So much for 'good guy' allies

Didn't the 'scary' TRA on Twitter saying that she would destroy the GC brigade advocate divide and conquer?

We are all fighting for the same side, we don't all have to agree on the tactics to want the same end. I don't even think PP and JL did anything wrong - if this was someone asking Trump questions they would be lauded.

I don't know why so many people are doing shit like this. It's not like it'll make a damn bit of difference. You're dealing with people who think not believing in gender identity is 'literal violence' and that wanting a discussion is the same as wanting them not to exist. That doesn't really suggest they're capable of much in the way of nuanced thinking.

I think the best thing to do is just stay off Twitter?
I am quite shocked by certain people's attitude to the events of last week, but that's their business really.
I will second this though:

PP and JL interrupted a lobbyist in a public place and asked them some (important and valid) questions. They were ignored and wanted to get a response. No more than is done by a group of news reporters trying to get a quote, and this was done genuinely because they want to talk about the issues.

And I do wonder what kind of ivory tower certain academic types live in that they are so shaken by a little bit of mild, opportunistic argy bargy.
What do they think direct action is?

I think they do littlbrowndog! So transparent

Yes bore. Been so obvious
Do ppl think we are just a stupid bunch of women

Indeed. I've noticed several agents provocateur trying to foment a schism though.

The GC side isn't going to implode. We've just got to the point where we are established and connected enough to actually start thrashing out the nuances of our own range of positions. I think it's happening rather explosively because it's a discussion we haven't been able to have for too long.

This.

The GC side isn't going to implode. We've just got to the point where we are established and connected enough to actually start thrashing out the nuances of our own range of positions. I think it's happening rather explosively because it's a discussion we haven't been able to have for too long.

Agree with Archery

FFS, Jonny Best has proven himself a true friend to women and has put his neck and reputation on the line for months now.

I don't know what's gotten into people this week. Everyone is laying into each other, apparently just because people are doing things in a different way to how they would themselves do it.

Tell me about it. It's fucking me right off, tbh. Just went onto Twitter to see Jane Claire Jones being laid into by Jenn Smith who seems to be conducting some kind of purity test.

The GC "side" is going to implode fast if this shit carries on. It all feels very divide and conquer. We do not live in a pure, fundamentalist world. And frankly, I'm not at all interested in living in one. It is controlling. Nobody has to think exactly what I think. And nobody gets to tell me how I "should" think either.

Let's all cut each other some slack.

I would genuinely buy a badge that said this.

This has been a long, gruelling, upsetting, frightening and immensely stressful debate for many women (and allies). Let's all cut each other some slack.

I applaud women who disobey female socialisation to engage in assertive woman-centred activism, and also those who disobey it by publicly stating their own boundaries or expressing disagreement or anger. These are all things women should be able to do.

ContentiousOne if you don't like sexists, I have some terrible, terrible news for you about the Heritage Foundation...

I liked your post too . Once you go into expulsion mode based on some people being purer than others, the end point is fragmentation into a million and one campaigns each comprising one person.

Now, for whose benefit is that?

nauticant You said in ten words what it took me five paragraphs to do!

Johnny explained what he did on his twitter feed. He also said harrop was a sexist piece of work

OK. Let's expel Jonny Best. Right, that's done, who's next?

Agree archery

OP, if your activism depends on other activists always being in perfect accord with your opinions and strategies, you are in for a lifetime of disappointment.

Disagree with their opinions, strategy or tactics by all means, but extrapolating "I am disappointed that someone blocked me" to "you all need to know that this person, who we previously thought was Good, is now Bad" is not useful or helpful.

Harrop is vile, the Heritage Foundation are vile, lots of people in this fight are pretty vile. The rest of us are, well, lets say just very heavily flawed on some angles, and pretty damn perfect on others. We do what we can with strategic alliances - or, in this case, from what I can see, making use of an opponent's own words to bolster your position on the opposite side - but that's not the same as becoming best buds forever.

Jonny Best has done some absolutely stonking work which has really collectively got us further forward to what we want. I'm sure there's plenty on which Jonny and I would disagree, but jumping in to condemn him just because you are disappointed in him is not something I'm interested in doing. Perhaps there will be a point in the future where he will whip off his mask to reveal the devil beneath, but that point is not now. I'd happily buy him a pint.

Same goes for other "join me in condemning this person who is broadly on my side but does not behave at all times how I'd like them to behave" threads.

Isn't JB the guy who co-ordinated the petition to Stonewall? I think we can safely assume we are on the same side.

I don't know what's gotten into people this week. Everyone is laying into each other, apparently just because people are doing things in a different way to how they would themselves do it.

Everyone has a contribution to make. Not everyone can be as fearless and forthright as Posie and not everyone can be as articulate as Doc Stock or Dr Jane Clare Jones.

ContentiousOne

Can you please give an explanation of how

the stampede to condemn the direct action of JL and PP has anything whatsoever to do with Jonathon Best's retweet?

Because I can't find anything on his timeline to support that.

And also explain your justification for accusing him of an attempt to manage [his] own reputation?

Because there are numerous tweets on his timeline that make it quite clear that his retweet was in fact motivated by concern that opponents of self-ID should not be seen as transphobic, because that is damaging to the campaign against self-ID. In his own words:

What I don't like in this tweet is how Harrop (and most trans allies) talk about equal rights when they mean rights they want to remove from others - usually women. But I RT this because Harrop wants to suggest that GC ppl are anti trans. And it ain't true.

Unjustified smearing of allies (even if they do have the misfortune to be male) really isn't a good look, people.