X Close

The Oxford kids are alright Students aren't the source of the culture wars — they're the solution

A cut-price Kendall Roy? (Greg Blatchford/CLICK NEWS AND MEDIA)


June 1, 2023   7 mins

Life as a gender-critical feminist can be quite strange. The first time I ever entered the Oxford Union, I was a 19-year-old fresher. All I really remember is getting very drunk on peach schnapps, crashing into a trestle table, and being asked to leave.

Fast forward 31 years, and I’m walking in there again, surrounded by security and being chased by photographers, accidentally dressed like a cut-price Kendall Roy from Succession. The image will make national front pages the next day. (Hilariously for our mutual friends, one of the presumed bodyguards is in fact my fellow philosopher friend Rob.)

Hustled by the Union’s reassuringly military-sounding bursar into a secret upstairs room in the building, I check Twitter. Rishi Sunak has tagged me in a supportive tweet. This will be the least weird thing to happen to me all day.

The morning had not started brilliantly — two consecutive trains cancelled, and I’d had to scramble around to find a local taxi driver who didn’t mind a four-hour round trip to London at short notice. By the time I made it, fairly late, to the driver taking me to Oxford, I had already aged several years.

Looking back, the younger version of me didn’t like the Union much, and I hardly ever went there. An institution completely independent of the wider university, it is mostly devoted to having debates. Back then, I thought it was an intimidating and archaic place, full of strident, cocky types who all wanted to be Prime Minister. I didn’t feel it was really for the likes of shy, awkward, comprehensive-schooled me. I certainly didn’t imagine that I’d one day be interviewed by its president about my views on gender.

I switch up my Kendall-Roy look to business-casual in a tiny bathroom, and then chat to committee members and Union staff. They seem excited but tense; occasionally, one wheels away to talk urgently on the phone. At one point, there is a muttered conversation about the welfare rooms being manned and ready to receive visitors. I wonder if that might be a slightly problematic verb to use.

For a while, as we wait, there is dead silence outside in the street, and I start to suspect that the whole thing is going to be rather anticlimactic. Eventually I hear the familiar sound of chanting outside and feel oddly relieved. At least I know this script — and not only from my former workplace.

Last November, I participated in a debate at the Oxford Union’s fellow institution, the Cambridge Union. There was a protest, and an attempt at disinvitation there too. So it seems I’m now a veteran of Oxbridge’s least athletic student Varsity match — and though it pains me to do so, I’m afraid I am going to have to declare the Light Blues the winner.

The motion we debated at The Other Place was not about sex and gender at all, but about whether there is a right to offend. Spoiler alert: I was on the side that argued that there is. The atmosphere as I entered that chamber was sombre and tense. Throughout the event, various young people bobbed up and down to denounce me, mostly for things I hadn’t ever said or written and didn’t believe.

Some appeared to think I was arguing that offence was a positive duty rather than a right (I wasn’t). Others didn’t care what I was saying, or indeed what I had ever said, but just wanted to feel the thrill of the pointed finger. In an update to the traditional mediaeval scenario, one organised chap read out his prepared denunciation from an iPad.

Protestors outside could be heard banging drums loudly, providing an unsettling percussive accompaniment to the speeches inside. The volume of drumming and yelling would increase each time I spoke, as coordinating messages flew between audience members and protestors.

Cambridge also provided a stunning bit of theatre: an undercover non-binary student called Kass cunningly disguised as a six-foot-plus man in a tuxedo. The results of Kass’s intervention upon my emotional equilibrium can be seen in the Channel 4 documentary Gender Wars, which coincidentally aired on the same day as the Oxford event.

Under false pretences, Kass had auditioned to speak for my side of the motion, arriving at the Union in full male-associated attire and dining convivially with me first, before sensationally dropping the act in order to denounce me as “disgusting” to everyone in the chamber. And things only went downhill from there. I was the only female speaker in the debate. Standing at full height next to me during their speech, Kass described to the audience how frightening it was to walk about the streets of Cambridge at night thanks to women like me.

In comparison to all this, the Oxford audience this week barely made any effort to make me feel awful. In fact, they offered enthusiastic applause as I entered the room. And in an unprecedented turn of events, many of my main objectors seemed actually to have read my book.

Even the four protestors who tried to create a rumpus inside the building were relatively meek. One stood up and shouted something, then left. Two others also shouted slogans rather apologetically, unfurled a flag, and threw some leaflets before hastily exiting too. The most intrepid of the four, dramatically unveiling a “No More Dead Trans Kids” T-shirt, used superglue to stick one hand to the floor right in front of me, but still complied docilely when five police officers — armed with blue plastic gloves and solvent, a lot of forms to fill in, and some very patient smiles — eventually arrived to sort it all out. The careful act of glueing itself seemed a bit Blue Peter.

After a nervous build-up, I started to enjoy myself, and it appeared to me that others in the chamber did too. There was a full and frank exchange of views, including some robust criticism of my position. Intellectual blows were landed on both sides. The Union President cornered me on an academic study that I didn’t know much about, while I managed to confuse him about which sense of “gender” he meant exactly (though, given the infinite flexibility of the term, who can blame him?). Various students queued up to quiz me on what they perceived to be errors in my reasoning, evidence base or attitude. I answered as best I could.

It seemed to me that the four protestors were not representative. I could be wrong, but I got the feeling that many in the chamber were pushing back against the sort of tired and hyperbolic cliches usually wielded to shut them up. Certainly, there was little apparent sympathy in the room for the superglued superhero, eventually escorted out to the sound of good-natured cheers and some booing. At times, the atmosphere bordered on riotous rather than rioting.

I found all of this quite promising. And even during the earlier Cambridge event, there had been another hopeful sign, not featured in the documentary. When it came to the moment for those in the packed room to file out and vote, the majority voted for our side of the motion, and the existence of a right to offend.

At both Cambridge and Oxford, I also had several enriching encounters with staunch defenders of my right to speak. A lot of these were with young gender-critical feminists, fired up by noticing the obvious inconsistencies and injustices in a supposedly “kind” worldview that tells women to put their own needs last. Some wanted me to sign their copies of my book. Others were keen to tell me their own stories of horrible social shunning for their beliefs.

One first year Cambridge student told me that, after writing a mildly gender-critical blog in defence of me, she had been ostracised and shamed by all the other women in her college year group, as well as by her own tutor. Another story I heard on Tuesday was about a young lesbian who had read my book and watched my talks, decided to defend my free speech publicly, and been kicked out of the Oxford LGBTQ+ student society as a result.

Other supportive students in Oxford, neither feminist nor anti-feminist, just seemed fed up with being emotionally blackmailed into stifled silence by a small group of childish and histrionic narcissists — among which they doubtless would include the occasional lecturer. And from within each Union, the committee members responsible for inviting me were totally impressive, standing resolute against pressure and showing exemplary resilience in the face of harsh criticism from some peers.

And I’m afraid I have even more disappointing news for those with unhealthy emotional attachments to the present culture wars. There were — indeed, undoubtedly still are — plenty of students who feel like this at my former workplace. I know they are there, either because they told me outright at the time, or because they demonstrated it to me via the open, inquisitive way they conducted themselves in the classroom.

I am sure that such students exist in every single UK university at the moment; I suspect there are thousands of them out there right now, muttering inwardly while listening to ever more dramatic tales of self-centring woe from fellow students, or eye-rolling inwardly as their lecturers give them pious homilies.

These students are a largely untapped asset to the project of detoxifying the current discourse around identity politics. Thanks to their relative youth, they tend to be sensitive, curious, idealistic but not fanatical, and genuinely want to understand the world. But they also want to play — with ideas, with jokes, with each other. Many have sufficiently rebellious or anarchic instincts to shrink from blatant attempts to manipulate and guilt-trip them. They are sick of being imprisoned in other people’s shame, guilt and paranoia. All we have to do is set them free.

This is not the fatuous argument, made by opportunistic identitarians and anti-woke warriors alike, that we should “listen to young people” — usually made while smoothly guiding listeners to exactly those young people whose views happen to coincide with their own. Nor is it the pretence that we oldies should just shut up and listen to young people generally, no matter what they say — as if today’s youth had miraculously gained hitherto unknown oracular powers, what with all that gaming and watching of TikTok videos. Of course, we shouldn’t be shy of arguing robustly with younger generations, when they talk what appears to be nonsense. They can both dish it and take it. The question is: can we?

In looking at some of the media coverage of my Oxford trip, it’s striking to me that certain journalists’ idea of balanced reporting is to interview, on one hand, Stock the supposedly offensive speaker, and on the other, students who say they feel threatened and frightened by my terrifying words. (The rough format goes as follows. Student: “I just feel exhausted constantly having to justify my existence every day!”. Interviewer: “What do you, Stock, say to the students who feel exhausted having to justify their existence every day?” Me, looking at said students, apparently with enough energy to drum and chant for hours: “Erm … I’m not sure. Maybe get their iron levels checked?”.)

