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

This is not ‘silencing women’, whatever TERFs may insist, since TERFs are not representative of all women

If you silence any woman who disagrees with you, you're effectively silencing women.

I am sorry I didn't manage to get there in time to see it. I got to Manchester in time for the make more noise event.

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

I didn't see anything aggressive from the ReSisters, but that man with blonde hair was shouting quite aggressively at the woman with the placard.

Shame they mostly drowned out the speech.

The claim that there is a “trans lobby” is unfounded

So who's been lobbying to get Gender ID law changed then?

At least the article acknowledges that, despite the hyperbole about GC 'violence', facing a group of protesting GC women wasn't as risky as counter protesting a group of Tommy Robinson supporters.

Are you sure the Medium article is not satire? They were scared of women getting close to them? They didn’t know what was in the speech because they chanted loudly? The resisters didn’t have any chants ready and something something.

I found it difficult to stop laughing at the possible violence from the GC women. So brave!

That article is incredible.

There was no mention of what the GC women supposedly stand for or were protesting, not even an outlandish claim or straw man argument.

Just repeated assertions that they need to be stopped and disrupted, even when meeting in private.

In our safeguarding guidelines for the event, we had asked that people not engage with individual antagonism from TERFs; it had not specified what to do if they attempted to have ‘conversations’ with us.
Conversations! So dangerous. How fragile must your position be if merely engaging in conversation will put it at risk.

[They] attempted to read out a 5–6 page speech. 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’...
"No idea what they were saying but they're not allowed to say it and us trying to stop them saying it isn't us trying to stop them saying it"

Its pretty blatant and utterly bonkers.

The original article is still there. (Looks like a bracket got caught up in the link)

Try this:

medium.com/@Emilystake/what-is-a-woman-and-who-gets-to-tell-her-story-1aae33393c34

Trying to talk to people!! What dastards you are!! I'm so relieved to see that SU could see through these underhand attempts to have a debate - which, as we know, are NOT allowed.

So, just be quiet in future, please. And no sitting in chairs either, remember.

Its been archived;

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20190809215149/medium.com/@sistersuncutmcr/terfs-out-manchester-27-07-2019-2705a084b84b" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20190809215149/medium.com/@sistersuncutmcr/terfs-out-manchester-27-07-2019-2705a084b84b

Do you have a copy of the original article? I am getting 404.

I did get some of the silliness of the article, they really need to demonise "TERFS" to the point that they feel at risk when talking to them. I can understand it's stressful interacting with people with opposing views, but feminists aren't known for their violence.