3 Responses to “Recuse”

• #1

  Sastra

  October 2, 2023 at 10:26 am

  Given the expectation that the Genderists will react with fury if the judgement doesn’t go their way and accusations of transphobia will be loud and long, I suppose it’s possible that by asking for pronouns at the start of the trial the judge is trying to signal impartiality. She is not hostile to trans people or the idea of personal pronouns, but will rule on the facts and the law. Maybe.
• #2

  Ophelia Benson

  October 2, 2023 at 10:32 am

  Hmm. But The Pronouns Question is so very not impartial. It’s tricky to signal impartiality by being extremely partial.
• #3

  NightCrow

  October 3, 2023 at 5:26 pm

  In another very curious development the Deputy Vice-Chancellor at the OU published an online article on Monday, the first day of the tribunal, in which she obliquely but specifically defends the University’s treatment of Jo:

  As a university, the OU is committed to supporting academics who have gender-critical or trans-positive research perspectives to continue their work, publish, develop their careers, debate, and influence wider thinking, at an institution that takes care of their needs as individuals.

  As part of that care, we are committed to ensuring that all colleagues and students feel accepted, included and supported to do their best work. But when people feel strongly, debate is rarely comfortable; and understanding, as institutions, where we draw the line in particular situations can be a challenging and complex task. …

  We don’t know how the tribunal will rule on the many specific details in the case, but we believe that we’ve acted lawfully, appropriately, and in good faith, as we navigated our way through a previously untrodden path. …

  Whatever the outcome, now is the time to work together to turn our energies to creating an environment where contentious viewpoints and beliefs can be explored, and knowledge created in a way that’s compatible with the safety and security of all those working and studying in universities.

  Most of the comments below the piece are highly critical:

  How is this appropriate to be publishing, given the timing of the tribunal? Women are being widely discriminated against and losing much fought-for single sexed spaces. Yet you are focussed [sic] on protecting against reputation damage? When an individual can not state biology is a fact, there is something rotten at the core. I question your motives behind this article and its timing.