Yet these are not the only students who have interests at stake. There are those who long to have robust arguments and vigorous disagreements with peers and elders, free from the fear that they will say something offensive and be punished accordingly. But these students don’t seem to get interviewed remotely as often. I don’t believe it’s because they wouldn’t speak to the media, in principle. Or at least — I think that if we collectively made it easier for some of them to ask for such things, greater argumentative disinhibition would become a more accepted norm quite fast, and a generation would collectively breathe a sigh of relief.

I don’t know how the younger version of me would look at present committee members, so impressively self-assured and full of vim, but this version of me (the Kendall Roy wannabe, that is) looks on with great affection and respect. In standing firm and holding a space where students are free to engage with big ideas in time-honoured, age-appropriate ways — whether by arguing, shouting, laughing, emoting wildly, or indeed glueing themselves to wooden floors — they are doing the world an enormous service. Perhaps we can relax a bit about the future after all.


Kathleen Stock is an UnHerd columnist and a co-director of The Lesbian Project.
Docstockk

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

161 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
J Bryant
J Bryant
11 months ago

I avoid reading most articles about the gender wars. It’s so tedious, ridiculous and depressing. But I couldn’t look away from the image at the top of this article.
There is the author, surrounded by burly guys (one of whom, she discloses, is actually a philosopher) and dressed like a Mob snitch heading into witness protection. But what is her crime? She will address a group of students and say, among many other things, and with greater sophistication than me, that a man isn’t a woman or vice versa. Cue the clatter of pearls being clutched in the Oxford Philosophy Common Room.
Most of the Oxford students might be alright, as the author generously suggests. They’re just laying low for fear of being ostracized for wrongspeak. I can believe that and sympathize with their predicament. But why are they so afraid? Because powerful institutions such as Oxford, Cambridge, the BBC, etc, etc, validate and enforce the nonsensical, destructive beliefs around gender and a host of other “progressive” issues.
I know I haven’t made a remotely original observation in this comment, but just look at the image at the top of this article for a moment. That is what the “elite” portion of Western society has wrought upon us. To add yet another unoriginal thought: a picture paints a thousand words.

Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
11 months ago
Reply to  J Bryant

Now I’m really stumped! The author is one of the people in the picture?! That, to me, is a picture of a group of men! Which one is she?!

Cynthia Potter
Cynthia Potter
11 months ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

Kathleen Stock doesn’t conform to regressive gender stereotypes. She’s doesn’t have to. Do you have a problem with that?

Steven Somsen
Steven Somsen
11 months ago
Reply to  Cynthia Potter

No she doesn’t indeed and she’s really good and yes, she is resisting something. Embracing femininity is tough for the likes of her.

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
11 months ago
Reply to  Cynthia Potter

regressive gender stereotypes like a man cannot become a woman?

Mark epperson
Mark epperson
11 months ago
Reply to  Cynthia Potter

I believe you have entirely missed the point of the article by a wide margin.

Steven Somsen
Steven Somsen
11 months ago
Reply to  Cynthia Potter

No she doesn’t indeed and she’s really good and yes, she is resisting something. Embracing femininity is tough for the likes of her.

Ethniciodo Rodenydo
Ethniciodo Rodenydo
11 months ago
Reply to  Cynthia Potter

regressive gender stereotypes like a man cannot become a woman?

Mark epperson
Mark epperson
11 months ago
Reply to  Cynthia Potter

I believe you have entirely missed the point of the article by a wide margin.

CF Hankinson
CF Hankinson
11 months ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

Amy the power of Kathleen Stock is that she doesn’t present as a feminine stereotype and yet is fighting forcefully that she is a woman.
And as a six foot tall woman probably with large feet, male clothes are easier to wear and look so good on her. It’s stylish practical and there is no thought of thinking or feeling that she is a man. It’s what first phase feminists in the Edwardian era called Rational Dress. And of course lesbians throughout time have liberated themselves from frills and frocks.
You can be a woman without make up without hair extensions without breast implants and plastic surgery it’s not only because she is s lesbian it’s because she is a feminist.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  CF Hankinson

Well said.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  CF Hankinson

Well said.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
11 months ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

You haven’t seemed to have read the article or else you are unfamiliar with her self-description as being dressed like ‘Kendall Roy’ of Succession fame.

joseph wilson
joseph wilson
11 months ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

you are a bit of an ars..ole. are you not.

Cynthia Potter
Cynthia Potter
11 months ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

Kathleen Stock doesn’t conform to regressive gender stereotypes. She’s doesn’t have to. Do you have a problem with that?

CF Hankinson
CF Hankinson
11 months ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

Amy the power of Kathleen Stock is that she doesn’t present as a feminine stereotype and yet is fighting forcefully that she is a woman.
And as a six foot tall woman probably with large feet, male clothes are easier to wear and look so good on her. It’s stylish practical and there is no thought of thinking or feeling that she is a man. It’s what first phase feminists in the Edwardian era called Rational Dress. And of course lesbians throughout time have liberated themselves from frills and frocks.
You can be a woman without make up without hair extensions without breast implants and plastic surgery it’s not only because she is s lesbian it’s because she is a feminist.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
11 months ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

You haven’t seemed to have read the article or else you are unfamiliar with her self-description as being dressed like ‘Kendall Roy’ of Succession fame.

joseph wilson
joseph wilson
11 months ago
Reply to  Amy Horseman

you are a bit of an ars..ole. are you not.

Marie Buckley
Marie Buckley
11 months ago
Reply to  J Bryant

I fully agree with everything you say. I would like to add that one organisation is in large part responsible for the current toxic culture and that is Stonewall and its CEO Nancy Kelly. They have adopted and promoted the most extreme position on every aspect of this issue, losing many of their members and founder members in the process. They have been the source of some poisonous rhetoric but what is worse, is they have managed to infiltrated so many of our institutions and companies with divisive, discriminatory and unlawful policies. I would pay to see a debate between Dr Kathleen Stock and Nancy Kelly.

Last edited 11 months ago by Marie Buckley
Wendy Barton
Wendy Barton
11 months ago
Reply to  Marie Buckley

i wouldn’t pay to hear Nancy Kelley. It would be a waste of my time.

Gordon Buckman
Gordon Buckman
11 months ago
Reply to  Wendy Barton

I wouldn’t urinate on her if she was on fire…

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago
Reply to  Gordon Buckman

How perfectly put Sir.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago
Reply to  Gordon Buckman

How perfectly put Sir.

Keith Johnson
Keith Johnson
11 months ago
Reply to  Wendy Barton

It would be worth it to see Dr Stock destroy Kelley.

Gordon Buckman
Gordon Buckman
11 months ago
Reply to  Wendy Barton

I wouldn’t urinate on her if she was on fire…

Keith Johnson
Keith Johnson
11 months ago
Reply to  Wendy Barton

It would be worth it to see Dr Stock destroy Kelley.

Wendy Barton
Wendy Barton
11 months ago
Reply to  Marie Buckley

i wouldn’t pay to hear Nancy Kelley. It would be a waste of my time.

Mark M Breza
Mark M Breza
11 months ago
Reply to  J Bryant

Welcome to the “I” gender generation . Who ever groomed these writers into thinking scrawling in the 1st person is a superlative communicative process !
Using the word “I” as if it is the most important word in the Oxford Dictionary only makes others think you are self absorbed in your own self worth. Anecdotal reporting is not empirical .

Last edited 11 months ago by Mark M Breza
Curts
Curts
11 months ago
Reply to  J Bryant

Thank you Professor. If members of society feel it’s fine to silence women or feminists then society has a serious problem. She is overly generous to those who would act this way but then she is balanced and erudite so I’d expect her to behave with class. World class stoicism and fortitude – she is brave and we should all support her.

Graham Strugnell
Graham Strugnell
11 months ago
Reply to  J Bryant

Lying low not laying low. They aren’t chickens.

Amy Horseman
Amy Horseman
11 months ago
Reply to  J Bryant

Now I’m really stumped! The author is one of the people in the picture?! That, to me, is a picture of a group of men! Which one is she?!

Marie Buckley
Marie Buckley
11 months ago
Reply to  J Bryant

I fully agree with everything you say. I would like to add that one organisation is in large part responsible for the current toxic culture and that is Stonewall and its CEO Nancy Kelly. They have adopted and promoted the most extreme position on every aspect of this issue, losing many of their members and founder members in the process. They have been the source of some poisonous rhetoric but what is worse, is they have managed to infiltrated so many of our institutions and companies with divisive, discriminatory and unlawful policies. I would pay to see a debate between Dr Kathleen Stock and Nancy Kelly.

Last edited 11 months ago by Marie Buckley
Mark M Breza
Mark M Breza
11 months ago
Reply to  J Bryant

Welcome to the “I” gender generation . Who ever groomed these writers into thinking scrawling in the 1st person is a superlative communicative process !
Using the word “I” as if it is the most important word in the Oxford Dictionary only makes others think you are self absorbed in your own self worth. Anecdotal reporting is not empirical .

