Woman's Place UK meeting threatened with "device"

Ok, anyone up for emailing the Daily Mail?

Prof. Michael Biggs article: users.ox.ac.uk/~sfos0060/FreeSpeechOxford.pdf

(extract)
"After the meeting a transwoman who founded Trans Oxford (Amada Dee) took to twitter to condemn ‘the shameful campaign of #bullying and #intimidation organised by the students and #transactivists outside of the #QuakerHouse. … I think @WomansPlaceUK do invite everyone as long as they have something to #contribute to the #debate. I know a number of #transsexuals who attended and spoke at their #events (and were immediately branded as apostates by the #transcommunity).’ This demonstrates yet again that transgender activists cannot claim to speak for the entire community of transgender people, whose political views are as diverse as any other demographic group.

Perversely, the violence and intimidation inflicted by transgender activists is then used to portray themselves as victims. Woman’s Place cannot announce their meetings in advance because the venue will be harassed, and so transgender activists portray it as a secretive organization. Dr Clara Barker, a transwoman at the University of Oxford, refused to attend the meeting despite having a personal invitation from one of the speakers, Dr Nic Williams.
Barker cited safety fears: ‘A number of events involving people who oppose trans-rights have ended up with physical violence.’ Of course the only violence at such events has been inflicted by transgender activists on women.

Campaigns of harassment and intimidation have become staple tools of transgender activism in the last fifteen years"

The full statement made by Amanda Dee (founder of Trans Oxford) is below in thread.
She commented after protests at WPUK meeting in Oxford,

"last night the tables have turned - and the bullied became the bullies"

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3234661-Condemnation-of-the-shameful-campaign-of-bullying-intimidation-against-WPUK-meeting-by-founder-of-TransOxford

@Alltheprettyseahorses

I would have agreed with you until I read Clare's blog.

Why is there no press coverage of this incident?

Especially now that WPUK have revealed this is their second event to receive bomb threats.

And now we can wonder on all the venues that cancelled events citing 'safety concerns'.

So we are concerned about a bomb threat, then bomb making equipment being found, and someone who gets off with asking no consent, on using people as props in a fantasy is derailing it?

Hello, any press about?

Please see the following thread for examples of persistant derailing during serious discussions about vulnerable women in homeless services (including a murder) and the privacy and dignity of school girls:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3266198-No-True-Transwoman-transadvocates-question-whether-TW-is-genuine-after-said-TW-sexually-harasses-women-in-homeless-shelter

Clare, I was reading your blog in which you describe being sexually aroused by the fantasy of yourself as a woman.

Is that not precisely the definition of autogynaephilia (AGP) which is Latin for a man being aroused by fantasies of being a woman?

I don't like the victim blaming and minimising that has gone on.

Why is there no press coverage of this incident?

There have been a few posts recently that suggest that it's women's fault that anti feminism is on the increase. Often it's because we object to certain words,don't speak in an acceptable way, don't speak as one or don't engage enough.

I don't think this is correct. I don't think women acting or not acting in a particular way will stop people being against the liberation of women and girls.

And I agree with Lang and Joan

For shame read 'conscious decision'

I mean as a consensus? Because I see posts written in what seems an attempt to satisfy one person torn apart by the next.

..surely there IS no 'as a consensus' on a public message board, as people all have their own opinions on stuff?

'Pile on' irritates me. We are many, there are lots of us, because it's a feminist board for women. I don't know why it's expected that when one or two come on to express a different view, even an anti-woman view, we should decide between ourselves that most of should withdraw to make it even and not a 'pile on'. It's just another silencing tactic.

When people tell you who they are, believe them.

Yes, absolutely.

Exactly Lang

Incidentally, it's a shame the National Newspapers haven't published a story about this threat. It would hopefully really hit home about what we are truly up against....

Insofar as I can see, there was a bomb threat against WPUK that the police have taken very seriously and this prompted Clare to turn up in order to minimise the fact that transactivism has created an environment so hostile to women that we are now facing actual, bona fide, terrorism.

