UK universities have failed to protect gender-critical academics from bullying and career-threatening restrictions on their research, according to a report.
The report, by Prof Alice Sullivan of University College London, recommends that students and staff “taking part in freedom-restricting harassment should face consequences commensurate with the seriousness of the offence”.
Sullivan said her report “raises stark concerns about barriers to academic freedom in UK universities. Researchers investigating vital issues have been subjected to sustained campaigns of intimidation simply for acknowledging the biological and social importance of sex.”
The report said the updated Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act, which comes into force in August, will uphold researchers’ rights in England, and calls for similar mechanisms in other parts of the UK. The report’s evidence pre-dates the UK supreme court’s April ruling on biological sex.
A government spokesperson said: “We are taking strong action to protect academic freedom and free speech, which are fundamental to our world-leading universities.
“This includes introducing new duties on universities to ensure they are robust in promoting and protecting free speech on campus. It also comes alongside the firm steps the Office for Students is already taking, through fines and new guidance, to ensure universities remain beacons of academic freedom.”
Sullivan’s other work includes a review commissioned by the previous Conservative government and published in March 2025 of barriers to research on sex and gender. The latest report’s call for evidence received 140 responses, the majority from people agreeing with gender-critical views – defined as a belief that biological sex is unchanging and should not be conflated with gender.
Sullivan blamed increasing layers of management and an insecure career structure for reducing academic autonomy, making researchers more vulnerable to internal and external pressures.
“Excessive and cumbersome bureaucratic processes have exacerbated the problem by providing levers for activists to exert influence. Academic institutions need to examine their policies and processes carefully to avoid these unintended outcomes,” she said.
“When fundamental issues cannot be investigated or debated openly, this undermines our academic institutions, it hurts individuals and it compromises the integrity of research. The suppression of research often harms the very groups that activists claim to support.”
The report said: “The decline of democratic academic governance means that, in most universities, the majority of academics engaged in teaching and research have little say or voice in how their universities are run.”
It recommends that universities help students to see “robust disagreement as an opportunity for intellectual growth rather than a threat”. They should also “avoid directing staff or students to mental health support resources in response to the presence of views with which they disagree”.
Many of the submissions detailed how research involving sex and gender was opposed or downgraded by other staff or administrators. It also included examples where Sullivan was targeted, including a planned talk that led to a one-day conference being cancelled in 2020.
Kathleen Stock, the professor of philosophy who resigned from the University of Sussex after protests and hostility from other academics, submitted detailed evidence on the three-year campaign of opposition she experienced for her gender-critical views.
Stock revealed a catalogue of abuse on campus and social media dating back to 2018, escalating to protests in autumn 2021 that she described as “a sustained campaign of intimidation” that led to her resignation.
A spokesperson for Universities UK, representing vice-chancellors, said: “In practice universities are bound by law to protect the free speech of individuals who have very different views on contentious topics. They are required both to allow and facilitate protest, and to prevent that protest creating an intimidatory or chilling environment on campus or from preventing staff and students from pursuing their work and studies.
“We will carefully consider this report as part of our work in supporting universities as they navigate these difficult issues.”