Last edited 11 months ago by Mark M Breza
Curts
Curts
11 months ago
Reply to  J Bryant

Thank you Professor. If members of society feel it’s fine to silence women or feminists then society has a serious problem. She is overly generous to those who would act this way but then she is balanced and erudite so I’d expect her to behave with class. World class stoicism and fortitude – she is brave and we should all support her.

Graham Strugnell
Graham Strugnell
11 months ago
Reply to  J Bryant

Lying low not laying low. They aren’t chickens.

J Bryant
J Bryant
11 months ago

I avoid reading most articles about the gender wars. It’s so tedious, ridiculous and depressing. But I couldn’t look away from the image at the top of this article.
There is the author, surrounded by burly guys (one of whom, she discloses, is actually a philosopher) and dressed like a Mob snitch heading into witness protection. But what is her crime? She will address a group of students and say, among many other things, and with greater sophistication than me, that a man isn’t a woman or vice versa. Cue the clatter of pearls being clutched in the Oxford Philosophy Common Room.
Most of the Oxford students might be alright, as the author generously suggests. They’re just laying low for fear of being ostracized for wrongspeak. I can believe that and sympathize with their predicament. But why are they so afraid? Because powerful institutions such as Oxford, Cambridge, the BBC, etc, etc, validate and enforce the nonsensical, destructive beliefs around gender and a host of other “progressive” issues.
I know I haven’t made a remotely original observation in this comment, but just look at the image at the top of this article for a moment. That is what the “elite” portion of Western society has wrought upon us. To add yet another unoriginal thought: a picture paints a thousand words.

Ben Jones
Ben Jones
11 months ago

It’s not the shouty wokesters at Oxford who worry me. It’s the shouty older wokesters who’ve seemingly infested the civil service, corporates and HR departments of the West.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
11 months ago
Reply to  Ben Jones

Trying too hard to be “down with the kids” perhaps. Again, though, their time will pass. As with the Puritans for instance, who at the time would’ve seemed to have encompassed their realm.

Last edited 11 months ago by Steve Murray
John Riordan
John Riordan
11 months ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

They are not remotely interested in being down with the kids: if that was the case, they could be embarrassed into doing a bit of growing up.

Wokery has taken over across the commanding heights of the economy and society (thanks to Vaclav Klaus for that phrase) because it is a useful means of exercising more power without accountability than would otherwise be the case. It provides not only a moral imperative that is sufficiently meaningless that it cannot be rationally rejected, but also a very effective means of punishing heretics extremely severely.

By “severely”, I refer of course to the modern-day definition of severe, which involves loss of job, career, reputation etc, instead of being burned at the stake as was the fate of heretics in centuries past. But just because the punishment is milder, it is deployed with even more reckless abandon: most people accused of witchcraft in days of yore, where the standard punishment was hanging, actually got acquitted. Nowadays there is no such institutional reluctance to condemn, hence the long and growing list of people who have lost reputations for nothing more than trying to debate honestly a set of fatuously silly ideas that they are expected to accept without evidence.

Last edited 11 months ago by John Riordan
Keith Johnson
Keith Johnson
11 months ago
Reply to  John Riordan

Great assessment. As a school governor, I’m steeling myself for the inevitable confrontation when this nonsense manifests itself significantly in our school. Many people just remain silent when the vociferous woke minority start to attack the reputation of anyone who dares to disagree with them.

Keith Johnson
Keith Johnson
11 months ago
Reply to  John Riordan

Great assessment. As a school governor, I’m steeling myself for the inevitable confrontation when this nonsense manifests itself significantly in our school. Many people just remain silent when the vociferous woke minority start to attack the reputation of anyone who dares to disagree with them.

John Riordan
John Riordan
11 months ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

They are not remotely interested in being down with the kids: if that was the case, they could be embarrassed into doing a bit of growing up.

Wokery has taken over across the commanding heights of the economy and society (thanks to Vaclav Klaus for that phrase) because it is a useful means of exercising more power without accountability than would otherwise be the case. It provides not only a moral imperative that is sufficiently meaningless that it cannot be rationally rejected, but also a very effective means of punishing heretics extremely severely.

By “severely”, I refer of course to the modern-day definition of severe, which involves loss of job, career, reputation etc, instead of being burned at the stake as was the fate of heretics in centuries past. But just because the punishment is milder, it is deployed with even more reckless abandon: most people accused of witchcraft in days of yore, where the standard punishment was hanging, actually got acquitted. Nowadays there is no such institutional reluctance to condemn, hence the long and growing list of people who have lost reputations for nothing more than trying to debate honestly a set of fatuously silly ideas that they are expected to accept without evidence.

Last edited 11 months ago by John Riordan
Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
11 months ago
Reply to  Ben Jones

Oh, your referring to people who show no leadership qualities, no?

Gill Holway
Gill Holway
11 months ago
Reply to  Ben Jones

If they’ve been to Oxford and made life hell for others and theyre working for the Civil Service then theyve met their own personal hell on wheels early!

Andrew Boughton
Andrew Boughton
11 months ago
Reply to  Ben Jones

Yep. The lost generation. In fact, the segment you refer to is the ridiculous generation.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
11 months ago
Reply to  Ben Jones

Trying too hard to be “down with the kids” perhaps. Again, though, their time will pass. As with the Puritans for instance, who at the time would’ve seemed to have encompassed their realm.

Last edited 11 months ago by Steve Murray
Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
11 months ago
Reply to  Ben Jones

Oh, your referring to people who show no leadership qualities, no?

Gill Holway
Gill Holway
11 months ago
Reply to  Ben Jones

If they’ve been to Oxford and made life hell for others and theyre working for the Civil Service then theyve met their own personal hell on wheels early!

Andrew Boughton
Andrew Boughton
11 months ago
Reply to  Ben Jones

Yep. The lost generation. In fact, the segment you refer to is the ridiculous generation.

Ben Jones
Ben Jones
11 months ago

It’s not the shouty wokesters at Oxford who worry me. It’s the shouty older wokesters who’ve seemingly infested the civil service, corporates and HR departments of the West.

Claire Landon
Claire Landon
11 months ago

Wonderful piece, by a wonderful philosopher. Thank you, Kathleen Stock.

Gill Holway
Gill Holway
11 months ago
Reply to  Claire Landon

Whats happened to good old fattist and tallist. Im 5’9 and chunky AND female. I suffered hell on wheels at university because of this but learnt to put it in the ‘Their problem not mine’ bucket and cleared off to marry a 6ft 6ins man

Gill Holway
Gill Holway
11 months ago
Reply to  Claire Landon

Whats happened to good old fattist and tallist. Im 5’9 and chunky AND female. I suffered hell on wheels at university because of this but learnt to put it in the ‘Their problem not mine’ bucket and cleared off to marry a 6ft 6ins man

Claire Landon
Claire Landon
11 months ago

Wonderful piece, by a wonderful philosopher. Thank you, Kathleen Stock.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
11 months ago

I watched the Channel 4 programme, and my impression is she’s “putting a brave face” on her experiences. Being interviewed during the course of the programme, events have clearly taken a toll on her; at times she looks as if she hasn’t slept for a week and her voice falters. This just makes her stance all the more impressive.

Others have commented that she seems to be making an overly optimistic claim that “the kids are alright”. I understand why many may think “actually, they aren’t” but i think it’s worth taking KS at her word. Those who keep their heads down at uni, study and graduate, will remember their experience and – unlike those in older generations for whom freedom of speech was a given but now find themselves restricted in the workplace – will ride out the current storm and become the opinion-makers of the future. This current wave of hysterical signalling will pass, as all such waves do. Transgender people will get on with their lives, in safety – as they could be doing now if they stopped drawing so much attention to themselves. What KS is writing here, is simply to point out that those who just get on with their lives anyway are in the majority and haven’t been “captured” by the minority. She’s right, and the brave face she shows to the cameras can relax a bit more – but not entirely: there’s still work to do.

Last edited 11 months ago by Steve Murray
Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

She also did very well on last night’s ‘Moral Maze’ on BBC Radio 4, unlike the ‘thing’ that Oxford offered up as a riposte.

However she did, to use a technical term, sound rather knackered, which is not surprising under the circumstances.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

She also did very well on last night’s ‘Moral Maze’ on BBC Radio 4, unlike the ‘thing’ that Oxford offered up as a riposte.

However she did, to use a technical term, sound rather knackered, which is not surprising under the circumstances.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
11 months ago

I watched the Channel 4 programme, and my impression is she’s “putting a brave face” on her experiences. Being interviewed during the course of the programme, events have clearly taken a toll on her; at times she looks as if she hasn’t slept for a week and her voice falters. This just makes her stance all the more impressive.

