For those interested, I thought I would provide a quick update about my response (objection) to my removal from the Feminist Criminology Editorial Board. Quick reminder: I was removed because I published a peer-reviewed article in said journal that recognized the distinction between sex and gender and opposed the prioritization of in-the-moment gender self-ID over sex for access to all (formerly) sex-separated spaces, no exceptions. (See here for a description of situation.)
Last week I requested a review of the rationale and process of my removal from the editorial board. I directed this request for review of the process and justification to the Chair of the Division of Women and Crime (DWC), who convened with the DWC Executive Board (this is the group that voted to accept the recommendation of the (overlapping) Editorial Board Committee to remove me on the basis of my ‘WrongSpeak)’. The overlap is due to Dr. Vanessa Garcia, who basically served in multiple, non-independent, roles in this particular situation.
DWC Backdrop: Late last year, the DWC chair stepped down, chair-elect became chair, a vocal group on the listserv pressured all non-BIPOC non-LGBTQ Executive Board members to step down; they did, including the new chair. Vanessa Garcia became the acting (unelected) chair; she and the executive board members (some unelected) developed the new ‘diversity and inclusion statement’ and created a new ‘Editorial Board Committee’ to oversee the Feminist Criminology Editorial Board; (I’ve never heard of an editorial board committee), which she then appoints herself to serve on, serves on and recommends my removal, and then when the recommendation to remove me reaches the Executive Board, she then votes as a member in support of my removal.
On May 13, 2021, I wrote this to the Chair of the DWC
Naively, I believed that I would write this email, and they would recognize the lack of procedural justice, and we would have a healthy discussion and they would be willing to poll the members. Alas, no.
I received this response a week later.
I suppose I should no longer be shocked, but I am. The request was simple: allow me to have a voice in these one-sided proceedings, poll the membership to see if my removal was something that the membership would approve. Apparently, they do not just oppose free inquiry and oppose the airing of diverse viewpoints on important social issues related to women and crime, but also they are not interested in fair or democratic procedures.
Good to know.
5 thoughts on “Response (Objection) to My Removal from Editorial Board”
Wow…Thanks for the update. This is enlightening. It feels like a doubling down on unscientific thinking…
LikeLiked by 1 person
The proud and smug authoritarianism on display is frightening. No scholar with any sense of ethics should submit articles to this journal. I am a sociologist who can’t openly discuss my views on this issue for fear of an online mob attack. There is a quasi-religious fervor around the topic of gender that is sweeping the nation and now its coming for any woman who is out of line, expert or not.
This is exactly right! And worse, the silencing for fear of mob responses doesn’t help us to better understand anything at all. My circle of colleagues often note the same issue, and it’s just not worth asking scientific questions about gender—not in this anti-intellectual climate.
Thanks for the update, and I will definitely NOT consider this journal for publication as they clearly do not embrace diverse discussion. So sorry you have been unfairly ostracized.
Pingback: Who represents the interests of female staff in Scottish universities? – MurrayBlackburnMackenzie