#speaker women

[juliatv]

Let's go girls!!

[jetdean]

Speaker woman and Tv Woman

[dkettchen]

she would've told them unlike her canon! version who decided not to be an ally smh

[odinsblog]

Just to emphasize: Mike Johnson is an antivaxxer, an anti-abortion, forced bither, he believes the job of poor women is to give birth to an infinite supply of low wage jobseekers, he is a climate change denier, he wants to cut Social Security + Medicare + Medicaid, and he’s a “Trump won!” Republican. And House Republicans just unanimously voted for him as Speaker of the House.

Please take note: there are no “moderates” in the Republican Party.

[csuitebitches]

On Being a Powerful Speaker

in order to be a good speaker, you have to be a good writer. that doesn’t mean publishing 100 books and making it on NYT’s best selling list.

writing your thoughts, challenging your own assumptions and stances, writing about “controversial” ideas and playing the devil’s advocate, questioning the known, will allow your mind to become clearer on what you truly stand for. It will allow you to understand exactly who you are and what you believe in. It will help untangle all the jumble in your mind because you have to pen down your thoughts. Writing things down takes more time than thinking things, which gives you the time to reflect as well. Once your idea has been presented on paper, you will feel a sense of clarity. When asked to spoken about said idea or subject, you’ll be able to speak clearer because you’ve already spent time thinking, reflecting and challenging yourself. You may realise that you need less time to remember certain words, you’ll be able to retrieve things from your memory faster, your vocabulary will improve vastly and hopefully, your rationality will increase.

how should one go about such an exercise if you can’t think of subjects on your own?

Look for any one articles in the news. Any one article or a book. Read just the headline and the sub-headline/ read just the summary of the book. Now pause. Think about what it just said - do you agree with it? Disagree? What are your initial assumptions? What are some things you’re thinking of? Write it down. Now read the whole thing. Were your hunches right, or did the author challenge your initial assumptions? Do you agree with the author or still disagree? What were things you felt the author did not clarify or consider in their argument? start writing things down.

You do not need to be a good speaker in order to be a good writer; but perhaps, you do need to be a powerful writer in order to be a good speaker.

[kimodraw]

i don't like windows when they're closed !

[starwikia]

suicide cw

look i have been in this area before mentally. it sucks and i wouldn’t wish this on anyone. but, and this is going to sound callous, but i don’t feel any sympathy for james somerton. even if i hope he’s like. not dead. But thats all the amount of goodwill im willing to give him. The more i think about this really, the more angry i am. 

ngl this entire situation is another example of how white people weaponize their mental illness to avoid consequences. Im seeing it in real time.

this man has a continuous habit of using self-harm as a get-out-of-jail-for-free card. in both of his apologies, he has worded his supposed attempts in ways that were clearly meant to guilt people who displayed his plagiarism and overall horrendous history of racism and misogyny. i say supposed because, while i’m not saying those are lies and this would he such a fucked up thing to lie about that i don’t want to think he has, unfortunately, it’s been proven again and again that his word can’t be trusted, as he’s known to lie to try get out of consequences. Hes a proven liar. him lying about this is actually the best case scenario, because no one should go through this entire situation, wouldnt wish this on anyone, but you can only do this so often before people stop sympathizing with you. is this callous? Yeah, but like. I’m actually fucking angry he cant straight up take no as an answer. that this is how he reacts realizing he cant be one of the Cool Kidz™️ on youtube anymore. he acts like he DESERVES a career, like its not a privilege hes lost due to his own actions.