Others have commented that she seems to be making an overly optimistic claim that “the kids are alright”. I understand why many may think “actually, they aren’t” but i think it’s worth taking KS at her word. Those who keep their heads down at uni, study and graduate, will remember their experience and – unlike those in older generations for whom freedom of speech was a given but now find themselves restricted in the workplace – will ride out the current storm and become the opinion-makers of the future. This current wave of hysterical signalling will pass, as all such waves do. Transgender people will get on with their lives, in safety – as they could be doing now if they stopped drawing so much attention to themselves. What KS is writing here, is simply to point out that those who just get on with their lives anyway are in the majority and haven’t been “captured” by the minority. She’s right, and the brave face she shows to the cameras can relax a bit more – but not entirely: there’s still work to do.

Last edited 11 months ago by Steve Murray
polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago

That picture says something Ab Fab Catwalk Photoshoot to me. A “strut” of serious looking philosophers, posing as streetwise hard men about to confront a rival gang, of teenage boys wearing frocks.
“What do you think Patsy?”
“Inspired Eddie, inspired”
(There is indeed an online shop trading on Amazon as Struts Fancy Dress.)
Professor Stock is way too generous and way too optimistic: The kids are not alright.
PS: I laugh, but still salute Professor Stock. The irony is that she is one of the few visitors to Oxford to have any b*lls.

Last edited 11 months ago by polidori redux
Steve Murray
Steve Murray
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

She doesn’t live there, she was invited to speak at the Oxford Union, a debating society, having had to travel by taxi from London due to cancelled trains, as she explains in the article.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

Okay I’ll change it to tourist

Last edited 11 months ago by polidori redux
Geoff Wilkes
Geoff Wilkes
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

She also explains in the article that some of those in the photo are actual, professional security men.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  Geoff Wilkes

Either she is kinda tall, or they are kinda short.

Andrew E Walker
Andrew E Walker
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Professor Stock is 6 foot. Yes, she’s real tall.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago

Exciting!

Judy Englander
Judy Englander
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Now now, p…..

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  Judy Englander

Deleted comment as it might have come across as snarky.

Last edited 11 months ago by polidori redux
Judy Englander
Judy Englander
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

It didn’t come across as snarky. I thought you were dribbling slightly and I was very amused.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  Judy Englander

I never dribble! Well, not in public.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  Judy Englander

I never dribble! Well, not in public.

Judy Englander
Judy Englander
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

It didn’t come across as snarky. I thought you were dribbling slightly and I was very amused.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  Judy Englander

Deleted comment as it might have come across as snarky.

Last edited 11 months ago by polidori redux
Judy Englander
Judy Englander
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Now now, p…..

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago

Obviously a genetic throwback to the Anglian conquest of the Montrose area of Pictland or whatever it was called.

Last edited 11 months ago by Charles Stanhope
polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago

Exciting!

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago

Obviously a genetic throwback to the Anglian conquest of the Montrose area of Pictland or whatever it was called.

Last edited 11 months ago by Charles Stanhope
Geoff Wilkes
Geoff Wilkes
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Or the photographer’s angle is kinda skewed?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

She said she was tall.

Andrew E Walker
Andrew E Walker
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Professor Stock is 6 foot. Yes, she’s real tall.

Geoff Wilkes
Geoff Wilkes
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

Or the photographer’s angle is kinda skewed?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

She said she was tall.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  Geoff Wilkes

Exactly.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  Geoff Wilkes

Either she is kinda tall, or they are kinda short.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  Geoff Wilkes

Exactly.

Geoff Wilkes
Geoff Wilkes
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

She also explains in the article that some of those in the photo are actual, professional security men.

Richard Powell
Richard Powell
11 months ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

No, she had to take a taxi to London because trains from Sussex were cancelled. She had to take a car from London to Oxford because the organisers of the event thought it unsafe (in the real sense) for her to arrive by train. (This isn’t explained in this article, but in Janice Turner’s excellent description of the event in The Times.)
As I don’t want to clutter up the comments too much, this is perhaps a good moment to say that Kass (as seen in Genderwars) really does come across as an ocean-going shit, as does the Cambridge tutor who ostracised one of her own pupils.

Last edited 11 months ago by Richard Powell
Arkadian X
Arkadian X
11 months ago
Reply to  Richard Powell

Thanks for clarifying that. I was confused by those comings and goings.
And yes, the non binary Kass has great entertaining value.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
11 months ago
Reply to  Richard Powell

How did the women in SOE in occupied countries cope ?

Arkadian X
Arkadian X
11 months ago
Reply to  Richard Powell

Thanks for clarifying that. I was confused by those comings and goings.
And yes, the non binary Kass has great entertaining value.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
11 months ago
Reply to  Richard Powell

How did the women in SOE in occupied countries cope ?

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

He didn’t say she lived there.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

Okay I’ll change it to tourist

Last edited 11 months ago by polidori redux
Richard Powell
Richard Powell
11 months ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

No, she had to take a taxi to London because trains from Sussex were cancelled. She had to take a car from London to Oxford because the organisers of the event thought it unsafe (in the real sense) for her to arrive by train. (This isn’t explained in this article, but in Janice Turner’s excellent description of the event in The Times.)
As I don’t want to clutter up the comments too much, this is perhaps a good moment to say that Kass (as seen in Genderwars) really does come across as an ocean-going shit, as does the Cambridge tutor who ostracised one of her own pupils.

Last edited 11 months ago by Richard Powell
Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

He didn’t say she lived there.

CF Hankinson
CF Hankinson
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

She’s wearing hat and glasses to hide. She happens to be tall and slim so I don’t know what your complaint is. She is far more up to date on media references comparing her look to the highly mocked Kendall Roy from Succession. That is funny. There was just one fellow philosopher with her the rest are security men.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  CF Hankinson

I haven’t complained – just laughed. And you don’t do poetic licence.
Edit: That reminds me – There is a Chesterton story about a monstrously tall master criminal, who was also a master of disguise – He could pass through any security check without attracting attention – Perhaps he didn’t exist.
Sorry I am not familiar with Kendall Roy.

Last edited 11 months ago by polidori redux
polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

I shouldn’t have admitted that I don’t know who Kendall Roy is! Those who anonymously downvote – I sneer at you for being ballless wonder..

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

You could have googled it before you started.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

I shouldn’t have admitted that I don’t know who Kendall Roy is! Those who anonymously downvote – I sneer at you for being ballless wonder..

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

You could have googled it before you started.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  CF Hankinson

I haven’t complained – just laughed. And you don’t do poetic licence.
Edit: That reminds me – There is a Chesterton story about a monstrously tall master criminal, who was also a master of disguise – He could pass through any security check without attracting attention – Perhaps he didn’t exist.
Sorry I am not familiar with Kendall Roy.

Last edited 11 months ago by polidori redux
Steve Murray
Steve Murray
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

She doesn’t live there, she was invited to speak at the Oxford Union, a debating society, having had to travel by taxi from London due to cancelled trains, as she explains in the article.

CF Hankinson
CF Hankinson
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

She’s wearing hat and glasses to hide. She happens to be tall and slim so I don’t know what your complaint is. She is far more up to date on media references comparing her look to the highly mocked Kendall Roy from Succession. That is funny. There was just one fellow philosopher with her the rest are security men.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago

That picture says something Ab Fab Catwalk Photoshoot to me. A “strut” of serious looking philosophers, posing as streetwise hard men about to confront a rival gang, of teenage boys wearing frocks.
“What do you think Patsy?”
“Inspired Eddie, inspired”
(There is indeed an online shop trading on Amazon as Struts Fancy Dress.)
Professor Stock is way too generous and way too optimistic: The kids are not alright.
PS: I laugh, but still salute Professor Stock. The irony is that she is one of the few visitors to Oxford to have any b*lls.

Last edited 11 months ago by polidori redux
Ian Guthrie
Ian Guthrie
11 months ago

Thanks Professor Stock

Ian Guthrie
Ian Guthrie
11 months ago

Thanks Professor Stock

Andrew H
Andrew H
11 months ago

Wonderful piece, thank you Professor Stock. A sense of humour goes a long way, doesn’t it? Always reassuring to see that the lunatic gender warrior trans lobby have no sense of humour or irony whatsoever, much like their climate warrior chums. Do they bulk-buy and share the glue for adhering themselves to debating chambers and roads? They’d be far better off sniffing it as this might even prompt a moment of clarity.

Andrew H
Andrew H
11 months ago

Wonderful piece, thank you Professor Stock. A sense of humour goes a long way, doesn’t it? Always reassuring to see that the lunatic gender warrior trans lobby have no sense of humour or irony whatsoever, much like their climate warrior chums. Do they bulk-buy and share the glue for adhering themselves to debating chambers and roads? They’d be far better off sniffing it as this might even prompt a moment of clarity.

Hugh Marcus
Hugh Marcus
11 months ago

Another well written piece from Kathleen. I sense that she’s beginning to recover from the devastation she suffered. It’s encouraging that she’s still able to enter the bear pit & defend her views. It’s sad though that she’s now constantly referred to as ‘gender critical’ by the media.

