Mob Rule
Speaking freely on certain topics now needs to be factored against how likely you are to lose your job and have your children living on the curb.
There are always costs to speech that doesn't comport completely with the mass view or the view of a particular mass, but this is getting especially ugly now with the power of regular citizens (or academic citizens) to band together on social media and "cancel" someone.
Kathleen Stock is standing up against the mob at The Spectator:
Academic freedom is vital in a functioning and healthy democracy. But when it comes to questioning and debating ideas around gender identity and sex, many of my colleagues in academia do not appear to agree.The latest glaring example of this came last week. An open letter, signed by over 600 of my colleagues, primarily in academic philosophy, suggested I was personally responsible for 'transphobic fearmongering', helping to 'restrict trans people's access to life-saving medical treatment', and serving 'to encourage the harassment of gender-non-conforming people'. Their pretext was my OBE for services to higher education and academic freedom, awarded in the New Year's Honours List. Since 2018, I've written several pieces criticising the idea that an inner feeling of gender identity should overrule facts about biological sex in nearly all policy contexts. I've also written extensively about the fact that many academics agree with me, but are too intimidated to say so. This has made me a particular target for abuse.
It did not matter to those who signed the open letter that there was no evidence for their outrageous defamatory falsehoods; nor that I regularly affirm the right of trans people to live lives free of harassment and discrimination. Never mind as well that as a six-foot tall lesbian, working in a male-dominated academic discipline, I'm fairly gender-non-conforming myself.
The authors of this letter clearly believed they could see into my soul - perhaps even without actually reading my views. Amusingly, the authors of the letter were later forced to add a correction to their claim that I am best known 'for opposition to the UK Gender Recognition Act' (In reality, I have no objection to the existence of the Act, and have objected to proposed reforms to it in favour of gender identity).
The spectacle of paid thinkers, whose entire training emphasises the importance of sober argumentation, signing a document which wouldn't look out of place in the Salem Witch Trial archive, makes one question particularly pertinent: what's actually going on here?
How can these academics look at the parts of the gender identity debate that concern me - for instance, vulnerable female prisoners being housed with male sex offenders; young lesbian women like Keira Bell regretting the effects of puberty blockers and voluntary mastectomies by the time they are 20; a loss of academic data about sex-associated patterns of discrimination, and so on - and conclude that I'm not only wrong, but that I should be publicly shamed?
They are cult members who would be the last to admit it.
She sums up with this, and I agree.
A world in which philosophers could have freely and aggressively interrogated these decadent abstractions and public policies which involve vulnerable women would surely have been a better one for detransitioners like Keira Bell or the victims of Karen White. Unfortunately, far too many academic philosophers are more concerned about silencing their colleagues for woke points than having any meaningful, evidence-based debate.
What is the solution? What we all can do is stand with people being mobbed, if not publicly, at least privately. (It makes a big difference for a person emotionally to feel they are not alone.) I try to do both when I can (time permitting, because I'm writing day and night to try to make my book deadline).
I especially appreciated when another author did the same for me despite disagreeing with my take on the issue. You can be against somebody's idea and also against them being mobbed, and tell them you're sorry for what's being done to them without compromising your integrity.
Academic freedom is vital in a functioning and healthy democracy.
No, it's meaningless.
A world in which philosophers could have freely and aggressively interrogated these decadent abstractions and public policies which involve vulnerable women would surely have been a better one for detransitioners like Keira Bell or the victims of Karen White. Unfortunately, far too many academic philosophers are more concerned about silencing their colleagues for woke points than having any meaningful, evidence-based debate.
"Academic philosophers"? Please. You can express your beliefs (and I agree with this particular set of views, if that matters) without the intellectusl bulwark of a university behind them.
I'd be far more impressed with a "philosopher" who doesn't even engage with the for-profit academic sphere to express her ideas, much less seem like she wants the university imprimatur.
Why do these people always care what colleges think of their views? If you want to defang the university, why not state plainly, "I don't give a fuck what you lot think" rather than whine online about how your views aren't reflected?
Kevin at January 14, 2021 1:51 AM
The Goddess: Academic freedom is vital in a functioning and healthy democracy.
Kevin: No, it's meaningless.
Tell that to a victim of cancel culture who loses their job because a group of "woke" academics conducted a phone-call/email campaign to their employers.