He lied about apologizing and forgiving people, he lied about giving the money to hbomberguy to give to ppl he ripped off (yknow, instead of doing it himself), he lied about the jessie gender situation and rewrote the narrative to make it so he isnt the bad guy, and hes the victim all along actually!

you can’t tell me that supposed last message of his isn’t meant to be a 13 reasons why esq attempt to deflect the blame “look i’m going to kill myself and it’s all YOUR PEOPLES FAULT for not letting me achieve my DREAM of being filmmaker IN PEACE!!! I just wanted Nick’s (the guy who I have thrown under the bus again and again) portfolio up!! Im just being a good friend dont you all FEEL BAD” he refuses to take ANY ACCOUNTABILITY of any of his actions and he IS STILL trying to shove the blame over to other people again.

it’s also pretty ironic people are like “uhhh well hbomber’s fans harassed him!!!” like hbomber outright told people NOT to HARASS JAMES!!! ALSO acting as if james doesn’t have a very real documented history of STRAIGHT UP sending his fans to harass and threaten smaller creators, more notably women, trans, and bipoc creators. especially after he’s stolen typically very personal anecdotes so he could profit from them. so why can he do it but the second people are like “hey this guys an actual piece of shit.” and he can’t handle it suddenly people are trying to white knight his shit? like no he doesn’t get that. he doesn’t get that at all just because he couldn’t handle the consequences of his actions. 

what? were supposed to stay quiet about a man profiting off of other minorities because he wanted to be the spokesman for all gay people? people tried to solve this on a smaller, more private scales for YEARS and he kept doing it. it was clear that the giant public video was the ONLY way to get people to notice. HE WOULDVE GOTTEN AWAY WITH STEALING 87 FUCKING THOUSANDS WORTH OF DOLLARS. HE CANT HANDLE THE FACT HE CANT GET AWAY WITH IT. 

am i supposed to feel bad for the guy who basically threatened a trans woman with the police? i don’t care what anyone says, it’s so fucking obvious that he threatened jessie by implying he was getting the police involved in their conflict. what am i supposed to act like that didn’t happen? are we supposed to pretend like he didn’t glorify nazi’s and outright said that gay people made up a good chunk of the nazis? That he didnt say america joined ww2 bc they were jealous of the NAZIS. WHAT WOULD POSSESS YOU TO FUCKING SAY THAT. but then? He gives women (not even women most of the time, he misgenders nonbinary ppl constantly) shit for writing mlm. are we supposed to act like he doesn’t straight-up sees himself superior and better than people of color and steals their works to put himself on a pedestal? Are we supposed to act like he didnt spit on our elders by saying “only the boring gays survived aids” like man! Fuck you! He BLANTANTLY MAKES UP HISTORY TO PUT HIMSELF ON A PEDESTAL!! HE ACTIVELY TRIED TO REWRITE LGBT HISTORY TO SUIT HIS FUCKED UP NARRATIVES!

yes this sucks ! no one deserves this but no one should be making him a martyr. Thats what he fucking WANTS! He wants to be immortalized as a victim!! (again, supposedly, it was reported hes alive but its not confirmed).

The shit he got isnt near the amount of fucking callous behavior hes done again and again. Again, to drill this point, EVEN IF HE DIDNT CALL THE POLICE HE THREATENED A TRANS WOMAN INTO THINKING HE DID!!! The fact he tried to use a head injury to justify years of the outright ghoulish shit fucking astounds me. Why the fuck did anyone in his life thought it was a good idea to let him TRY to come back. in the end, he had options. he didn’t need to try to make a comeback. HE DIDNT NEED TO FUCKING LIE OR IGNORE THE SHIT HE WAS CALLED OUT ON the reality is, he wanted to come back thinking he could shove it under the rug, was told that no dude, you’re not allowed to be a youtuber anymore. you’re done. you need to move on and went full nuclear. it’s not on anyone’s hands but his own. HES BEEN DOING THIS TO HIMSELF!! But nah man we cant call his shit out bc hell may or may not kill himself. Fuck the other minorities who have the same issues but worse and sometimes BECAUSE of him. This is going to SUCKKKK so bad when other ppl, specifically white gays, are going to weaponize this shit to get away with their stuff.

[feluka]

been listening to refaat alareer's lectures on poetry on the subway and it's brought me to tears several times. i want to transcribe them and compile a document of all of them as soon as possible.

