Anger over UCU’s ‘anti-scientific’ fight against Cass Review

Who exactly does UCU represent and how can they stand up against a review led by experts? This is a disgrace

Why is the UCU wasting its time sticking its collective nose into something that is outwith its remit - the legal term is "ultra vires" [beyond its powers]? It is not their role to comment on reviews or research, it's there to represent the membership collectively in pay & conditions negotiations and individually whenever a member needs defending against injustice or abuse. You'd have thought that would have kept them quite busy enough.

Those of us who are UCU members have only ourselves to blame. With a few small exceptions, no one wants to step up and take office, at any level, in the union except for a tiny minority of delusional far-left extremists. This (and the disgraceful statement on Ukraine from last year, which caused many Slavonicist colleagues to quit) is the result. I'm just as guilty. At the next opportunity I'll put my name forward. I really, really, don't want to, but stepping up is the only way to get a leadership that is in any way representative of the of members.

Have now quit UCU. Idiots. Final straw

I long for the day UCU stuck to fighting for the working conditions of members. No wonder membership is haemorrhaging.

UCU should be resisting politicized attacks on academics' work, not leading them

In the Kiera Bell case, the High Court stated that there was effectively only one mode of treatment on offer to patients at GIDS, namely puberty blockers invariably followed by sex hormones. The alternative being no treatment. THAT is why NHSE had to close GIDS: it isn't possible that every patient requires identical treatment varied only by dosage and start date. It's also no coincidence that GIDS received the lowest possible NICE inspection rating of 'inadequate' in 2020, leading to the Cass Review. If you dismiss Cass, the High Court and NICE inspection what do you put in its place?

One of the more bizarre political developments of recent years has been the rise and rise of anti-science positions among both right and left. The only difference is which particular pieces of scientific evidence they dislike. Disappointing but not surprising to see UCU staying on trend.

Can the UCU NEC explain why the number of referrals to gender services has expanded by 3000% of the last 10 years or why the ratio.of prospective transitioners has gone from 80% male to 80% female? Can they explain why the majority of them are same sex attracted or why a third have autism or why so many of them are victims of homophobia or sexual abuse? Gender affirming care will in my opinion turn out to be the biggest medical scandal since lobotomies. It is quack medicine with no evidence base.