Wo, here’s a crack in the ice: academics refused to sign a new Trans Declaration of What You Have To Do. Just up and said no, as if they had a right to.
A programme to encourage universities to follow guidance on trans discrimination is to be changed after Cambridge academics refused to sign it.
“Here’s our guidance on how you have to coddle us, sign right here.”
“No.”
Advance HE, a charity that advises higher education institutions, has bowed to pressure and pledged to alter its guidelines requiring universities to foster a “collective understanding” on the belief that gender can be chosen.
Should universities foster a collective understanding that the sun circles the earth every day? How about a collective understanding that elephants are smaller than grasshoppers?
Cambridge University academics had refused to commit to the Athena Swan programme, arguing that the issue should be a matter for debate.
Shouldn’t even be that really. You can’t change species. You can’t time travel. You can’t change sex.
Arif Ahmed, a reader in philosophy at Cambridge University who objected to the scheme, said: “It’s welcome that Athena Swan is reconsidering what could have been a charter for thought-control, as many of us had been warning. A university should absolutely not be ‘fostering collective understanding’ on controversial issues but encouraging open debate.
…
Johns said Advance HE was responding to the concerns raised.
“We have been working with the sector-led Athena Swan governance committee to amend and remove the wording on ‘fostering a collective understanding’.
“While this amendment will protect academic freedom, the charter principles will still recognise that individuals can determine their own gender identity and that the specific issues faced by trans and non-binary people needs tackling.”
But they can’t, not the way you mean it. If “gender identity” is defined as just how you present, then sure, but it never is confined to that, is it. It’s all “trans women are women,” and that’s where women who can find their noses in the dark say no.
Comments
12 responses to “Cambridge academics refused”
Maybe he should talk to his colleagues at Yale. At least some of them are happy with thought-control and no debate.
Given the recent history of trans activism, I’m not sure “tackling” is best choice of wording here. It gives no indication that they.ve really been listening. And how many of those “issues” are of their own making because they won’t accept no for an answer?
Mathematically we can do time travel… Developing a useful description of the process required to change sex (that isn’t reliant on magic spells) is something else.
As a former Cambridge graduate student, I am very happy to see my school leading the way in fighting against the insane thought control that has characterized the so-called “trans” movement.
MIT President Rafael Reif was leading MIT into programs for antiracism and DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion). But now MIT is searching for a new president, since MIT announced (in February) that Reif will step down at the end of this year. The search committee (that was announced in April) sent a survey to the MIT community (in June) that included me among alumni. The survey included an optional comment area where I wrote:
I can’t say for sure, but I like to imagine that Reif stepping down was triggered by his leadership into antiracism and DEI. Sufficient pushback may have come from: 1) The MIT community (where I also responded to an earlier request for feedback), 2) Debate within higher education at large (at other schools), and 3) Legal advice (about the legality of programs for antiracism and DEI). Gender identity issues are a fraction of the issues, but I have made a point to highlight them.
Reif will take a sabbatical in 2023 before returning to the faculty in 2024. His sabbatical could help MIT change course if it decides to.
Dave, thanks for that. I am an MIT alumnus, but I haven’t followed the goings-on at the school very closely in the last few years, and only barely noticed the incident with Dorian Abbot. Spurred by your post, I looked up further information, and discovered the MIT Free Speech Alliance, whose web site contains a great deal of interesting information.
I am not at all surprised that MFSA exists. Among the groups of people pushing hard for freedom of speech are libertarians, and it is my impression that small-l and large-L libertarians are in abundance at MIT, or at least they were in my experience some decades ago. But of course concerns about these issues are not limited to libertarians. I like what I see on the MFSA web site, and may join the group.
Cool that there are two MIT alums here. Like one of those bumping into your cousin on the Paris Metro type things.
Sackbut, you’re welcome. I have extensive notes following these issues at MIT, but this was my first time I decided to write a comment here that I could condense to be fairly short. And thank you for that link to the MFSA. Your analysis rings true to me.
You might appreciate The Babbling Beaver, a satirical news site, named apparently after The Babylon Bee and the MIT beaver (the MIT mascot, to explain to other readers here). The Beaver archive of news looks like they started earlier this year. Each article is typically based on a link to real news at MIT, which I find hilarious and depressing. Their web site has a page to subscribe to their news by email.
Another MIT alum here. *waves*
I will be checking out The Babbling Beaver. Thanks, Dave.
We’re up to three! I’m all amaze!
This:
is incompatible with this:
You did well in succinctly rooting your position in the Western tradition of free speech and the crucible of debate, but I have two major concerns. First, as mentioned above, you invoke the primacy of open debate while simultaneously affirming that gender identity can be subjectively determined and that the concept is coherent, a dual affirmation that can be interpreted as moving those points “off the table.” Second, it is unclear what you mean when you say that a university ought not foster collective understanding. Going back to what we examined in section one, what is the university’s telos? How does that purpose inform organizational decisions? These two points and those marked inline require more explication on your part.
B (but I will happily replace this grade with that of an amended version should you submit one before end of term)
Late to the party (still catching up on blog reading after a couple of weeks of a houseful of family), but I figured I should raise my hand to even out the female to male ratio of MIT alums here.
Yay!