[fras-redacted-shapes]

Alright let's go - Ramblings regarding Saga, in comparison to Jesse and "The World"

if anyone feels like expanding on any point please do, I'm gonna leave this text as it is because otherwise it's gonna torment me for weeks

I don't recall in which interview, a couple writers said Casey was developed because Saga needed someone to bounce ideas off of and/or because she needed something to externalize her personality without relying on awkward exposition (or something along those lines).

And that's kind of noticeable if you compare Saga's and Jesse's treatment from a writing/presentation stand point:

Jesse as a character is far more obscure and details about her inner life are limited, while Saga is established and very detailed without relying on exposition.

Jesse, from a technical standpoint, suffers the "new character introducing an audience to a new IP" syndrome if you will.

Jesse's past is presented in vague details and a general sense of direction: finding Dylan who is a stranger to the audience. Her inner monologue is to Polaris and it works as exposition but by Polaris' nature there's no back and forth.

When Jesse talks to a character it is always a one-to-one conversation, and an important portion those are about the history of the FBC, asking questions that require exposition. Not to mention there's no interaction between the main cast other than with Jesse.

Some information can be inferred from Jesse's "epilogue" lines after the end of the game. But that's about it regarding the main text.

And that goes in line with the thematic difference I feel between Control and Alan Wake games - the former (heh) is about The World, the later, about the people in it.

Overall it can feel quite isolated and lonely, or well, mechanical. You have to fill in a lot of info yourself. And I believe the writers identified this and tried to change where they could with Foundation and AWE - with the way Jesse and Emily are far more comfortable with each other as they joke and tease during their dialogue, and getting a deeper look into my beloved Langston's personality (which is quite self-aware because lmao, finally it's Jesse who's at the end of a one-way "conversation").

But Saga's has an already established and rich life before the story and details bleed all through the text.

A partner and friend she's known for years and their history is spoken and written, there's no need to infer and fill in details yourself that much.

Their relationship is detailed enough in "side tidbits" (all of her Mind Place stuffs) and in actual conversations, which often enough involve a third party.

Casey works as exposition for Saga's character but, by virtue of Casey being character apart from Saga, the information is introduced far more organically (and arguably, in a more detailed way).

Remedy also gave Saga a huge advantage Jesse didn't have: The Collectible and Missions menus are hers.

So not only we get to hear Saga's thoughts on the current situation, we also get a sneak peek into her mind and inner life.

Some people in Saga's life also have a detailed enough history that they stand on their own rather than solely working as Saga's motivation because the story requires them to be at stakes.

Dylan is, technically, a stranger to Jesse, she's clinging to the past idea of him: we are motivated to find Dylan because we're told to care about him. While Logan and Casey are present in Saga's life and we get more details upfront to care for them.

Saga got curious, shit started to go down and we want them to be safe because otherwise it'd be painful for Saga.

Unlike the ghosts that Trench and Darling were to Jesse, Saga gets to actually talk to Tor and Odin. And well, the entire plot of the game is her undoing and confronting Alan's work on her life, rather than cleaning the mess done by the previous administration that are now gone and cannot be held accountable for.

And I suppose that's another improvement in the writing: the Hiss as the antagonist force is basic (and if you've played Mass Effect they're nothing new, and to me they're the least interesting part of the wolrdbuilding). There's not much room to maneuver, so Jesse's got one way to fight them (so far).

Saga could've gone several ways in dealing with Wake, and we see her struggle when she's about to give the Clicker to Alan/Scratch, she didn't mince her words in that confrontation and she had all the right to go even further. And yet she kept it together, unwilling to fully give herself to despair.

AND!

She chose compassion in the end!

And, honestly? Their final conversation is such a good and rich detail.

Saga's motherhood could've remained as basic reminders to the player that she has a daughter who's the victim and that's your motivation girl! As well as her silly jokes because parents do that sometimes teehee.