Phil Rees
Phil Rees
11 months ago
Reply to  Hugh Marcus

Yes, and “controversial“, when there is nothing controversial about her views at all.

Dr. G Marzanna
Dr. G Marzanna
11 months ago
Reply to  Phil Rees

They aren’t even views, they’re just facts.

Jeff Cunningham
Jeff Cunningham
11 months ago
Reply to  Dr. G Marzanna

We live in a time when we aren’t allowed to view facts. So many facts.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  Dr. G Marzanna

Exactly.

Jeff Cunningham
Jeff Cunningham
11 months ago
Reply to  Dr. G Marzanna

We live in a time when we aren’t allowed to view facts. So many facts.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  Dr. G Marzanna

Exactly.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  Phil Rees

She’s brave. As is JK Rowling.

Last edited 11 months ago by Clare Knight
Dr. G Marzanna
Dr. G Marzanna
11 months ago
Reply to  Phil Rees

They aren’t even views, they’re just facts.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  Phil Rees

She’s brave. As is JK Rowling.

Last edited 11 months ago by Clare Knight
Phil Rees
Phil Rees
11 months ago
Reply to  Hugh Marcus

Yes, and “controversial“, when there is nothing controversial about her views at all.

Hugh Marcus
Hugh Marcus
11 months ago

Another well written piece from Kathleen. I sense that she’s beginning to recover from the devastation she suffered. It’s encouraging that she’s still able to enter the bear pit & defend her views. It’s sad though that she’s now constantly referred to as ‘gender critical’ by the media.

Daniel P
Daniel P
11 months ago

I think she makes a very valid point regarding the idea that there are multitudes of normie students out there that feel intimidated by a much smaller cohort of narcissistic bullies because a) those bullies will hound them and b) large institutions will penalize them in support of the bullies.

I think the same holds true in the broader culture. Way too many of us have become fearful of saying what we really think for fear of the potential backlash from government, employers, and institutions like colleges and universities. We have been stifled by fear of being ostracized because the media has worked hard to create the impression that our views are wildly out of the norm and antisocial, even evil.

But we are neither abnormal nor evil and neither are our views, and if allowed to freely express our views and be heard, I suspect that what we would find is that we actually represent the great majority of people. Most of us are moderate and kind, we can disagree politely and we have no desire to force others to accept our views. The minority on the other hand is immoderate, nasty to those it disagrees with and requires compulsary support of its views on penalty of being harassed, bullied, our employment threatened.

I strongly suspect that the main reason the crazies on the left do all they can to make those of us who disagree with them fearful of speaking out is that if enough of us do it we will realize that we are the vast majority and so lose our fear of them and be willing to push back, they will lose their power to intimidate.

Our ancestors have fought and died, shed blood and had their blood shed, to fight for our freedoms. Among those freedoms is the right to think as we will and to express freely what we think. Hundreds of years of patriots fighting governments and powerful institutions, being killed and or beaten, their fortunes taken, so that we can live freely. If they could do that for us, then it seems to me that we can at least be brave enough to exorcise those rights, force those who would strip us of them to acknowledge our rights exist, and be willing to pay the price of a public shaming, online harassment and of having to find new employment. If we fail, then we leave the generations that follow nothing worth having.

James Anthony Seyforth
James Anthony Seyforth
11 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

It’s a very good point, when will be willing to face severe discomfort for upholding our ‘normie’ (I would say traditional) beliefs?

I don’t know but what infects us is comfort and convenience, it’s bred into us in the West now from birth.

James Anthony Seyforth
James Anthony Seyforth
11 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

It’s a very good point, when will be willing to face severe discomfort for upholding our ‘normie’ (I would say traditional) beliefs?

I don’t know but what infects us is comfort and convenience, it’s bred into us in the West now from birth.

Daniel P
Daniel P
11 months ago

I think she makes a very valid point regarding the idea that there are multitudes of normie students out there that feel intimidated by a much smaller cohort of narcissistic bullies because a) those bullies will hound them and b) large institutions will penalize them in support of the bullies.

I think the same holds true in the broader culture. Way too many of us have become fearful of saying what we really think for fear of the potential backlash from government, employers, and institutions like colleges and universities. We have been stifled by fear of being ostracized because the media has worked hard to create the impression that our views are wildly out of the norm and antisocial, even evil.

But we are neither abnormal nor evil and neither are our views, and if allowed to freely express our views and be heard, I suspect that what we would find is that we actually represent the great majority of people. Most of us are moderate and kind, we can disagree politely and we have no desire to force others to accept our views. The minority on the other hand is immoderate, nasty to those it disagrees with and requires compulsary support of its views on penalty of being harassed, bullied, our employment threatened.

I strongly suspect that the main reason the crazies on the left do all they can to make those of us who disagree with them fearful of speaking out is that if enough of us do it we will realize that we are the vast majority and so lose our fear of them and be willing to push back, they will lose their power to intimidate.

Our ancestors have fought and died, shed blood and had their blood shed, to fight for our freedoms. Among those freedoms is the right to think as we will and to express freely what we think. Hundreds of years of patriots fighting governments and powerful institutions, being killed and or beaten, their fortunes taken, so that we can live freely. If they could do that for us, then it seems to me that we can at least be brave enough to exorcise those rights, force those who would strip us of them to acknowledge our rights exist, and be willing to pay the price of a public shaming, online harassment and of having to find new employment. If we fail, then we leave the generations that follow nothing worth having.

Andrew Bamji
Andrew Bamji
11 months ago

Splendid stuff, encapsulated by the phrase “ being emotionally blackmailed into stifled silence by a small group of childish and histrionic narcissists”. Spot on. Many of the woke brigade seem to think that if they use f words instead of rational arguments it makes them right, but it makes them look – childish and histrionic narcissists…

Andrew Bamji
Andrew Bamji
11 months ago

Splendid stuff, encapsulated by the phrase “ being emotionally blackmailed into stifled silence by a small group of childish and histrionic narcissists”. Spot on. Many of the woke brigade seem to think that if they use f words instead of rational arguments it makes them right, but it makes them look – childish and histrionic narcissists…

René Descartes
René Descartes
11 months ago

Of course a man who thinks of himself as a woman is not the same thing as a woman. Surely you don’t have to go to Oxford to learn that.

Dumetrius
Dumetrius
11 months ago

You’d be surprised.

Years ago I had a long, patient and respectful chat with someone who thought that her growing up with a strong desire to become a male, was the exact same thing as growing up as a male.

She just couldn’t fathom how the two experiences were by definition, polar opposites.

Last edited 11 months ago by Dumetrius
Dumetrius
Dumetrius
11 months ago

You’d be surprised.

Years ago I had a long, patient and respectful chat with someone who thought that her growing up with a strong desire to become a male, was the exact same thing as growing up as a male.

She just couldn’t fathom how the two experiences were by definition, polar opposites.

Last edited 11 months ago by Dumetrius
René Descartes
René Descartes
11 months ago

Of course a man who thinks of himself as a woman is not the same thing as a woman. Surely you don’t have to go to Oxford to learn that.

Julian Pellatt
Julian Pellatt
11 months ago

A most courageous woman. We own people like her a great deal.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  Julian Pellatt

We’re being supportive here. I’m sure she reads the comments and it helps her to not feel alone.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
11 months ago
Reply to  Julian Pellatt

We’re being supportive here. I’m sure she reads the comments and it helps her to not feel alone.

Julian Pellatt
Julian Pellatt
11 months ago

A most courageous woman. We own people like her a great deal.

Anton van der Merwe
Anton van der Merwe
11 months ago

I am one of those people who did not pay much attention to this affair until I read what Kathleen Stock had to say. She and the many other brave gender critical women deserve a Nobel Peace Prize for their stoicism and integrity.

Anton van der Merwe
Anton van der Merwe
11 months ago

I am one of those people who did not pay much attention to this affair until I read what Kathleen Stock had to say. She and the many other brave gender critical women deserve a Nobel Peace Prize for their stoicism and integrity.

Liam F
Liam F
11 months ago

Well done Kathleen – we need more people like you. You’re a brave woman.

Liam F
Liam F
11 months ago

Well done Kathleen – we need more people like you. You’re a brave woman.

Emil Castelli
Emil Castelli
11 months ago

Excusing these degenerate thugs is not going to help anyone. Excusing these people out to terrorize everyone into Shutting Up – because some security and some regular people were on the side of freedom of thought – enough that you were able to speak – that is crazy. They are not to be excused, but resisted. Which you managed for various reasons – But most can not resist these ones, not without a heavy price indeed.

A mob of degenerate thugs are terrorizing decent people in every level of life and society. Making them too frightened to say their real thoughts – so afraid of the Mob they must Pretend to go along with something they are in complete disagreement with. Making decent people live a lie –

You call that

”The Oxford kids are alrightStudents aren’t the source of the culture wars — they’re the solution”
Really?

These postmodernist vermin work by stealth destroying any who disagree publicly. They are Not Alright. I like Cicero

”But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.”
This Orwellian degeneracy is so far in Corporate ESG mandates that the resistance finally rising is amazing!

