Reading University law lecturer’s office door ‘covered in urine’ after transgender-rights debate

By on

Professor Rosa Freedman fears for safety after raising concerns over proposed changes to Gender Recognition Act

Professor Rosa Freedman and the University of Reading

A University of Reading law professor has claimed her office door was drenched in urine after she expressed her views on the law relating to sex and gender identity. Professor Rosa Freedman, a specialist in law conflict and global development, said she had also received a number of threatening calls, including one telling her she “should be raped and killed”.

Taking to Twitter yesterday, Freedman said she was scared for her “physical safety” and had resorted to “hiding behind trees” because of her “views that a woman is defined by law as biological not psychological”.

The 35-year-old, who is against self-identification, raised concerns publically about how changes to the law, namely the Gender Recognition Act, and how this might affect womans’ rights.

Continuing, the Queen Mary, University of London law grad claimed academics were “being demonised, harassed, and targeted for expressing opinions based on the expertise for which we were hired and for why we are revered.”

Responding to the tweets, Dr Chloё Houston, an associate professor in early modern drama at Reading uni, said she “100%” condemned the abusive treatment and called on the protestors to “take their masks off”.

Freedman told Legal Cheek: “The University supports academic freedom, as do my colleagues and many students. A very small minority of trans rights activists are trying to intimidate people or shut down debate, but we have seen over recent weeks that these discussions are occurring regardless and I will continue to contribute opinions based on my research on international human rights law where and when appropriate to do so.”

In a statement on Twitter, the University of Reading said:

“We are aware of the alleged incidents against a member of staff and we are investigating them. The safety of students and staff is our top priority and we do not tolerate any form of harassment or intimidation, but until we know more detail we cannot say anything further.”

According to her LinkedIn, Freedman completed an LLM at UCL before going on to study the Bar Vocational Course (now the Bar Professional Training Course) at City, University of London.

For all the latest commercial awareness info, and advance notification of Legal Cheek's careers events:

Sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub



Sickening. Not only is she being physically attacked and harassed for having an opinion (which in its own right would be a troubling state of affairs), but in this case her opinion is not only reasonable but the common-sense majority view of things, grounded in scientific fact.

It is absolute nonsense that a vocal minority of leftist radicals have been allowed to dominate this debate, to the extent that casual observers probably think that the momentum driving us towards “self identification” culture is irreversible.

We have to be clear that normal people think this trans lobby guff is just that: irredeemable garbage.



Marking territory in this way is a very primitive MALE thing to do.

Why are we being made to legitimise a fiction?



“her opinion is not only reasonable but the common-sense majority view of things, grounded in scientific fact.”

Keep this out of it please. How “reasonable” her opinion is is irrelevant. It’s not worse to attack someone with opinions you think are right than someone who has opinions you think are wrong. That is the exact line of thinking that leads to attacks like this.

Personally I am in favour of the proposed reforms to the law, but I still think attacks like this are sinister and sickening.



These urine throwers need to be prosecuted for criminal damage. This abuse needs to stop.



Surely you can’t be serious?






It’s a reference to Airplane! for those who misunderstood the joke.



Oh, I too often have bodily fluids all over my office – not to worry, I have the number for a great cleaner.



Well the transgender lobby are very rattled at the moment.

Mainly by this case:

Which completely exposes the nonsense behind their position.

After all, it is ok in [current year] to ignore the biological reality of a penis and XY chromosomes, why not also ignore the biological reality of when you left your mother’s womb?

So we should expect them to be rather hysterical for a while until they figure it all out.


Ziggy the Zebra

But if I FEEL like a Zebra, then I must be recognised as one, notwithstanding the fact that I was assigned homosapien at birth.



I’m applying to have my bank account altered to reflect that I am in fact a billionaire



I’m not quite as extreme as you but I do self-identify as a wealthy person despite working in Legal Aid.

Do you have any advice on how to sue my bank for not enabling me?



What if the door self-identifies as clean?



Please don’t be thyraphobic.



I self-identify as a top, top titan.

But then, I am a partner at Greenberg Glusker LLP.



Trans activists legitimise real violence against real women because of the abstract “violence” that they feel is being perpetrated against them by real women objecting to their claimed womanhood.



Hit the nail on the head.


solicitor who solicits

I can’t see what the debate is. I understand there is a desire to be recognized or called male or female or transgender. But, then there is the physical reality of a person’s gender. If a person wants to be identified as a woman or a man, then fine, but it does not alter his/her/it/them physical and biological state. It therefore must follows that if any identification documents must state the facts as to the holder’s biology.



Why should a document state a biological gender rather than their psychological gender? Likewise, why should you be limited to using restrooms of your biological gender rather than your psychological gender?

It makes greater sense to me that the psychological gender should be the one that matters. The biological gender is more relevant when it comes to medical procedures, or classifying groupings for sporting events. Your day to day right to use the appropriate restroom and your overall identity (e.g. as displayed on official documents) should be based on your psychological gender.



But surely biological is more important, as you pointed out, it is relevant for medical procedures. If this is the case, why not list both? Why just the one. Surely the idea of an Identification Document is to provide accurate information. I am happy to list both as biological male that identifies as male.



I agree, it would be reasonable to list both on identification documentation. However, in certain cases where one or the other must apply, then it may be necessary for a certain call to be made (i.e. it is up to the individual to decide based on either the biological or psychological gender they associate which restroom they use).



For those committed enough to have the surgery, I have no objection to them being recategorised and recognised in their new gender.