Saga's compassion is informed by her motherhood but not limited to it. As a mother she knows that everyone needs someone who believes in them unconditionally, as a daughter she knows how good a reminder of your good qualities can be, and as a detective she knows how to gather, read and act on information.

So when she reminds Alan that he had defeated the Dark Presence before and that he can do it again, she's not saying it because she's desperate, and she's not being patronizing due to Alan's loneliness and isolation.

She's saying because it's true.

And she doesn't rub his missteps and mistakes on his face. She knows how to get the point across without being mean.

She needed very little guidance: information to fill in the blanks of her life from Tor and Odin, short and vague phone calls from Alice, and a portal to the Writer's Room from Ahti. (Rose's lunchboxes were technically not necessary but she gets a honorable mention.) I don't know if there's enough information to conclude whether the reminders that helped her find a way out of the Mind Place were sent by someone else or came solely from her own resilience, and either would be neat, but I would like to think there's someone who's been looking out for her the same way she's been looking out for other characters.

And she's not flawless, but in working her flaws I believe the writers treated her with well deserved respect. She's not a caricature and the story has enough characters being tortured, any more and it'd feel cruel and it'd be permission granted by the horror genre anyways (although, to be honest, I believe Cynthia's treatment was a tiny bit too cruel and that's mostly due the last stage of her boss fight).

I love her first conversation with Norman because she's being a bit patronizing (I believe that's the correct word?), but he's like, nope! No dementia here! Not cool you brought it up :]

Her Nightmare Mind Place is as explicit as it gets. And the few times she loses it are not unearned. I love it when she gets frustrated with Rose and her "Oh fuck this", as well as her pained "My daughter is dead because of you. What is wrong with you?" to Alan in the holding cells.

Her biggest flaw is being a fed.

She's an extremely well put together person and integral, rich character. Her pain and suffering are palpable and the developers did an excellent job in showing it without being cruel (or well, knowing where to place the cruelty *cough* the white man *cough*).

And that's, in general, where I'd call attention to the leaps in improvement to Remedy's writing, right alongside the development and treatment Alice got, and the departure that is from Marshall in Control (the one character of color of any sort of relevance to the story, who got the least dialogue or details about her life and involvement despite being part of the old guard, and that gets killed in the end).

-

I have the same criticism (affectionate) with Control and Quantum Break: the world, its history and other characters are more interesting (to me) than their protagonists.

I wanted to get far deeper into the inner lives of Beth Wilder, Paul Serene, William Joyce and Martin Hatch than Jack's. William's and Beth's specifically, the one who ruined everything and the one who's struggling with the fact it can't be fixed, respectively. Sure I got my fix from the novel, but that is not part of the main text, so my comment still stands.

Ahti and Polaris/Hedron's goals, The Oldest House and all the places and events and phenomenon it connects to is what makes my mind wander. Jesse's involvement with all of them and her relationships with other characters remain only as possibilities at the end of the game.

I would feel far less affection or attachment to either Jesse and Jack if it weren't because of the sibling element. That's my huge bias/weakness there I'll admit.

But with Saga, I do care about her entire world, everything and everyone that surround her. She likes weird, morbid stuffs and romance stories, she's extremely curious which got her in trouble but was responsible enough to go deal with it.

As a new protagonist character that stands right next to a well established one as Alan Wake, I think there's very little Remedy could've done to make her better.

She's just amazing, Remedy and Melanie Liburd deserve so much praise for her.

-

The only gripe I have about her treatment is extremely petty and it's the same I've had in previous games, which is technical - she could've had more animations that showed her body language given she didn't have as many live action scenes (and also watching some of previous Melanie's work, she's got an incredible voice range for certain emotions that weren't explored in the game). But that's a matter of presentation and technical development.

AND

Remedy flexed the leaps in improvement they've gone through already! I mean, Saga's animation of picking up things anyone???.

So here's hoping they got more plans for her and they include more live action.

[memento-mariii]

There's something I find hilarious about this perjorative korean incels (and honestly just about any korean website whose userbase tend to lean male; the incel problem is depressingly widespread and normalized here) use for non-misogynist men, "스윗남 (pronounced "sweet-nam")", that translates literally to "Sweet Man".