Bud Light! Target! If the fight is not made, if appeasing is continued, freedom is gone. Thought Crime, Political Crime… what Orwell predicted, wins. This is Not a small matter. It is war for freedom. Your experience shows it is a 5th generational warfare with actual kinetic elements. The Police answer these Gender Thought crimes immediately; wile they refuse to investigate assault and burglary. It is now a Political Crime to speak one’s truth. The Kids are NOT Alright.

Marcus Corbett
Marcus Corbett
11 months ago
Reply to  Emil Castelli

‘To speak one’s truth’. Have you alao been infected.

Paul Milnes
Paul Milnes
11 months ago
Reply to  Emil Castelli

Well, she has way more generosity of spirit than you! Actually, she was talking about students in general, not focussing on the under-deprived children who can’t bear to hear and opposing view.

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
11 months ago
Reply to  Emil Castelli

Thank you. I’d like to buy you a pint if you ever find yourself in Bristol.

Jack Martin Leith
Jack Martin Leith
11 months ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

And I’ll buy the second one.

Gordon Buckman
Gordon Buckman
11 months ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

I’d need more than a pint if I ever found myself in Bristol…

Jack Martin Leith
Jack Martin Leith
11 months ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

And I’ll buy the second one.

Gordon Buckman
Gordon Buckman
11 months ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

I’d need more than a pint if I ever found myself in Bristol…

Wendy Barton
Wendy Barton
11 months ago
Reply to  Emil Castelli

I agree

0 0
0 0
11 months ago
Reply to  Emil Castelli

“They are not to be excused”
Stock isn’t excusing anyone, you’ve misread her point

“…but resisted. Which you managed for various reasons”
which Stock ‘managed’ by extraordinary courage & grit!!

“most can not resist these ones without a heavy price” :
Maybe don’t lecture Dr Kathleen Stock on paying ‘heavy prices’!!

Your ire is mistargeted. With her experience of students at Sussex, Cambridge & Oxford perhaps listen; she may have insight that you & I do not.

Terry Raby
Terry Raby
11 months ago
Reply to  Emil Castelli

please advise the location of the Cicero quote

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago
Reply to  Terry Raby

It doesn’t exist!
It should be in “M. Tullii Ciceronis Orationes in Catilinam” but sadly isn’t.
A great quote nonetheless.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
11 months ago
Reply to  Terry Raby

It doesn’t exist!
It should be in “M. Tullii Ciceronis Orationes in Catilinam” but sadly isn’t.
A great quote nonetheless.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
11 months ago
Reply to  Emil Castelli

Well put.

Marcus Corbett
Marcus Corbett
11 months ago
Reply to  Emil Castelli

‘To speak one’s truth’. Have you alao been infected.

Paul Milnes
Paul Milnes
11 months ago
Reply to  Emil Castelli

Well, she has way more generosity of spirit than you! Actually, she was talking about students in general, not focussing on the under-deprived children who can’t bear to hear and opposing view.

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
11 months ago
Reply to  Emil Castelli

Thank you. I’d like to buy you a pint if you ever find yourself in Bristol.

Wendy Barton
Wendy Barton
11 months ago
Reply to  Emil Castelli

I agree

0 0
0 0
11 months ago
Reply to  Emil Castelli

“They are not to be excused”
Stock isn’t excusing anyone, you’ve misread her point

“…but resisted. Which you managed for various reasons”
which Stock ‘managed’ by extraordinary courage & grit!!

“most can not resist these ones without a heavy price” :
Maybe don’t lecture Dr Kathleen Stock on paying ‘heavy prices’!!

Your ire is mistargeted. With her experience of students at Sussex, Cambridge & Oxford perhaps listen; she may have insight that you & I do not.

Terry Raby
Terry Raby
11 months ago
Reply to  Emil Castelli

please advise the location of the Cicero quote

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
11 months ago
Reply to  Emil Castelli

Well put.

Emil Castelli
Emil Castelli
11 months ago

Excusing these degenerate thugs is not going to help anyone. Excusing these people out to terrorize everyone into Shutting Up – because some security and some regular people were on the side of freedom of thought – enough that you were able to speak – that is crazy. They are not to be excused, but resisted. Which you managed for various reasons – But most can not resist these ones, not without a heavy price indeed.

A mob of degenerate thugs are terrorizing decent people in every level of life and society. Making them too frightened to say their real thoughts – so afraid of the Mob they must Pretend to go along with something they are in complete disagreement with. Making decent people live a lie –

You call that

”The Oxford kids are alrightStudents aren’t the source of the culture wars — they’re the solution”
Really?

These postmodernist vermin work by stealth destroying any who disagree publicly. They are Not Alright. I like Cicero

”But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.”
This Orwellian degeneracy is so far in Corporate ESG mandates that the resistance finally rising is amazing!

Bud Light! Target! If the fight is not made, if appeasing is continued, freedom is gone. Thought Crime, Political Crime… what Orwell predicted, wins. This is Not a small matter. It is war for freedom. Your experience shows it is a 5th generational warfare with actual kinetic elements. The Police answer these Gender Thought crimes immediately; wile they refuse to investigate assault and burglary. It is now a Political Crime to speak one’s truth. The Kids are NOT Alright.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
11 months ago

I am writing from New York City with grateful thanks to Dr. Stock. This is not going to be easy, but we can none of us give up. Dr. Stock has given us clear direction on what we, as the (supposed) “adults in the room” need to do, which is to keep speaking up and supporting young people who speak up too. The alternative, to quote Dr. Stock, is not sustainable: “I just think if you don’t talk about reality then we don’t go on. We can go on through life pretending for a while, but reality will hit you in the face in the end.”
Susan Scheid

Last edited 11 months ago by UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
11 months ago

I am writing from New York City with grateful thanks to Dr. Stock. This is not going to be easy, but we can none of us give up. Dr. Stock has given us clear direction on what we, as the (supposed) “adults in the room” need to do, which is to keep speaking up and supporting young people who speak up too. The alternative, to quote Dr. Stock, is not sustainable: “I just think if you don’t talk about reality then we don’t go on. We can go on through life pretending for a while, but reality will hit you in the face in the end.”
Susan Scheid

Last edited 11 months ago by UnHerd Reader
Dominic A
Dominic A
11 months ago

“a small group of childish and histrionic narcissists”
These eight words sum it up perfectly. One of the deepest disappointments in working as a psychologist is realising, for the first time, that a patient is deeply narcissistic; all they’ve been doing and saying in the session is merely a game being played by an unreliable and unrelatable narrator, and my effort in listening and trying to help was not given so much as stolen. It gets much easier to spot with experience – and then you can do the only thing that can be done – walk away. As a society we are slowly learning this through our experiences with such activists, Johnson, Trump, Markle and others.

Dumetrius
Dumetrius
11 months ago
Reply to  Dominic A

Walk away maybe, but watch out or they may follow you.

It works best in separating from a narcissist if you pretend they hurt you.

Then they have what they need & are able to detach and let you alone.

Never let them know that’s what you did, however 🙂

Last edited 11 months ago by Dumetrius
Dumetrius
Dumetrius
11 months ago
Reply to  Dominic A

Walk away maybe, but watch out or they may follow you.

It works best in separating from a narcissist if you pretend they hurt you.

Then they have what they need & are able to detach and let you alone.

Never let them know that’s what you did, however 🙂

Last edited 11 months ago by Dumetrius
Dominic A
Dominic A
11 months ago

“a small group of childish and histrionic narcissists”
These eight words sum it up perfectly. One of the deepest disappointments in working as a psychologist is realising, for the first time, that a patient is deeply narcissistic; all they’ve been doing and saying in the session is merely a game being played by an unreliable and unrelatable narrator, and my effort in listening and trying to help was not given so much as stolen. It gets much easier to spot with experience – and then you can do the only thing that can be done – walk away. As a society we are slowly learning this through our experiences with such activists, Johnson, Trump, Markle and others.

Susan Scheid
Susan Scheid
11 months ago

BTW, while Dr. Stock, typically modest, does state, “When it came to the moment for those in the packed room to file out and vote, the majority voted for our side of the motion, and the existence of a right to offend,” she doesn’t note that her side won in a landslide. As reported in Unherd on 18 November 2022: “Protesters shouted into their bullhorns, at times making it difficult to hear the speakers. But ultimately, it was the speakers in favour of the motion who won, with Stock and Ahmed securing a 247-72 victory.”

Last edited 11 months ago by Susan Scheid
Susan Scheid
Susan Scheid
11 months ago

BTW, while Dr. Stock, typically modest, does state, “When it came to the moment for those in the packed room to file out and vote, the majority voted for our side of the motion, and the existence of a right to offend,” she doesn’t note that her side won in a landslide. As reported in Unherd on 18 November 2022: “Protesters shouted into their bullhorns, at times making it difficult to hear the speakers. But ultimately, it was the speakers in favour of the motion who won, with Stock and Ahmed securing a 247-72 victory.”