Tell it to a young girl who had carelessly announced that black people should stop resisting and just comply. Then some time later, she announced that she was going to a certain college on a gymnastics scholarship.
A woketavist replied, "No, you're not. :)"
Sure enough, once the college got wind of her apparently not-PC statement, they rescinded their offer.
Patrick at January 14, 2021 7:25 AM
Academic freedom is vital in a functioning and healthy democracy.
Also for science. I can refer you to Lysenko for a second opinion, if you like.
I R A Darth Aggie at January 14, 2021 8:26 AM
Somewhat on topic. Although Academic freedom is and has been in jeopardy for some time, I feel it has not been in jeopardy here.
Thank You Amy.
Joe J at January 14, 2021 8:40 AM
"How can these academics look at the parts of the gender identity debate that concern me - for instance, vulnerable female prisoners being housed with male sex offenders; young lesbian women like Keira Bell regretting the effects of puberty blockers and voluntary mastectomies by the time they are 20..."
Yet the Woke Progressives talk incessantly about how much *empathy* they possess.
In many cases, they will feel empathy for you (or at least claim it, whether they actually do feel it or not) if you are a member of a category they have been *told* to feel empathy for.
David Foster at January 14, 2021 8:51 AM
.I think some folks tend to confuse sympathy and empathy.
Sympathy is to share the feelings of another. Empathy is to be aware of them.
An interesting read on empathy is in Chris Voss' book on his experience as an FBI hostage negotiator, Never Split The Difference. Voss says empathy was one of his greatest tools, even when he didn't' sympathize with the hostage-taking party.
Conan the Grammarian at January 14, 2021 9:04 AM
The hostage-taking party?
(I loved that book.)
Crid at January 14, 2021 9:14 AM
A good title for extreme wokesters would be "Chancellor," but with the "h" silent as in Italian.
JD at January 14, 2021 9:57 AM
Conan, the way I've always heard the words used, it was practically the opposite. (Maybe those people were wrong. Or maybe there are cases where both definitions apply to each.)
As in, people born into rich families might have sympathy for the poor, but they cannot truly empathize with them.
Or, from another source:
"Empathy means experiencing someone else's feelings... It requires an emotional component of really feeling what the other person is feeling. Sympathy, on the other hand, means understanding someone else's suffering."
But, from Merriam Webster:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/sympathy-empathy-difference
"In general, 'sympathy' is when you share the feelings of another; 'empathy' is when you understand the feelings of another but do not necessarily share them."
lenona at January 14, 2021 10:04 AM
Lenona,
I've seen them used the way you describe as well as used interchangeably, so I'm going with the Webster and Voss usages of them and included an explanation for clarity.
The advice Voss gives, however, is solid. You should understand what the other party is feeling and what their motivations are, even if you don't feel the same way - in negotiations, debate, etc. It's an art that is sorely lacking in society today.
==========
Got a better term?
"Kidnapper" seemed only to cover the international taking of a hostage for ransom purposes, and Voss included trapped bank robbers in his anecdotes.
On the other point, I agree, it was a good book. Well worth the time taken to read it. Even if I never have to negotiate a hostage deal.
Conan the Grammarian at January 14, 2021 11:02 AM
Gotcha! Chapter 2.
Crid at January 14, 2021 11:30 AM
Amy, you might be amused by the flow of Abigail Shirer's Twitter feed today, and it's somewhat related to your topic.
Crid at January 14, 2021 11:49 AM
Most people are jerks at some time or another. Thus anyone dumb enough to put their jerkiness out there on the internet can be ruined if it pleases some other jerk.
In the academic world, the way to refute someone used to be to write a book or articles disagreeing. That is too much work now, easier to just get them fired.
In the case of the trans debate, the woke play it as if it were the civil rights movement but it is not. Women do in fact have a right to not have a biological male in their showers, even if they are in prison. There are in fact ethical issues with encouraging teens to transition when we don't let them do any other legal thing like vote or smoke or buy alcohol. Pretending that a person is female when they are not when they come to the doctor can risk their life. Since the woke cannot argue in good faith on these issues, they just scream "transphobe" and get people fired. charming
cc at January 14, 2021 2:22 PM
Oops! Shrier.
Crid at January 14, 2021 3:06 PM
Leave a comment