Like, that's just objectively not a bad thing to be??? Sorry that guys who actually respect women and have actual personalities get more pussy than you, bro. Maybe if you were a better person you'd get laid more.

It's just so embarrassingly obvious that they're just seething in jealousy 😂

EDIT: a TERF reblogged this so here's a reminder that trans women are women, trans men are men, and punching down at a group of fellow marginalized people who are *also* oppressed by the cisheteropatriarchal gender roles will not free us from the patriarchy.

[crimeronan]

On the topic of How Do You Handle XYZ Comment, I've always wondered how you handle terrible responses on your toh takes. Like I know the toh fandom doesn't lack piss on the poor reading comprehension and they also really enjoy wildly out of touch takes, but I've never seen any comments on your princess luz stuff of that nature. I'm sure they must be there but maybe I'm too early? But anyway, how do you tend to deal with the "acktually shipping luz and Hunter is incest" and the "ur not a real lesbian because putting amity in a poly ship is lesbian erasure" and the "as a white person kinda sus you make the poc woman an empress" kind of responses? Ones that are technically not hate and maybe if you squint could be from people who aren't inherently trying to do bad but just lack the maturity needed to engage with the internet at large?

this ask made me giggle. honestly, i haven't received as much pushback as you might expect! way less pushback than i expected. in the princess AU, i've gotten a LOT more "this is actually too grotesque for me to stomach" comments than "this is problematic" comments, which is fine. horror-thriller isn't for everyone, those comments do not upset me.

i have had a Few run-ins with bad faith people, whom i mostly block. there's one prolific commenter in toh tumblr fandom who would repeatedly write angry essays on my humor meta posts -- essays that were all about how belos is too evil to be sympathetic and/or about how hunter is a soft gentle boy who shouldn't be jokingly referred to as evil. then they'd go "i can't help my active and conscious decision to type a bunch of rude fucking words and then my active and conscious decision to send those rude fucking words because i'm autistic :(((" around the fourth or fifth time this happened, i was fucking done with that nonsense and finally blocked them. shoulda done it after the first comment tbh!! no more autism exceptions.

as for the rest of it, my main management strategy is to simply.... preempt the bad faith comments?

i had a LOT more unpleasant and conflict-filled fandom experiences when i was in the raven cycle fandom. that was my first exposure to "you can't ship multi-gender polycules if anyone involved is gay" and "queerplatonic het relationships are just heteronormativity shipping that you're trying to get away with." having dealt with those takes before, i've found a few different ways to disarm bad faith readers before they get started.

first is to be super open and honest about my interests. i talk about what i find compelling in different relationships All The Damn Time. it's really hard for anyone to accuse me of only wanting hunter to fuck amity if they've seen, like.... anything i've said about hunter and amity.

same with hunter and luz. the only negative reactions i've really gotten to how they're written in the princess AU is like.... two people being squicked by camila thinking they're romantically involved. i REALLY expected more pushback on the touchyfeely bed sharing stuff, but from what i remember, there's never been Any....? not even from people who consider them siblings.

i expected a lot of pushback on how mean hunter and amity are to each other, since it's taken So much farther than the canon. but it turns out that there's a very large overlap between people who like dark horror AUs and people who like hunter and amity murdering each other. (in a fluffy fic i don't think this characterization would fly Nearly as easily.)

i find that being funny really disarms people, too. when you look at any of my toh meta posts that could be controversial, they're basically all funny. people are a lot more willing to listen to what you have to say if you make them laugh, and it's harder for them to get angry at you.

and then the last thing is that i think i'm in sort of a privileged position in toh fandom. i've written a lot of controversial subjects and relationships and characterizations.... but i've also written some WILDLY popular mainstream fic. and people who like the mainstream fic don't really want to beef with me about differing niche opinions, bc there's a level of respect there. which they might not have for a writer they don't like.

but anyway. when things Do happen, i almost always just block and move on. there are so many people here who get what i'm talking about that there's no need for me to try to convert people who don't, you know??