For me, this characterises extremist transactivism. Absolutely, utterly, totally incapable of reflecting on the consequences of its demands and actions if they affect any group but itself.

Women should take note. When people tell you who they are, believe them.

I disagree that they were ever engaging constructively. They were merailing and it was really innappropriate in the circumstances. Since then a link to their blog has been posted, I suggest you check it for yourself and think on how constructive any dialogue with this person is going to be. It isn't worth my time, I can tell you that.

Pressed too soon...

Quiten down to let others have their say? Hen simply have to go along with it and any anger, disagreement or passion is seen as aggression or transphobia.

We have to take a different angle and give the benefit of the doubt to someone who has publicly said they are AGP, ignored male violence, made a threat against women about how it will affect the trans community, ignored any calls for debate and explanation...

But is us who have to see everything g from another perspective?

Have you read Clare's blog SeaHorses?

I think for me, I wanted to engage with Clare, but I didn't feel Clare was being truly authentic once I had started to read the blogs and especially what was said about WP.

Clare was repeatedly asked to explain. Many points and Clare choice to ignore. It came across quite high and mighty and like Clare was unwilling to engage.

Why is it always, always up to us to make the allowances? Quite down to let others have their say?

Who has to be nice? I probably follow half of you on twitter and some of you might be following me back. I use my real name on there and my posts are often very robust to say the least. But it doesn't hurt to find common ground with someone seeking to engage constructively. I probably don't agree with them as much as anyone, but there was a fair amount of game-playing going on.

Great series of important quotes by women:
ReSisters UK
'Women who refuse to be silenced'

(June 15th)
twitter.com/ResistersUK/status/1007877932877041664

Picasso - many will be unaware of these type of arguments. It's important people know the true reality of the situation.

But Joan - don't forget it's they who are the vulnerable ones. They need protection.

Us female- born- female- identifying people are the ones with all the privilege and power....

Sigh.

We can't function like that as a group, which is what we need to be to help our cause.

So now it's all about ClareFlourish because we are mean?

I wonder how many other ways can be found to make this be all about people who aren't women?

I'd have been quite happy with a quick "this is terrible and I am fully in support with women speaking and meeting about their rights, and completely in opposition to the extreme and violent actions of antifeminist trans activists"

and stopping there

It is so fucking boring having the same sex of people constantly making everything all about them, centering themselves in every conversation about women, and now we arent even allowed to point out the sex of the people doing this, even though feminism has a long established criticism and awareness of the behaviour they are displaying?

It's fucking jokes mate.

ClareFlourish has a pretty standard BS antifeminist blog btw. Their posts on this thread have been shown up to be entirely disingenuous and my suspicions about the sort of person they are have been completely validated.

Maybe you should focus a bit less on how nice women are to people who aren't us at a time when we are under attack, and a bit more on your basic logic when you think feminists can be allied with antifeminists, and women can be allied with misogynists. I don't need to learn to 'function as as group' with people who want to erase me. Are you daft?

This "women have AGP" is a common deflection.

The trans bandwagon has been created by cross dressers. They are not jumping on it.

Alltheprettyseahorses

I don't have any obligation to engage in group think here or anywhere else in fact.

People ask questions and post comments that I haven't thought of, I find it extremely interesting to see that.

Do you want that to stop?

No one is attempting to rip Clare to shreds, simply calling her out on what they disagree with as they would by any other poster. No one is holding Clare accountable, simply saying that at times Clare seems to reflect the attitude we have come across many times before.

Clare - I was reading some of your blogs last night.

You stated that you used to masturbate while wearing women's clothing. The fantasy was about being an attractive woman. You then transitioned.

I'm sure you explained how you came to know you were female and not 'just' AGP, but as you can hopefully imagine. I found I found that part quite upsetting so I didn't want to read on...

Can you understand that those of unfamiliar with this could find that distressing and worry about those who are AGP are trying to jump on the trans bandwagon as it were?

Incidentally, I also came across another blog (NOT Clare's) that stated that even 'CIS' women have AGP, and that many fantasise about being in a female body.

Who knew?

Ever wished you could un-read, or in- know anything?

But I suppose my distress isn't significant.