What I object to is a person with a penis being allowed into women’s private spaces such as toilets and changing rooms because they “feel” like a woman today.



Aren’t there separate cubicles in the ladies toilets so it doesn’t really matter?


Sandra from Accounts

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.



Fighting over pronouns…

Those who fought in the war for freedoms would be ashamed that people are using their time to argue about gender issues to the scale of this.


Lt. Aldo Raine

Now, I don’t know about y’all, but I sure as hell didn’t come down from the goddamn Smoky Mountains, cross five thousand miles of water, fight my way through half of Sicily and jump out of a fuckin’ aeroplane so dudes could wear dresses.


Cpl Max Klinger, 4077th MASH

…but I did!



This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.



As a woman, I don’t feel defined by either my reproductive biology or by ‘shame’. Cheers.



Are you trans or biological woman, though?



I’d sincerely love to see the transphobic prospective lawyers/lawyers in this comments section have their comments exposed to grad rec, pupillage committees and HR. Keyboard warriors tend to lose steam without their anonymity.

In other news – the embarassment of being wrong ought to be sufficient punishment for this woman. Nobody should ever fear for their safety merely for being wrong.



I’d love to see the HR team get rammed in their asses by the firms’ internal cybersecurity/GDPR brigade if they get wind of HR using such information



Yeah, the LC comments are something else. I think the commenters are mostly not employed (hence why there are so many articles on how to get pupillage/TC – these are the ones that get clicked on). I guess they are mostly students who mostly occupy certain echo-chambery corners of the internet. It’s interesting that you don’t get these kind of views expressed at all on the RoF comments/message boards, which is where more practicing lawyers post. Honestly it makes me a bit worried for student wellbeing — I think it seems that there are a lot of unhappy young people out there (although obviously that doesn’t excuse bigotry).



Hear hear. Most BTL commenters are definitely students with an axe to grind and an ego to bloat. The quality of commentary under the articles is saddening. Every now and then you get someone who sounds sensible (like the poster above). The rest of them don’t appear to know jack s**t about legal practice.



Nope. Practising solicitor here. Haven’t commented before this but I generally agree with the sentiments before.



Yeah you say so but wouldn’t a (competent) practising lawyer spell “practising” correctly – I mean, presumably you’ve seen the word used before and used it yourself?

For your future reference: practice is the noun; practise the verb.

I wish you the best of luck in your HR role.



And that is the problem with expressing an opinion nowadays.

You never know when your opinion is going to become “unfashionable” and will lead to loss of career/status in later life.

Without a crystal ball it’s left to the extremists with nothing to lose to set the agenda.

The silent majority have to keep one eye on the future in case the nutters win and their sensible but later unfashionable views are used to destroy them.

That is the trans activist method.

They have relatively little public support but want to impose their false “I am a woman with a penis”
misogynist agenda on real
Womankind by declaring that the issue is beyond debate.


tfw ur so right about things that you have to rely on the fear of the other person getting fired to win an argument



Real life

It is the craziest thing I have heard. But this is the world we live in. A lot of modern feminists have to take responsibility for this though. The initial wave wanted equality. Then came a bunch of feminists who decided that gender was an accident of nature and that gender has no relevance to anything. So of course along came some mentally ill folk who claim that because they feel a certain way, the rest of society should treat them that way, ultimately undermining what women worked hard to achieve.



“I’d sincerely love to see the transphobic prospective lawyers/lawyers in this comments section have their comments exposed to grad rec, pupillage committees and HR.“

Yeah track down and persecute young people who hold different opinions or who just come here for a bit of light-heated banter – because in history that’s always ended well, hasn’t it?

And have you ever considered that there may be a time when YOUR far-left (but now wholly institutionalised) views will fall out of favour – would YOU like it if you were tracked down and persecuted?

Why do you assume that it’s always going to be YOUR boot stamping on someone else’s face?


Calm down self identification is the perfect hustle

The way I see all this trans self identification b.s is the ace in the hole for me in terms of enhancing my chances of securing a training contract. As I minority with M.E (self disgnosed). I can play the race card, tick the disability section on equalities monitoring, and now because of self identification I can capitalise on parasitic feminist demands for quotas, and positive discrimination for women or at the very least I can capitalise on the lgbt pc lunacy rubbish without question no opp needed, just a decent ability to fib here and there.




If straight white men can self identify as gay black women, then who are HR to question that if this lunacy goes through.



Revered seems to be a rather generous description



I self-identify as a giant schlong swinger at Jones Day. I was born as an ambulance chaser at Irwin Mitchell.



What a complete load of crap….psychopathic tossers….FACT…regardless of the drooping appendage.
This woman has earned her right to express her learned opinion. This doesn’t give the confused ignorant psychos a right to piss on her door.

Ambulance chasers don’t qualify. Your opinion is worthless. Get yourself some morals and put your education to something useful rather than robbing the dead.



Y so angry 😬?



“Hiding behind trees” lol.

What is this – a Benny Hill sketch?



Professor Rosa Freedman “a specialist in law conflict and global development” yeah right



Hurt feelings are a reason to react violently and put this woman in prison for causing offence.





I’m with the proper women on this one.


Jobbie Travers

Y did LC removed my comments HAHHAHAHA?! Censorship?


Danesh the Tranesh

Why we no hear about more BAME trans?

I am BAME trans woman lesbian.

I am most discriminated agains person on earth!


Comments are closed.

Related Stories