Dr Sarah Hendrica Bickerton 🏳️‍🌈
banner
sarahhbickerton.bsky.social
Dr Sarah Hendrica Bickerton 🏳️‍🌈
@sarahhbickerton.bsky.social
Lecturer in public policy & tech, sociologist, tangata tiriti, feminist, geek, coffee-vampire, lesbian, urbanist, electric motorcyclist, ex-Chicagoan, wannabe Carol Danvers/Clarke Griffin/Kate Kane. She/her ❤️🖤🤍
https://about.me/sarahhendricabickerton/
Yes & no, more that they (including the clothing thing) all go back to the same root.
November 15, 2025 at 1:47 AM
Not at all, seriously. What an utterly stupid decision.
November 14, 2025 at 7:34 PM
Hope they kick up a stink against this kind of thing.
November 14, 2025 at 7:22 PM
I mean, we still have folks who think cellphone towers will give you cancer.

Like dude, do you know what the rate of drop-off by distance is for electromagnetic radiation? That rate INCREASES as you go up the ‘G’s … like 6G will have problems with the air molecules.
November 14, 2025 at 8:20 AM
Yeah, they’re looking at the Tāmaki Drive bus & car crash and saying “the media don’t want us to know!”
November 14, 2025 at 8:16 AM
But no, let’s fear-monger about vehicles with less moving parts, that generate massively less heat, that with modern batteries packs are far more protected than the literal metal container of explosive fluid you have hanging under your arse. Sure.
November 14, 2025 at 8:15 AM
Drive an ICE vehicle? Your machine is literally designed around barely contained explosions via a highly flammable liquid (heaven help you if it gets aerosolised) producing enormous amounts of heat that the whole system is desperately trying to get rid of. And that’s if it works perfectly.
November 14, 2025 at 8:12 AM
Abigail Thorn on Philosophy Tube did a really good breakdown (read: tearing to shreds) of this stuff ... bsky.app/profile/thea...
The new episode of Philosophy Tube is about birth rates, ageing populations, and moral panics. Check it out! 👶

youtu.be/AIDnr646tLA?...
You're Wrong About Birth Rates & Aging Populations
YouTube video by Philosophy Tube
youtu.be
November 14, 2025 at 4:25 AM
More directly said than I, Lew, well put.
November 14, 2025 at 2:44 AM
Oh, I don't think we need to comment on another woman that way either, further it individualises the issue rather than it being something more systemic and structural.

I would thus personally avoid commenting on the sexual/relationship history of a woman journalist to discredit her.
November 14, 2025 at 2:39 AM
More crucially, this sucks btw, we as academics HATE to lose access to journals, because not only does it impact our ability to publish, we can't access the latest research either. This blows chunks.

But that shows just how strongly we all feel on this.
November 14, 2025 at 1:56 AM
And this is ever more likely to occur the more senior, powerful, or popular, the man is.
November 14, 2025 at 1:48 AM
Their sexual histories will be brought up, their clothing is mentioned, any perceived lack of resistance (though of course not violent resistance, because too much is also negative) will be noted, as well as anything other than the perfect (undefined) reaction to the act(s) itself/themselves.
November 14, 2025 at 1:45 AM
It is regular as clockwork, you can almost set your watch to it, and is part of why so many women are loath to speak up and out about such things, because they rightly know the worst parts of their lives will be dissected & demeaned in order to discredit them.
November 14, 2025 at 1:41 AM
Yeah, it’s by Roof, and it’s called the Djagger. I’m genuinely interested, it’s very very cool, but I’d expect it to be expensive, and I’m a little concerned that introducing motors is introducing complexity and hence failure/break points that’ll just make your helmet unusable, crashes aside.
November 13, 2025 at 8:38 AM