I'm pro Callie H. Burt. Her article in Feminist Criminology is a heroic act.
Callie H. Burt support thread.
-
Is this the one?:
"The US Equality Act, which amends civil rights statutes to explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, passed the House in May 2019 with unanimous Democratic support. Adopting a feminist perspective, I scrutinize the act from a largely neglected position, one that supports both LGBTQ and sex-based rights. Although laudable in its aims, the Equality Act is objectionable in form. Rather than create new protected classes, the Equality Act's provides non-discrimination protections to LGBTQ individuals by redefining sex to include gender identity and sexual orientation. This is not only terminologically imprecise but also creates a clash between sex-based and gender identity-based rights. By defining gender identity as something that exists to be protected "regardless of sex", the act undermines sex-based provisions, replacing them with provisions based on gender self-identification. Recognizing confusion over terminology, I describe key terms (sex, gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation) and consider various usages. I conclude by discussing ways the bill might be modified so as to protect LGBTQ people without undermining women's rights."
If so, what is the objection? That sex and gender are the same thing, or what? I haven't read past the abstract yet; haven't seen anything objectionable in the abstract though.
-
Here is the objection to Burt's article raised in the letter sent to DWC by Erin et al:
"Second, considering the newsletter’s public (albeit performative) admonishment of racism within the Division, it is especially troubling to see that the Division (vis a vis its journal Feminist Criminology) is now also characterized by blatant transphobia and the suppression of queer scholarship. In 2020, Feminist Criminology published an article by Dr. Callie Burt, entitled “Scrutinizing the US Equality Act 2019: A Feminist Examination of Definitional Changes and Sociolegal Ramifications,” which argues (among other things) that including protections for trans people in the Act devalues the rights of those “born female.” Following its publication, the editorial board did not solicit responses or commentary -- a failure on its part to foster dialog on such a controversial (and outright transphobic) article. Moreover, when trans* inclusive feminist, legal, and queer criminology scholars attempted to submit a rejoinder, Feminist Criminology desk rejected the piece. That the journal would publish such an article speaks to its diminishing support of marginalized scholars and research on marginalized populations while simultaneously signaling an unspoken shift to a myopic viewpoint of what it considers to be “good” research. Given that the piece was published without so much as a public invitation for a rejoinder is morally suspect. As a result, some queer scholars (who have previously faced challenges with the journal) have vowed to not submit further manuscripts for consideration or to accept requests to provide reviews. Furthermore, some members of the Division, including several signatories of this letter, have recently experienced highly unprofessional responses to their submissions to the journal and have written evidence of their treatment. Consequently, a rapidly increasing number of highly experienced feminist scholars have made explicit that they will not submit their work to the journal for review due to longstanding issues with its editorial direction. This is problematic given there are so few outlets for critical criminologists and victimologists to publish and amplify their work."
-
Here is the objection to Burt's article raised in the letter sent to DWC by Erin et al:
"Second, considering the newsletter�s public (albeit performative) admonishment of racism within the Division, it is especially troubling to see that the Division (vis a vis its journal Feminist Criminology) is now also characterized by blatant transphobia and the suppression of queer scholarship. In 2020, Feminist Criminology published an article by Dr. Callie Burt, entitled �Scrutinizing the US Equality Act 2019: A Feminist Examination of Definitional Changes and Sociolegal Ramifications,� which argues (among other things) that including protections for trans people in the Act devalues the rights of those �born female.� Following its publication, the editorial board did not solicit responses or commentary -- a failure on its part to foster dialog on such a controversial (and outright transphobic) article. Moreover, when trans* inclusive feminist, legal, and queer criminology scholars attempted to submit a rejoinder, Feminist Criminology desk rejected the piece. That the journal would publish such an article speaks to its diminishing support of marginalized scholars and research on marginalized populations while simultaneously signaling an unspoken shift to a myopic viewpoint of what it considers to be �good� research. Given that the piece was published without so much as a public invitation for a rejoinder is morally suspect. As a result, some queer scholars (who have previously faced challenges with the journal) have vowed to not submit further manuscripts for consideration or to accept requests to provide reviews. Furthermore, some members of the Division, including several signatories of this letter, have recently experienced highly unprofessional responses to their submissions to the journal and have written evidence of their treatment. Consequently, a rapidly increasing number of highly experienced feminist scholars have made explicit that they will not submit their work to the journal for review due to longstanding issues with its editorial direction. This is problematic given there are so few outlets for critical criminologists and victimologists to publish and amplify their work."Has anyone offered a substantive critique, or is it all entirely "performative" posturing as in the excerpt above?
-
Here is the objection to Burt's article raised in the letter sent to DWC by Erin et al:
"Second, considering the newsletter?s public (albeit performative) admonishment of racism within the Division, it is especially troubling to see that the Division (vis a vis its journal Feminist Criminology) is now also characterized by blatant transphobia and the suppression of queer scholarship. In 2020, Feminist Criminology published an article by Dr. Callie Burt, entitled ?Scrutinizing the US Equality Act 2019: A Feminist Examination of Definitional Changes and Sociolegal Ramifications,? which argues (among other things) that including protections for trans people in the Act devalues the rights of those ?born female.? Following its publication, the editorial board did not solicit responses or commentary -- a failure on its part to foster dialog on such a controversial (and outright transphobic) article. Moreover, when trans* inclusive feminist, legal, and queer criminology scholars attempted to submit a rejoinder, Feminist Criminology desk rejected the piece. That the journal would publish such an article speaks to its diminishing support of marginalized scholars and research on marginalized populations while simultaneously signaling an unspoken shift to a myopic viewpoint of what it considers to be ?good? research. Given that the piece was published without so much as a public invitation for a rejoinder is morally suspect. As a result, some queer scholars (who have previously faced challenges with the journal) have vowed to not submit further manuscripts for consideration or to accept requests to provide reviews. Furthermore, some members of the Division, including several signatories of this letter, have recently experienced highly unprofessional responses to their submissions to the journal and have written evidence of their treatment. Consequently, a rapidly increasing number of highly experienced feminist scholars have made explicit that they will not submit their work to the journal for review due to longstanding issues with its editorial direction. This is problematic given there are so few outlets for critical criminologists and victimologists to publish and amplify their work."
Has anyone offered a substantive critique, or is it all entirely "performative" posturing as in the excerpt above?Asking the SJW folk for a critique is one thing, but asking for the critique to have substance.... come on...