,
13 tweets,
6 min read
Read on Twitter
Justin Weinberg @DailyNousEditor is not obligated to link to philosophical writing on his blog, but the reasons he gives dailynous.com/wp-content/upl… for not linking to @Docstockk's piece are not convincing. 1/ quillette.com/2019/04/11/ign…
Most obvious is the claim that @Docstockk is scaremongering about statistics being collected according to self-IDed gender and not sex using the Scottish census as an example. Hmm... 2/
Problem here, @DailyNousEditor, is that the fact there might now be a census question on sex and optional question on gender ID is due to campaigning and arguments presented by @Docstockk and many others. She's not scaremongering: she saw a problem and attempted to sort it. 3/
But the census question is already well dealt with by @mary_leng, so I won't dwell on how galling it is to be told by someone who claims to know better that a problem you've campaigned to get rid of (with possible success) never actually existed. 4/
Kathleen Stock is right about crime statistics and the fact that the UK police are collecting crime data on the basis of self-identified gender, as noted here thetimes.co.uk/article/lettin… 'Accurate' information collected should not include gender history to avoid intrusion. 5/
Kathleen has already clarified much of this in her response to @DailyNousEditor and corrected the misinterpretation of her views about the potential danger which trans women pose (which is simply in virtue of their being male, not being trans). 6/ medium.com/@kathleenstock…
Your suggestion @DailyNousEditor, that 'we have good reason to believe that the facts regarding statistical male violence are not representative of the facts regarding violence by transwomen' lacks evidence. Please post some as I am genuinely interested in seeing it. 7/
You suggest that 'more than a few' cases are needed to support the generalisation that [male-bodied] trans women might be a danger in female spaces. Do you really propose that women and girls wait to get raped, attacked or killed to prove our point? Usual practice allows prior 8/
risk assessment. Unless the evidence you speak of exists (and, having worked on this question for a while, I have not seen it), putting females at greater risk of attack is not a morally acceptable course of action. There needs to be an alternative way to protect trans women. 9/
Gender self-ID is also not the rational process you assume (and thereby accuse @Docstockk of scaremongering again). Self-ID changes the culture such that females are unable to challenge males in single-sex spaces and may themselves be criticised. 10/
This is what is happening to female sport when self-ID is allowed (it's one case among many). Some sports do have restrictions but still leave female athletes at a disadvantage. Female prizes and scholarships, women-only shortlists etc are also at risk 11/
Given this, it's not clear why @DailyNousEditor is accusing Kathleen Stock of scaremongering and inaccuracy. The reasoning doesn't add up unless he is not aware of the details of these cases or simply disbelieves them all. 12/
As for problems with @Docstockk's tone? FFS. Tone? DailyNous has linked to pieces which use 'TERF' without issue, a term more usually used to accompany threats of violence, rape & death against females. I don't think a little bluntness about pronouns should really be an issue. 13