[juliatv]

red speaker man and speaker woman playing PlayStation :3

"my headcanon" I think that red speaker man is a gloomy and smart brother and speaker woman is a cheerful and brave sister with a love of music

[coochiequeens]

The TQ+ love to shout "Just be Kind" until a lesbian states her belief in the importance of biological sex. Even though she didn't say anything mean to her TQ+ coworkers.

Prof Jo Phoenix was hounded out of the Open University for being gender critical

A group of academics who harassed her were blasted in an employment tribunal 

By STEWART CARR PUBLISHED:  3 February 2024 

These are the academics who were blasted in a stinging judgment by an employment tribunal after they hounded a lesbian lecturer out of her job.

Criminology expert Prof Jo Phoenix, 59, saw her name dragged through the mud at the Open University once her views on the importance of biological sex became known.

Despite assuring colleagues she was not transphobic, a small group of trans activist lecturers refused to set aside their personal politics to allow freedom of opinion.

Instead, ringleader Dr Leigh Downes, a female who identifies as non-binary, led a campaign against Prof Phoenix - publishing an open letter 'in order to create a pile-on', which amassed 368 staff signatures

Last week, in an extraordinary judgment, the participants were criticised for their vindictive motives; as well as their evidence, which a judge described as 'evasive' and 'not credible'.

Employment Judge Jennifer Young said: 'On multiple occasions, whenever gender critical views were expressed at the Open University, Dr Downes complained or tried to get the view suppressed. 

'The claimant's gender critical beliefs made Dr Downes feel palpably uncomfortable.'

The judge went on: 'The purpose of signing the open letter was to create an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for Prof Phoenix. 

'We conclude that having 368 of your colleagues sign a public letter saying that you are part of a group that is fundamentally transphobic, is stigmatising and damaging.'

Besides Dr Downes, other signatories in the open letter - Dr Helen Bowes-Catton, Dr Nicola Snarey, Prof Peter Keogh, Natalie Starkey and Dr Chris Williams - were found to have contributed to the hostility, despite their claims that they were expressing academic freedom.

The judge dismissed this reasoning and wrote: '[It] was not an exercise in academic freedom. There is nothing scholastic about the open letter, it stigmatised the claimant and damaged her reputation.'

Rather than stamp out the febrile atmosphere on campus, departmental leaders at the university left Prof Phoenix to face the onslaught alone and even blamed her for having spoken out in the first place.

Prof Louise Westmarland, a former friend who had unsuccessfully competed for the same job, likened the under-fire professor to 'a racist uncle at a dinner party'.

The head of the department, Dr Deborah Drake, caused huge distress by comparing Prof Phoenix to controversial US political scientist Charles Murray, whose views have been likened to a racist.  

Despite both of their denials, Judge Young found that on balance, they had indeed made the comments and both had contributed to the harassment of Prof Phoenix. 

Judge Young noted: 'We find that Dr Drake disliked the claimant expressing her gender critical position. 

'This was evident in her efforts to silence the claimant speaking about her research, comparing her to a prominent sociologist Charles Murray (perceived as being racist), and her frustration in her emails to various members... in particular Dr Downes.

'We consider that this was pivotal in creating and maintaining the hostile work environment."

'Dr Drake's role as head of department meant that she set the tone for the department. Professor Westmarland's behaviour towards the Claimant likening her to a racist uncle also contributed to the hostile atmosphere.'

The tribunal at Watford heard that Prof Phoenix, an expert in criminology, had began her academic career at the Open University 30 years earlier where she studied for her PhD. 

Having held senior posts at Durham University and the University of Leicester, she returned to the Open University in 2016, taking a £18,000 pay cut in order to enjoy a 'homecoming' for the final phase of her career.

