What was that again?
Kathleen has closed her Twitter, I hope temporarily, and the Sussex UCU has deleted its statement, but Kiri Tunks hasn’t.
Let’s look at that first sentence in the third paragraph again.
Public discourses regularly devalue the lives of trans and nonbinary people and appeals to both employment rights and academic freedom are often instrumentalised in this context
That’s a very remarkable thing for a union to say. It has that whiff of “white women’s tears” contempt that we’ve become so accustomed to lately. Employment rights and academic freedom are supposed to be “instrumentalised” i.e. used to protect the academic worker; that’s what they’re for. It’s so revealing that these pathetic quislings frame that as illegitimate and Karenish.
For trans rights activists, it’s not necessary to think about what gender-critical voices have to say, it’s only necessary for them and their allies to understand that they’re wrong. Thus there are plenty of bogus rationalizations offered about those like Stock being wrong, but no evidence is provided, only accusations are flung. Such are the means TRAs and their allies use to achieve their ends and it’s not justifiable, not if it’s the truth that you really care about. No, all they care about is, in Orwell’s words, is their smelly little orthodoxies.
It’s all one ideology. Things that oppose the theory or its adherents in any way are bad. Things that support the theory or its adherents are good. When a legal protection is beneficial to them, it’s an inalienable human right. When a right presents an obstacle to them, it’s tyranny.
Thankfully, Stock’s account is back, now.