Last edited 11 months ago by Susan Scheid
Adrian Matthews
Adrian Matthews
11 months ago

Another excellent piece by Kathleen Stock. Her approach navigates the issues with humour and compassion but underneath a steely determination in defence of the right to hold opinions without being excommunicated from civilised society. Given the horrors she has been through, I find her approach inspiring and uplifting. One of the people in the world I’d most like to have a pint with!

Adrian Matthews
Adrian Matthews
11 months ago

Another excellent piece by Kathleen Stock. Her approach navigates the issues with humour and compassion but underneath a steely determination in defence of the right to hold opinions without being excommunicated from civilised society. Given the horrors she has been through, I find her approach inspiring and uplifting. One of the people in the world I’d most like to have a pint with!

V Solar
V Solar
11 months ago

Thank heavens for Kathleen Stock and for her courage in speaking publicly about these important issues. She is fighting on our behalf to keep reality as the fulcrum of public policy.
It would be good if professor Stock could write an article about any contemporary philosophers whose work she thinks is popular among students involved in the trans movement. I’m curious about the influence of Judith Butler and Donna Haraway and her Cyborg Manifesto for example. I’m not an academic myself but I have observed that the ideas that students engage with, particularly art students, does filter into the main stream via the arts and then into popular culture so you end up with lots of people assuming attitudes and stances which are expressed though their style of dress and political posturing. Wilhelm Reich was a big influence on the hippy movement for example but if the average hippy knew anything about him at all it was that he advocated more orgasms for all, an idea they happily went along with. My point being that you don’t have to know much about a persons ideas to take them up and if enough people do that and express their tokan allegiance to them through their life style choices and fashionable political posturing the culture will change and the internet will excelerate this process exponentailly.

Last edited 11 months ago by V Solar
Dr. G Marzanna
Dr. G Marzanna
11 months ago
Reply to  V Solar

Yes exactly. As a former art school lecturer I can say most students grasp these few authors and misread them (Led, of course, by teachers completely untrained in philosophy.) and then base a lot of their work, and all of their essays on them.

V Solar
V Solar
11 months ago
Reply to  Dr. G Marzanna

I’m glad you understand what I mean Dr. Marzanna. I wonder what students will be told if they ask ChatGPT how to destroy the patriarchy, or late capitalism, or solve climate change? I have a feeling the answer would be the same in all cases – break down binaries. It’s just a guess and I must leave as such as there’s no way I’ll be talking to any bots find out – not if I can help it.

V Solar
V Solar
11 months ago
Reply to  Dr. G Marzanna

I’m glad you understand what I mean Dr. Marzanna. I wonder what students will be told if they ask ChatGPT how to destroy the patriarchy, or late capitalism, or solve climate change? I have a feeling the answer would be the same in all cases – break down binaries. It’s just a guess and I must leave as such as there’s no way I’ll be talking to any bots find out – not if I can help it.

Dr. G Marzanna
Dr. G Marzanna
11 months ago
Reply to  V Solar

Yes exactly. As a former art school lecturer I can say most students grasp these few authors and misread them (Led, of course, by teachers completely untrained in philosophy.) and then base a lot of their work, and all of their essays on them.

V Solar
V Solar
11 months ago

Thank heavens for Kathleen Stock and for her courage in speaking publicly about these important issues. She is fighting on our behalf to keep reality as the fulcrum of public policy.
It would be good if professor Stock could write an article about any contemporary philosophers whose work she thinks is popular among students involved in the trans movement. I’m curious about the influence of Judith Butler and Donna Haraway and her Cyborg Manifesto for example. I’m not an academic myself but I have observed that the ideas that students engage with, particularly art students, does filter into the main stream via the arts and then into popular culture so you end up with lots of people assuming attitudes and stances which are expressed though their style of dress and political posturing. Wilhelm Reich was a big influence on the hippy movement for example but if the average hippy knew anything about him at all it was that he advocated more orgasms for all, an idea they happily went along with. My point being that you don’t have to know much about a persons ideas to take them up and if enough people do that and express their tokan allegiance to them through their life style choices and fashionable political posturing the culture will change and the internet will excelerate this process exponentailly.

Last edited 11 months ago by V Solar
Richard Craven
Richard Craven
11 months ago

The woke scum are apologists for sadistic paedophilia. Of course we have a duty to offend them.

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
11 months ago

The woke scum are apologists for sadistic paedophilia. Of course we have a duty to offend them.

John Riordan
John Riordan
11 months ago

“Other supportive students in Oxford, neither feminist nor anti-feminist, just seemed fed up with being emotionally blackmailed into stifled silence by a small group of childish and histrionic narcissists — among which they doubtless would include the occasional lecturer.”

There are rhetorical jewels aplenty in this excellent piece, but this one stood out as especially well-expressed. I intend to nick it, for re-use in other debates where it will come in very handy.

Last edited 11 months ago by John Riordan
John Riordan
John Riordan
11 months ago

“Other supportive students in Oxford, neither feminist nor anti-feminist, just seemed fed up with being emotionally blackmailed into stifled silence by a small group of childish and histrionic narcissists — among which they doubtless would include the occasional lecturer.”

There are rhetorical jewels aplenty in this excellent piece, but this one stood out as especially well-expressed. I intend to nick it, for re-use in other debates where it will come in very handy.

Last edited 11 months ago by John Riordan
Arkadian X
Arkadian X
11 months ago

I wish Kathleen had spent a few words describing the “welfare rooms”. I often wonder what goes on in these “safe spaces”.

Anyway, the way of reporting news with “choice” interviews is pretty standard, so much so I tend to change channel when that happens. It is all in the name of “balance” and “fairness” when instead they usually tend to overblow one side of the argument, or indeed create one artificially. It has been like that for, I daresay, decades, or at least for as long as I can remember and it is part of the “how to do reporting” playbook. You don’t even have to listen to the interviews as you know what they are going to say. A bit like when they interview “random” passengers outside Victoria station to talk about train delays.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
11 months ago
Reply to  Arkadian X

It wasn’t a news programme, but an hour-long documentary, which included a great deal more than you describe, including for instance, interviews with Julie Bindel and a non-binary person who campaigns against transactivism.

I agree about the basic point you make around “news” items.

Arkadian X
Arkadian X
11 months ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

I am not talking about the documentary at all (and not is Kathleen), but I was commenting about this:
” (The rough format goes as follows. Student: “I just feel exhausted constantly having to justify my existence every day!”. Interviewer: “What do you, Stock, say to the students who feel exhausted having to justify their existence every day?” …)”

Arkadian X
Arkadian X
11 months ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

I am not talking about the documentary at all (and not is Kathleen), but I was commenting about this:
” (The rough format goes as follows. Student: “I just feel exhausted constantly having to justify my existence every day!”. Interviewer: “What do you, Stock, say to the students who feel exhausted having to justify their existence every day?” …)”

Linda Hutchinson
Linda Hutchinson
11 months ago
Reply to  Arkadian X

It’s packed with chaises longues and persons dispensing smelling salts and providing fans to cool their fevered brows. For those really overcome there are people to hold their hands and little lap dogs for them to pet. Ambulances are also available for those who have fallen into a dead faint, they will be taken to a local psychiatric hospital for in-patient help and trauma counselling.

Judy Englander
Judy Englander
11 months ago

At Oxford they also supplied ear plugs. Make of that what you will.

Judy Englander
Judy Englander
11 months ago

At Oxford they also supplied ear plugs. Make of that what you will.

Nikki Hayes
Nikki Hayes
11 months ago
Reply to  Arkadian X

I doubt she actually saw them inside – no way would they allow her to pollute their “sacred space” – eyeroll!

Arkadian X
Arkadian X
11 months ago
Reply to  Nikki Hayes

Quite 😀

Arkadian X
Arkadian X
11 months ago
Reply to  Nikki Hayes

Quite 😀

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
11 months ago
Reply to  Arkadian X

It wasn’t a news programme, but an hour-long documentary, which included a great deal more than you describe, including for instance, interviews with Julie Bindel and a non-binary person who campaigns against transactivism.

I agree about the basic point you make around “news” items.

Linda Hutchinson
Linda Hutchinson
11 months ago
Reply to  Arkadian X

It’s packed with chaises longues and persons dispensing smelling salts and providing fans to cool their fevered brows. For those really overcome there are people to hold their hands and little lap dogs for them to pet. Ambulances are also available for those who have fallen into a dead faint, they will be taken to a local psychiatric hospital for in-patient help and trauma counselling.

Nikki Hayes
Nikki Hayes
11 months ago
Reply to  Arkadian X

I doubt she actually saw them inside – no way would they allow her to pollute their “sacred space” – eyeroll!

Arkadian X
Arkadian X
11 months ago

I wish Kathleen had spent a few words describing the “welfare rooms”. I often wonder what goes on in these “safe spaces”.

