If you fancy a good laugh. . .counter article on Peoples History Museum counterprotest

Really? Safeguarding guidelines on how to have a conversation with people whose views you disagree with? And 'no members were harmed by this close quarters engagement'? Its a conversation FFS, and its with a bunch of women with a megaphone, not armed riot police.

Are we sure this wasn't written by Jarvis Dupont?

mobile.twitter.com/JarvisDupont

Just gotta post my all time favourite Magdalen Burns clip here of Julie Bindel's reaction to Jane Fae saying people were scared of Jeni Murray.

That is absolutely hilarious.

Nobody should expect these 'activists' to protest anything - they clearly find conversation exhausting and any form of discussion endangers their mental health. This is why they need safe spaces, I suppose.

This is a deep-down mother thing, isn't it? Are they all just cross with their mums?

I don't know if I can say this without getting deleted, but I've long thought that an exaggerated "concern" for one's own safety can be part of a sissy fetish.

Only interested in safeguarding when it refers to themselves?

That would be a logical conclusion, seeing as they're doing all they can to remove safeguarding from children or vulnerable adults.

Only interested in safeguarding when it refers to themselves?

It's so bad thay those poor trans people were spoken to calmly, factually and rationally by women how traumatised they will be 😔

Obviously drowning out those nasty women's voices with a megaphone, shouting and chanting isn't traumatic for the women. Anyway, it's not silencing women because for it to be that, all women in the world have to agree. Better make that the universe actually.

But surely they don't want to look intimidating, they are trying to persuade people that transwomen are scared and oppressed, not that they hang out with gangsters.

It's really interesting to see that several people on their side kept their faces covered - are they ashamed of their opinions or actions?

Is it to appear more intimidating? Because this method of face covering with bandanas is favoured by many gangs and their members.

Once again it's getting harder to tell satire from real life

As someone said upthread, surely this is satire? Mind you - looking at some of the more deranged contributions round here recently, maybe not....

That first article is so bad it’s like it was written by a 10 year old, they don’t even seem to know what they’re protesting against, apart from TERFs.

I think it's also that women are a safe target

That's absolutely true, and if there had been men on the GC side these TRA protesters wouldn't have behaved at all in such a confrontational, bullying way.

yetanother, precisely. They will earn brownie points for ‘punching a TERF’, but what they are actually doing is physically assaulting someone weaker and often older than them. They will get no physical retaliation from women which is why this cause is so great for them- a chance to look woke, to indulge in some violence, and with no comeback? Ideal.

I have never ever EVER seen even the slightest hint from GC feminists that violence against TRAs should be used as a tactic. Never. It is all coming from the TRA side.

Pota2 - I think it's also that women are a safe target. They know they're not actually at risk of physical violence from women, despite what they claim, so they can safely vent at them. Square up against a group of men, on the other hand, and they know they risk getting a pasting. And for those motivated by misogyny, they probably don't have any interest in other campaigns.

We are unsure of the precise contents of this speech, since we insistently chanted over them, making sure that not a word of it was audible. This is not ‘silencing women’,

Absolutely hilarious.

How do these people find the energy. Trying to stop private meetings? Fgs.

The most telling thing though is the point about the Tommy Robinson rally. I noted on another thread that I have never ever seen the same level of anger and vitriol from these people directed towards any other social justice cause. I unfortunately have lots of contact with angry TRAs in my day job (they don’t know I am GC). I have seen outbursts of pure rage against ‘TERFs’ and unbelievable anger and wishes to stop them from even inhaling oxygen. I have never seen the same people give even half as much of a fuck about racism, about homophobia, about class inequality. I thought it was strange. Then I saw the bit in this article about safety and it struck me that it’s not so much about caring passionately about the cause- it’s the chance they get to attack the person with opposing views. It’s not that they feel so so strongly about the terrible impact that a woman disagreeing with someone will have (🙄) it’s that they want to indulge in some legitimate misogynistic bullying and physical intimidation and here is their perfect opportunity. It’s all about hating women. If it wasn’t, they would be protesting everything, getting in people’s faces, getting arrested for things they believe in. But doesn’t seem to be happening, does it?

Hillarious that TPA are now 'caring' about safeguarding. They have heard us discuss our concerns and are trying to use our language while clueless of what safeguarfing actually means.

When we did initiate interaction with the group, it was largely to disrupt their photos with trans flags, and using our megaphone to drown out their arguing with members of our group and getting them to leave. We were in no way threatening.

They describe what they did and then have the cheek to say "We were in no way threatening." No, a group of mostly males (no idea how the individuals identified, going by their voices) did nothing to intimidate a group of women when they drowned them out or stopped them speaking to others. Or shoved one middle aged woman. Of course not.

I noticed their mention of safeguarding. It's a term that AWAs have recently adopted from feminists although from its context it's unclear what they mean by it. When I've come across its use on Twitter from AWAs it's been clear they have no idea what safeguarding is or how it works

On those grounds they (the women who prioritise men) should silence themselves as they don't represent me.

It's almost like women can have different points of view.