Prof Phoenix's problems began in October 2018, when she signed a letter alongside 53 other academics, which appeared in The Guardian, criticising proposals for the introduction of self-identification in gender reassignment.

The tribunal heard the Guardian letter was met with dismay from Prof Phoenix's colleagues. One of them, history lecturer Dr Chris A Williams, wrote to his colleague Dr Helen Bowes-Catton and expressed deep concern about Prof Phoenix carrying out research into the area and even discussed getting an injunction against her.

The tribunal noted: 'Dr Williams was displaying an irrational fear and was hostile to the Claimant because she had gender critical beliefs.'

On March 6 2019, a planned conference into prison abolition was axed after several academics objected to Dr Richard Garside speaking at the event. He had previously written a critique against placing transgender prisoners in the women's estate.

On April 16, 2019, Prof Phoenix spoke up for women's sex-based rights at an event hosted by campaign group Women's Place UK and she criticised the university for cancelling its prison abolition conference.

A video of Prof Phoenix's speech was shared among colleagues.

Prof Louise Westmarland wrote, 'I can hardly bear to watch it' while Dr Downes claimed to have been reduced to tears, writing back to her: 'I watched it yesterday and had to take a walk. I found it very upsetting. Been a while since I cried at work.'

The panel read through a transcript of Prof Phoenix speech and noted: 'There is nothing in the talk that we find that would be upsetting.'

Prof Phoenix faced wrath from her colleagues again in June 2019, when she signed another letter, this time in The Sunday Times, criticising the closeness of UK universities with the LGBTQ charity Stonewall.

In September of that year, Prof Phoenix attempted to reach out to Dr Leigh Downes, to discuss carrying out research into trans prisoners, but her attempts were rebuffed.

In May 2021, Prof Phoenix was interviewed on a podcast called Savage Minds by the presenter Julian Vigo, where she discussed her gender critical beliefs. 

The following month, she launched the Open University's Gender Critical Research Network alongside Dr Jon Pike and Laura McGrath.

Giving evidence, Prof Phoenix told the tribunal she could never have imagined the level of backlash she would receive. 

Almost immediately, a WhatsApp group was set up by Open University staff. 

Among those involved in this WhatsApp group were Dr Leigh Downes, Dr Avi Boukli, Dr Chris Williams and Dr Helen Bowes-Catton, but they all denied before the tribunal that the group's purpose was to create a campaign against Prof Phoenix.

But the tribunal noted: 'We simply did not believe Dr Downes, Dr Boukli, Dr Bowes-Catton or Dr Williams' evidence on this point and find that the WhatsApp group was set up to counter gender critical beliefs at the OU and was being used to set up the open letter.'

On June 17, 2019, the 'open letter' blasting Prof Phoenix and the new Gender Critical Research Network was published on Google documents and was signed by 368 Open University staff. 

It stated: 'We call on the OU Vice Chancellor's Executive Team to take the following actions: 

'To withdraw its public support for and affiliation with the Gender Critical Research Network 

'To affirm their position as a trans inclusive employer 

'To commit to developing a concrete plan of action for supporting and affirming trans students and staff in this trans-hostile external and internal environment.'

Dr Downes, who published the document and was its first signatory, was unable to explain in court who drafted it, neither were fellow contributors Dr Williams and Dr Bowes-Catton.

On June 24, 2021, one of the open letter's signatories, Professor Peter Keogh, sent an email to the LGBT+ staff network email list blasting Prof Phoenix's gender critical network for 'sharing transphobic views and materials on their website'.

The tribunal noted: 'The purpose of the conduct was to violate the claimant's dignity. The claimant's email response the same day to Professor Keogh's email indicates that Professor Keogh's email affected her deeply.'

The 'punishing' backlash eventually led Prof Phoenix to leave the university in December 2021.

Last week, the court upheld almost 20 of her claims. A remedies hearing will take place to decide the damages owed to her.

It also ruled that the abuse Phoenix endured was harassment and the university's failure to protect her from it made it complicit in this treatment.

