When I started my academic career at the Open University (OU) in the UK, feminism was opposed to the determinism of biological sex as a force in determining identity. Instead, the malleable influence of gender and culture was emphasized.
So it seems strange that a gender-critical feminist like Joe Phoenix is now advocating for gender superiority. But there is a reason for this apparent reversal. Additionally, harassment, victimization, and discrimination should not be a response from colleagues, even if they disagree.
As transgender activism gains momentum, cisgender women are increasingly concerned about the safety of women and girls in spaces such as restrooms and workplaces. For decades, women have been fighting against toxic masculinity and sexual harassment. They united around the common experiences of biological women: menstruation, pregnancy, childbirth, and menopause. And they fear that highly publicized cases, such as the jailing of a male rapist who identified as female in a Scottish women’s prison, are just the tip of the iceberg.
However, people who identify as transgender also have compelling human rights. A 2022 Canadian study found that transgender youth are 7.6 times more likely to attempt suicide than cisgender youth. Transgender youth suffer disproportionately from mental health issues such as bullying, isolation, self-harm, anxiety, and rejection. People who identify as transgender are not robbed of a cheap ticket out of a “normal” life.
Many faculty members at OU who adopted only that second human rights position made Ms. Phoenix’s life so difficult that she felt forced to resign. The university was criticized for failing to protect her from her “hostile environment” in an employment tribunal ruling last month.
Women’s and transgender rights are just one of the edgy cultural debates in educational institutions. We are embroiled in conflicts that seem almost irreconcilable: Islamophobia versus anti-Semitism, immigration versus national identity, religious freedom versus homophobia and patriarchal oppression. And her OU isn’t the only one finding it difficult to navigate such terrain. In my experience, most universities are completely dysfunctional.
For example, two-thirds of US higher education institutions now offer anti-bias training. However, extensive research has concluded that such training “does not reduce bias, change behavior, or change the workplace.” In fact, we often increase prejudice by dividing people into binaries of those who are indisputably privileged and those who are clearly oppressed.
For example, all people with white privilege are hostile to all BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) people, including wealthy political leaders and royalty, even those who grew up in poverty. It will be. This is despite three million people in the UK alone being of mixed race, and high rates of self-reported discrimination among Irish, Jewish, Roma and Travellers.
Straight identity is also contrasted with LGBTQ+ identity, but young bisexual British people feel excluded from both gay and straight communities. Setting people against each other in such mutually exclusive ways is a zero-sum game.
On the other hand, some academics oppose canceling culture through free speech. But the problem is not just that free speech allows hateful views to be broadcast. The libertarian position simply allows for the coexistence of conflicting positions. It does not provide a way to bring people’s perspectives and rights closer together in a democratic intellectual community.
There are better ways than tolerating a cacophony of opinions. It is to replace the framework of individual human rights pursued at the expense of the rights of others with so-called competing human rights.
Let’s start with the Human Rights Code of Ontario, Canada. It aims to encourage people to show dignity and respect to each other and to share responsibility for finding agreeable solutions. It also rejects power imbalances and human rights hierarchies and advocates mutual and maximum recognition of interests, rights, and obligations.
How would this help Phoenix and her critics? It would bring them together in a facilitated dialogue based on protocols that ensure active listening. Rights and risks will be addressed on both sides. Clear ground rules are set, such as civility, empathy, humility, tolerance, rationality, and practicality. It might even encourage transgender students and scholars to collaborate with gender-critical peers on common projects and generate mutual understanding.
Practical solutions could be explored, such as better unisex toilets. All students, faculty and staff exercise the right to choose and display their own pronouns without pressure on others to post their pronouns. Misplaced pronouns or misattributed identities will likely result in a sincere apology and swift correction, rather than a lengthy punitive interrogation. Course materials include readings on competing perspectives.
Cancel culture has to stop. But we also cannot maintain a free-for-all situation where the loudest voices and most powerful lobbies prevail. Rather than diminishing or destroying each other’s human rights, competing human rights frameworks will enable us to expand our humanity together.
Andy Hargreaves is Professor Emeritus at Swansea University, Research Professor at Boston University, and Visiting Professor at the University of Ottawa. Co-authored with Dennis Shirley: The age of identity: Who do children think they are and how can we help them feel like they belong?