More than four dozen scholars from the United Kingdom signed onto a letter warning that the government’s proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act and interpretation of the Equality Act – as well as politically correct campus politics – are restraining and censoring academics and analysts from critically investigating, researching and teaching about transgender issues.
The 54 scholars representing a newly formed network of more than 100 scholars – most serving at U.K. universities, including Oxford and Cambridge, along with some from American universities, including MIT and George Washington University Law School – are alerting the public about higher education’s censorship of information that reveals the danger a transgender lifestyle poses to gender-confused individuals … and to society, at large.
In addition, Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne allowed the dozens of scholars to submit several letters to the U.K.’s consultation earlier this week that express their fears over the government’s introduction of self-ID for gender reassignment – legally identifying transgenders as their opposite, non-biological sex.
Only speak positive … or else …
A major concern of academic leaders – from the fields of sociology, philosophy, law, criminology, evidence-informed policy, medicine, psychology, education, history, English, social work, computer science, cognitive science, anthropology, political science, economics, and history of art – was voiced about how professors are essentially handcuffed by the government, university officials and LGBT activist groups from revealing any scientific information explaining the detrimental effects that transgenderism has on sexually confused individuals and vulnerable women and children.
“[T]he scholars … aired their complaints about how they have faced an unusual amount of opposition for what they consider to be normal critical analysis of scientific and political assertions,” The Christian Post (CP) reported. “The group also condemned the influence that LGBT political organizations are having when it comes to the limiting of academic freedom on college campuses.”
The academic professionals’ signed document discusses how they are continually being silenced from dispensing reliable information concerning the harm that transgender medical practices and lifestyles entail.
"We are also concerned about the suppression of proper academic analysis and discussion of the social phenomenon of transgenderism, and its multiple causes and effects," the scholars’ letter published on Tuesday in The Guardian reads. "Members of our group have experienced campus protests, calls for dismissal in the press, harassment, foiled plots to bring about dismissal, no-platforming, and attempts to censor academic research and publications."
The politically correct opposition faced by scholars wanting to reveal the truth about transgenderism – fierce resistance that has been waged in the name of “tolerance” and “anti-discrimination” – was criticized as being irresponsible, anti-intellectual and unacceptible.
“Such attacks are out of line with the ordinary reception of critical ideas in the academy, where it is normally accepted that disagreement is reasonable – and even productive,” the scholars wrote.
Anti-intellectual movement in universities?
Instead of having an allegiance to dispense academic knowledge and encourage critical thinking, it was argued that a large proportion of universities in the U.K. are loyal to pro-LGBT groups that fervently promote alternative lifestyles and fiercely oppose those who don’t.
“Many of our universities have close links with trans advocacy organizations who provide ‘training’ of academics and management, and who – it is reasonable to suppose – influence university policy through these links,” the letter continues. “Definitions used by these organizations of what counts as ‘transphobic’ can be dangerously all-encompassing and go well beyond what a reasonable law would describe.”
The new terms and euphemisms concocted by LGBT activists are argued to be suppressing intellect and harming society.
“They would not withstand academic analysis, and yet their effect is to curtail academic freedom and facilitate the censoring of academic work,” the scholars contend. “We also worry about the effect of such definitions on the success rates of journal submissions and research grant applications from governmental bodies such as the AHRC and ESRC.”
The scholars ended by dismissing claims that offering a critical analysis of transgender behavior and medical practices is hate speech or intolerance.
“We maintain that it is not transphobic to investigate and analyze this area from a range of critical academic perspectives,” the letter concludes. “We think this research is sorely needed and urge the government to take the lead in protecting any such research from ideologically driven attack.”
Hitting the transgender nail on the head …
University of Sussex philosophy professor Kathleen Stock – one of the letter’s 43 signatories – publicly and candidly voiced her take on the matter earlier this month in a column.
"A range of structural inequalities between females and males are widely recognized,” Stock wrote in her op-ed for The Conversation, donning the headline, “Why self-identification should not legally make you a woman.” “These material facts about female oppression must be acknowledged when we think about two questions at the heart of a bitterly disputed U.K. government consultation on reforming the Gender Recognition Act."
She listed off the facts supporting her argument that changing genders is science fiction – not a reality, as most LGBT activists would like to believe.
"The first is whether self-identifying as a woman without medical certification should be sufficient criteria for legal gender reassignment,” Stock continued. “The second is whether self-identifying transwomen should be allowed into women-only spaces and have access to women-only resources."
The respected professor stirred up more controversy and outrage from the LGBT community this summer when she indicated that simply having a sex-change operation does not convert a man into a woman – any more than wearing women’s shoes make a man a woman.
"[T]rans women are still males with male genitalia," Stock told the U.K.’s The Argus in a July interview.
The same month, she upset more LGBT activists when she questioned the label the transgender community ascribed to her for being vocal about her politically incorrect take on the controversial social issue.
"I emphatically deny that I am transphobic," Stock insisted to Pink News in July, according to CP. "I vocally uphold the rights of trans women to be free of violence and discrimination, but I question whether the only way to protect trans women from violence is to allow trans women into female communal spaces."
The British scholar impressed that it is biological women who need society’s protection – not biological men pretending to be women, who naturally have the physical ability to better defend themselves from sexual predators.
"Violence against females is endemic," Stock stressed. "Trans women are biologically male, and though most are law-abiding, some small proportion are not. There is a general social need to continue to protect females in communal female-only spaces from the possibility of male violence."