Professor Tim Blackman, Vice-Chancellor at the Open University, released this statement: 'This judgment made for difficult reading for all of us. In several areas we fell very short. We apologise unreservedly to Professor Phoenix for the hurt and distress this has caused. This is not The Open University we want to be.

'The University has supported and continues to support the work of the Gender Critical Research Network (GCRN) as part of the many important research activities that take place at the OU. But our understanding of academic freedom and freedom of speech at the time meant we did not intervene about the open letter, statements and social media posts that followed the GCRN's launch. The tribunal ruling makes it clear that we should have acted differently to address the impact of this reaction on Professor Phoenix and the working environment that she experienced. 

'We are sorry that this has been a painful episode for many colleagues. Research and academic debate are the life blood of universities. They are not at odds with inclusion, and we will find a path that encourages diversity of thought and views in the inclusive environment we all want to see at the OU. We have learned from the judgment and there is now more we need to do. The experience and outcome of this case will guide us with this important and essential work.

'We will be initiating a major independent review of our internal working environment. This will include addressing the challenge we and the sector face balancing the complexities of upholding academic freedom, freedom of speech, and equality and employment rights. It will help us to work together to ensure those with differing views are safe and free to express their opinions within the law.  

'Achieving our mission to be open to people, places, methods, and ideas depends on us all at the OU committing to take forward this learning and to treat each other with civility and respect however profoundly we may disagree.'

This is why I don't trust most libfems and non-binary or trans identified females over a certain age. Those women were willing to smear her reputation and cost another woman her job because she spoke against a movement that benefits men.

[xvs9000]

some st doodles of speakerwoman tv woman and ttv (we heart them sm)

[csuitebitches]

Interviews with Incredible Women

Here are some interviews that I think are absolutely brilliant, and I’ll explain why.

These women are trailblazers in what they do and I think, have really nailed the interview process down and you can tell because the more natural a person appears to be on camera, the more effort has gone into looking that way. Uneasiness, discomfort, shyness are easily spotted, especially with body language - and you can see the confidence just radiating from them.

Now, you may not like some of these women for whatever reason. I don’t really care about that - I’m simply looking at their oratorship, their presence in front of everyone and how they carry themselves. There’s obviously lots of powerful female orators, leaders and figures out there but I can’t possibly list them all so excuse me if I’ve missed out on your favourites - I’ll add them next time.

There’s a few things these women have in common:

1. They don’t always jump to answer. They think for a second or two before answering.

2. There are no filler sounds. They speak at a measured rate, which allows them to think ahead about their sentences.

3. They have a vast vocabulary.

4. They are not shy in disagreeing with the person in front of them. None of that diplomatic nonsense. There is clearly a strong sense of self identity and personality, unapologetically.

5. They show their vulnerabilities, weaknesses and hard times as thing of the past and accept them without a fuss- they don’t oppress themselves with it, and come across as strong survivors rather than wallowing in self pity. It’s what makes people admire them.

6. They don’t answer what they dont want to. And they beat around the bush with it, clearly stating that they will not answer those questions.

7. One thing I loved about Rekha’s interview - when questioned about an ex lover, she asks: “hey, is this interview about me or Mr Bacchan?” And it didnt come across as haughty or egoistical.

8. There’s feminineness in their strength. Them being strong in their stances is not masculine, overly aggressive or yelling - its firm, to the point, yet graceful.

This is what you should be looking at, carefully:

- body language

- Vocabulary

- Talking speed

- Gestures

- Facial expressions

- Voice modulation

- Expressing emotions

Video Links

1. Rekha

2. Princess Ameerah Al-Taweel

3. Meryl Streep

4. Indira Gandhi

5. Princess Diana

6. President Sirleaf

7. Lady Gaga

8. Naomi Campbell and Vivienne Westwood

9. Anna Karina

10. Michelle Yeoh

11. Mika Brzezinksi

[thefortysecondolive]

begging cis folks to unpack the phrase “women and non-binary people”