Article about transgender and free speech at Melb Uni

bookoholic

An article in The Age about the transgender debate and free speech at Melbourne University.

CallMeAl

How awful. This seems such a high profile topic right now, and that really brings out the hate on both sides. I feel terrible for the run of the mill trans people just trying to quietly live their lives under the radar and having to see stuff like that that makes them feel hated.

And then on the other side of the coin, this stuff is scary as heck too “The university is also close to finalising its gender affirmation policy which, if adopted in its current draft form, would enable it to veto public events and discourse it views as potentially harmful to transgender and gender-diverse staff and students.”

Silencing civilised discussion isn’t going to make trans hate go away, it’s going to make it worse.

LadySybilVimes

A great deal of space and the highest-profile part of that article is about the transphobic graffiti at Melbourne Uni. Then, down towards the end, this single sentence about the rally on campus to support Holly Lawford-Smith: “A small number of students at the rally became verbally abusive towards them. One splashed Ms Hercus with water.”

Interesting to see the importance placed on the first act and the dismissive description of the second. I would say that holding a megaphone in someone’s face and screaming abuse at them, then chucking water at them is far more aggressive and frightening to experience than a person writing something bigoted on a window then running away.

Here is a story about that rally (it’s from Sky News if that will cause anyone to get out their fainting couch, but it contains footage of the rally and an interview with Katherine Deves who is very good and measured):

CassandraNORI

It wouldn’t surprise me one bit if TRAs did that graffiti themselves - I’ve never seen examples of feminists being actually transphobic in that manner ‘trannies’ etc. It’s just not what is driving the feminists concerns (transphobia) - what’s driving this push back is concern for women’s rights.

LadySybilVimes

I had the same thought. The timing is very convenient and the language isn’t right. People worried about academic freedom and expressing gender-critical views are more likely to ask for a polite discussion over a cup of tea than graffitiing windows with slurs.

RichardParker

I think trans people are TOLD that they’re hated - or told that reactions of confusion or calling them by their former names and pronouns is an act of literal violence instead of a mild impoliteness or a genuine mistake. Their uneasiness in their own bodies is seized upon by people who benefit by creating a siege mentality. But most people don’t actually give a shit about what trans people wear or want to do with their own bodies. We are concerned about not being able to speak truth as we see it without threats of violence or exclusion. I don’t see this conflict going away anytime soon, no matter how many times we’re told to be kind. We’re talking about fundamental functions of a civilised society - the free functioning academy - it can’t operate for the benefit of the populace if it is censured.

CallMeAl

RichardParker I think trans people are TOLD that they’re hated - or told that reactions of confusion or calling them by their former names and pronouns is an act of literal violence instead of a mild impoliteness or a genuine mistake. Their uneasiness in their own bodies is seized upon by people who benefit by creating a siege mentality. But most people don’t actually give a shit about what trans people wear or want to do with their own bodies.

I think unfortunately the echo chamber happens on both sides. I get the impression that many trans people who go online get exposed to the “everyone hates us -> outrage” echo chamber, and then on the other side people who start questioning it can end up in a “trans people want your spaces, and are crazy and disturbed and often criminal” echo chamber. The bulk of people on both sides who are just living life and not hating anybody or trying to take anybody’s spaces are largely invisible in the online world.

bookoholic

I agree it wasn’t the most balanced article, but at least they did cover it, and I think it was good that it was in The Age rather than a more “right wing” publication, because a lot of people will dismiss something like Sky News just because it’s Sky News.

I don’t have much to add to what you’ve all said above, but I agree with it. It’s great to have a place where we can discuss these issues, because I certainly don’t feel safe talking about it on Facebook.

bookoholic

An editorial in The Age about cancel culture in general, but it does mention the Holly Lawford-Smith/Melbourne uni issue.

We would not wish emotional distress and anguish on anybody, least of all those members of the community who have daily struggles with prejudice and discrimination. But a university must also insist on the ability of well-educated, intelligent adult students to conduct open conversations without unduly hemming in the broad sweep of ideas and inquiry, however controversial.

Heyho2

There was one in the Australian by prof. Cordelia fine. Paywall, so can’t read it… but was wondering how she was going in this current climate…

Morrigan

It’s that struggle isn’t it? I remember my dad was upset when they wouldn’t let that David Irvine(?) talk about how the Holocaust didn’t happen. He said it was obviously stupid and hurtful to say, but banning it was a slippery slope and nobody would be able to talk about anything. It was better to let him speak and then refute his arguments. Thinking he had a point, even though I can’t believe anyone would think the Holocaust didn’t happen.

Heyho2

Morrigan

Thats the bit that gets me stuck. I do t want some dipshit to be able to say something so blatantly untrue, vile and hurtful, but I’m sure there’s people that feel that way about gc views.

bookoholic

Yes, the problem with shutting down ideas you don’t like is that the same methods can be used to shut down ideas you do like. For example, Israel Folau was sacked for saying homophobic things. I’ll admit I was happy at the time to see that, because I don’t like those ideas, but now that’s set a precedent that people can be sacked for saying things that their work doesn’t like. (Maybe not a legal precedent - I am not a lawyer! - but it’s certainly an example that people can point to.) And I don’t want people sacked for expressing gender critical views.

I don’t know what the solution is.

CassandraNORI

This is a really good article discussing Holly Lawford

smith et al

https://spectator.com.au/2021/06/the-woke-patriarchy/

‘Women have their own needs, and people like Professor Maskell are placing the expression of these needs in conflict with trans-identified people. I don’t resent, dislike or fear tans identified males, it is just that they are categorically different from me in the same way that males are. And that this difference matters in the relationship I have with the state and society, and in the services that I require from the state and state-regulated organisations.’