Anyway, the way of reporting news with “choice” interviews is pretty standard, so much so I tend to change channel when that happens. It is all in the name of “balance” and “fairness” when instead they usually tend to overblow one side of the argument, or indeed create one artificially. It has been like that for, I daresay, decades, or at least for as long as I can remember and it is part of the “how to do reporting” playbook. You don’t even have to listen to the interviews as you know what they are going to say. A bit like when they interview “random” passengers outside Victoria station to talk about train delays.

Keith Hotten
Keith Hotten
11 months ago

Kathleen Stock OBE – now that she is clearly on the PM’s speed dial let’s hope we may see Baroness Stock in the Lords very soon. Perhaps on Rishi’s leaving honours list?

Keith Hotten
Keith Hotten
11 months ago

Kathleen Stock OBE – now that she is clearly on the PM’s speed dial let’s hope we may see Baroness Stock in the Lords very soon. Perhaps on Rishi’s leaving honours list?

Annette Lawson
Annette Lawson
11 months ago

As always, Kathleen Stock, brilliantly said and written. You have helped me feel optimistic about the eventual outcome of the Gender Wars. I had discovered before today that your side won the Cambridge debate. I am assuming there was not a vote in Oxford because it was not a debate but it sounds as if you won the argument there too, pace Toby Young who goes on about lavatories while saying it was what you did. But then who was putting the questions?
Thank you Kathleen.

Annette Lawson
Annette Lawson
11 months ago

As always, Kathleen Stock, brilliantly said and written. You have helped me feel optimistic about the eventual outcome of the Gender Wars. I had discovered before today that your side won the Cambridge debate. I am assuming there was not a vote in Oxford because it was not a debate but it sounds as if you won the argument there too, pace Toby Young who goes on about lavatories while saying it was what you did. But then who was putting the questions?
Thank you Kathleen.

Victoria Powell
Victoria Powell
11 months ago

Brilliant writing, amusing, logical. As always.

Victoria Powell
Victoria Powell
11 months ago

Brilliant writing, amusing, logical. As always.

Fiona English
Fiona English
11 months ago

Thank you, Kathleen, for giving us this ray of hope, written with your usual wit and style!

Fiona English
Fiona English
11 months ago

Thank you, Kathleen, for giving us this ray of hope, written with your usual wit and style!

Christopher Chantrill
Christopher Chantrill
11 months ago

I’m a racist-sexist-homophobe, so what do I know. But, as a sexist I feel that saying you are “exhausted” is a girl thing. Obviously, King Henry V would not say at Harfleur, “forget about the breach, girl friends, we’re exhausted.” So a girl thing is being used to shut up a woman? Hello?

Alan Osband
Alan Osband
11 months ago

Ah but was it a trans woman or a trans man who said this ? If a trans woman , that could be taken as a validation of ‘her’ assumed gender . If a trans man, then the contrary .

CF Hankinson
CF Hankinson
11 months ago

Yes you are being modest and are far more sensitive to sexism than most.

Wendy Barton
Wendy Barton
11 months ago

Cobblers. I know men who declare occasionally that they are exhausted.

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
11 months ago
Reply to  Wendy Barton

Are they married perchance?

Julian Farrows
Julian Farrows
11 months ago
Reply to  Wendy Barton

Are they married perchance?

Alan Osband
Alan Osband
11 months ago

Ah but was it a trans woman or a trans man who said this ? If a trans woman , that could be taken as a validation of ‘her’ assumed gender . If a trans man, then the contrary .

CF Hankinson
CF Hankinson
11 months ago

Yes you are being modest and are far more sensitive to sexism than most.

Wendy Barton
Wendy Barton
11 months ago

Cobblers. I know men who declare occasionally that they are exhausted.

Christopher Chantrill
Christopher Chantrill
11 months ago

I’m a racist-sexist-homophobe, so what do I know. But, as a sexist I feel that saying you are “exhausted” is a girl thing. Obviously, King Henry V would not say at Harfleur, “forget about the breach, girl friends, we’re exhausted.” So a girl thing is being used to shut up a woman? Hello?

Dumetrius
Dumetrius
11 months ago

Now the centre-ground has been increasingly recovered, to create a ‘fighting base’, I wonder what more can be accomplished.

Aside from vigilance & maintaining a kind of Gibraltar on the straits of public opinion, is it not best to let the Transatollahs follow their own path and go to what awaits?

With an NHS in turmoil & little resourcing – and the claimants disinclined to want to spend any of their own money on their fantasies – and you can’t fund surgery by auctioning boxes of kitty litter, a bunch of pink hair dye and a d_ldo collection – will this thing just peter out because of nigh-on-total impossibility ?

Last edited 11 months ago by Dumetrius
Dumetrius
Dumetrius
11 months ago

Now the centre-ground has been increasingly recovered, to create a ‘fighting base’, I wonder what more can be accomplished.

Aside from vigilance & maintaining a kind of Gibraltar on the straits of public opinion, is it not best to let the Transatollahs follow their own path and go to what awaits?

With an NHS in turmoil & little resourcing – and the claimants disinclined to want to spend any of their own money on their fantasies – and you can’t fund surgery by auctioning boxes of kitty litter, a bunch of pink hair dye and a d_ldo collection – will this thing just peter out because of nigh-on-total impossibility ?

Last edited 11 months ago by Dumetrius
UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
11 months ago

Well done Prof Stock, well done indeed. Absurd that you’re described as brave for expressing the ‘controversial’ view that one cannot change sex. That is however what you are, brave, dignified and stalwart.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
11 months ago

Well done Prof Stock, well done indeed. Absurd that you’re described as brave for expressing the ‘controversial’ view that one cannot change sex. That is however what you are, brave, dignified and stalwart.

Sue Frisby
Sue Frisby
11 months ago

As a veteran of the Brighton Right-on scene of the ‘80s, I wish Kathleen Stock the very best. It was all so much more contained in those days, as you can imagine!

Sue Frisby
Sue Frisby
11 months ago

As a veteran of the Brighton Right-on scene of the ‘80s, I wish Kathleen Stock the very best. It was all so much more contained in those days, as you can imagine!

susie Gilchrist
susie Gilchrist
11 months ago

Well done Kathleen Stock! Loved it all all. No more to say really!

susie Gilchrist
susie Gilchrist
11 months ago

Well done Kathleen Stock! Loved it all all. No more to say really!

j watson
j watson
11 months ago

One thing is for sure – the Author has benefitted from amplification and couldn’t be any further from being ‘cancelled’ if she tried. That said fair play to her for being resilient and not brow-beaten by what is, and always was, a tiny strident minority.
Reading the Article, and following the story last year or two, does jog memories of similar student days and protest. Endeavour to prevent certain Speakers speaking at debates is far from new. (Maybe what’s new is we get to hear about it more via Social media). And guess what – the world hasn’t come to an end because of student discourse. I think the Author gently highlighting that in this Article, which may not be entirely welcomed by either end of the Woke – Anti-Woke spectrum.
I even suspect sensible moderation on the specifics of the subject the Author is now well known for will win-out. Shock, horror.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  j watson

Indeed it happened in my day. What is new is the spineless response of so many of her colleagues. We have reached a new low. Welcome to your world.

Last edited 11 months ago by polidori redux
j watson
j watson
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

I don’t know, I remember various Professors/Lecturers being on different sides of equivalent debate c40yrs ago. Like I say I suspect much just never got outside of student press but now with social media we can all get in a right lather much quicker and easier.
KS was on Radio 4 last night too. C4 documentary as well. That’s my point – whoever may be being spineless, it’s if anything just adding amplification and sending her thoughts much wider than otherwise would likely been the case.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  j watson

She has been driven out of her job.

j watson
j watson
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

She resigned. Even those campaigning against her made clear they did not believe she should be sacked. Yes there was abuse, and from the strident minority, but her employer was not looking to sanction or dismiss her. It must have been uncomfortable some colleagues objected to her views too, but that’s not the definition of spineless. I’m not aware threats of violence to her were ignored by Authorities where the perpetrator was evidenced, although she was advised on some security measures. Some of her critics had their details leaked too and received threats as well. The atmosphere was poisoned but that’s not because someone was spineless.
Now it may be that the resignation added to the amplification.
I agree Universities need to protect free speech (so long as not justifying violence), but no evidence they’ve stopped her and no evidence media cancelled her. To be fair to her she mentioned how this debate has resulted in threats to trans people too, and more pernicious. The silly minority are that, a minority. And that seems to be the point she’s making.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  j watson

She was driven out of her job.
Dress it up however you want, but that is what happened.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

A woman was threatened by men; it is cowardice. No man at Sussex challenged those who threatened Professor Stock.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
11 months ago
Reply to  polidori redux

A woman was threatened by men; it is cowardice. No man at Sussex challenged those who threatened Professor Stock.

polidori redux
polidori redux
11 months ago
Reply to  j watson

She was driven out of her job.
Dress it up however you want, but that is what happened.

j watson
j watson
11 months ago