'". She has said that many trans women are "still males with male genitalia, many are sexually attracted to females, and they should not be in places where females undress or sleep in a completely unrestricted way." She has denied opposing trans rights, saying, "I gladly and vocally assert the rights of trans people to live their lives free from fear, violence, harassment or any discrimination" and "I think that discussing female rights is compatible with defending these trans rights".

In her 2021 article "What is a woman", Stock outlines her view that there are two immutable sexes (male and female), that the categories of "man" and "woman" are decided by biological sex not gender identity, and that views on language to establish more inclusive definitions are "hopeless".

Students and academics began to criticise Stock's views in 2018, when she spoke against proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act; the changes would have allowed people of all ages to legally self-identify as a particular gender without the requirement of a psychological or medical diagnosis. She received death threats as a result of her position.

Still wondering which 'ideal' here is problematic.

It's really a curiousity.

Is it lesbians can only be female?
Is it that you can change sex? (Which you can't)
Is it that gender shouldn't be conflated with sex? (Like a full on record which states this harms trans people)
Is it that makes should be allowed free access to changing rooms / female only spaces? (Which is potentially illegal, and at direct odds with the exception clause in the Equality Act)
Is it that she opposes self ID, like the majority of the population of this country?

Honestly I'm struggling with where the controversy actually is here!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c74k2mpp02go
New article.

Arif Ahmed, OfS director for freedom of speech, said the fine could have been as high as £3.7m and there was "potential for higher fines in the future".

Universities have told the OfS they were concerned about how to uphold free speech while preventing hate speech.

The University of Sussex was the first to be fined under new powers given to the OfS in January.

The higher education regulator's investigation examined the university's trans and non-binary equality policy, which said that course material must "positively represent trans people and trans lives" and also said "transphobic propaganda... [would] not be tolerated".

The watchdog said the "chilling effect" this would have on anyone wanting to voice an opposing view meant the university failed in its duty to uphold freedom of speech on campus.

Surely you can say something negative about a group without being phobic, if it's factually accurate and backed with robust evidence?! You know, public interest defence or holding power to account or scandal type stuff that should be part of public discourse.

Saying that lesbians can't be male is one such point because there's a conflict issue.

This isn't bloody difficult despite the whining. These universities are clearly as thick as mince despite all the supposedly clever people in them!

An new article in the Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2025/mar/26/institutions-fear-bigger-penalties-after-landmark-university-of-sussex-fine

I wonder if they're investigating the OU?

"The higher education regulator's investigation examined the university's trans and non-binary equality policy, which said that course material must "positively represent trans people and trans lives""

I find this confusing.

I'm trying to imagine this concept in another context "must positively represent women and women's lives" - how would you write anything meaningful about women? Would it apply to all women? How would you write about domestic violence? Michelle Mone? Could you criticise Margaret Thatcher?

They didn't speak to us!
Oh, they only communicated by post.
No meetings!
Well, no substantive meetings.
Waah! They didn't believe our bullshit! It's soooOOOOoooOO unfaaaaaiir!

"Margaret Thatcher was a wonderful Prime Minister who was strong and was highly respected around the world." aren't words you'd expect to hear coming from a leftie academic of a certain age thats for sure!

😂

How far Sussex Uni have fallen, since their glory days with Sir Harry Kroto. He was such an inspiration to young scientists. I had some wonderful master-classes with him, and attended brilliant talks in the Gardner Arts Centre (as it was known then).

Objectively, feelings can't be more important than facts. Otherwise, there are no firm foundations to build our lives and societies upon.

The Guardian article makes it all sound very dry and academic, as if Prof Stock was never bullied, harassed or eventually driven from her job as a result of the way the University allowed her to be treated.

A good article in tonight’s Times: https://www.thetimes.com/article/e985f191-e20d-4b25-9d8b-e57c3fcb80b1?shareToken=ba09d39585a749c3f1e1b6cae8fbedd8 (it’s a share token version)

I work in academia and people were talking about about this in the office this afternoon. General consensus was “No matter whether you agree or not, you can’t treat people like that”.

( I resisted a victory lap of the kitchen. )

I heard the news whilst driving into work and literally cheered out loud.

At the time I couldn't believe how badly Prof Stock had been treated and it seemed liked the Uni were getting away with it...until now!

I believe the Uni are being disingenuous as surely academics can understand the difference between reasoned arguments, differing views and bullying.

surely academics can understand the difference between reasoned arguments, differing views and bullying

I think we have more than enough evidence from tribunal testimonies to confidently answer "no' to that.