Julia Bindel on the FiLia conference

I don't want to gave StephsPlace the clicks. I looked once and it was very poorly written and laid out.

Woops
Stop the unbelievably poorly judged protestation of conferences about violence against women when your stated success goal has to be "we were not violent to women".

www.stephsplace.uk/fly-the-flag-the-inquest.cfm

Report from the organiser.

There are some substantial safeguarding challenges with young people drawn into this.

Steph seems oblivious to this as a 69 year old male concerned only to explain to people that they are confused about the GRA and EA.

That moment came and went with the consultation and subsequent analysis, with the reform outcomes now communicated and settled for now.

Steph seems to need to catch up with the impact on children. As does Portsmouth Uni and all other agencies involved with young people. It's not enough to say that they managed to not be violent, they need to realise what else is going on.

And stop the unbelievably poorly jprotesting at meetings that

Cwenthryth I have sent a message asking for that.

I would like to know if any of the protestors who behaved in particularly egregious ways have a conflict or declaration of interest. Will they be using the points towards status as an ally, or for improving the Workplace Index points of an organisation? Will the experience be cited on a CV or as part of an application for a political candidacy or post?

New excuses just dropped. The trans activists have said that we should not share that picture of that sign, with the sexually violent threat, because the person sitting next to it may be under 18, and not understand the gravity of what they're being pictured endorsing

Meh, if your old enough to protest using threats of sexual violence your old enough to face the consequences.

I'm assuming someone has had a telling off from their parents.

Tough shit if they're 17 and don't understand the rapeiness

"They're using our awful behaviour to make us look bad!"

I get more and more convinced that the answer to this is probably star charts and stickers.

One of them boasted on Instagram that the event had - I quote ""suck my dick" energy everywhere"

hiyamaya.net/2021/10/18/amnesty-international-is-sexually-harassing-women-political-protest/

Maya Forstater has written an excellent letter to the Head of Amnesty UK (with a copy to the Charity Commission) to confirm if it was an official AI protest as claimed and, if so, who was responsible for child safeguarding etc

Can you ask for screenshots of that please Appalonia?

A friend of mine who was following their group on FB said that They were told not to chalk anything on the Sunday using the c word or drawings of penises as apparently we were using them to make us look like victims!!

Even my MP passed Nick Gibb’s correspondence back to me nervously, saying he knew I wouldn’t be happy with the response.

There was a woman from Eritrea talking alongside Julie about the weaponisation of rape and genocide in Tigray. Many women inside har been abused, pimped etc and the sexualised hostility from the TRAs is appalling.

The shame. A woman talking about rape as a weapon of war and these... obnoxious children screaming suck my dick and blow jobs are real jobs. God.

What bollocks saying they don't understand the gravity of what they're being pictured endorsing, they know full well.

Of course they do.

And yes...is the person smoking underage as well?

Long post but I want to say something about the public figure who is Councillor Claire Udy, elected city councillor, Portsmouth City Council. I’ll be very careful how I phrase things, and it’s all a matter of public record anyway @MNHQ.

The local paper, the Portsmouth News, reported on 19th April 2018:

Ms Udy’s tweet said: ‘Got a barely used travel system for baby that’s worth over £500 for £100 today also. Not even a Jew. Amazing.’

www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/politics/portsmouth-labour-candidate-deeply-regrets-twitter-comments-branded-anti-semitic-301332

When her 2013 tweet came to light, there followed a furore within the local Labour Party, not least because Udy had been selected as a council candidate in the forthcoming local elections for Charles Dickens ward.

Trying to put out the fire, Udy publicly apologised. The Portsmouth News continues:

In a statement to The News, Ms Udy said: ‘I deeply regret the comments I made on my Twitter account in 2013, and profusely apologise for any hurt or distress this may have caused. These remarks were made before I joined the Labour Party or indeed ever contemplated standing for public office. I have become more informed of the impact these views and words can have and hope I can prove through my actions they will never be repeated again.’

Leaving aside the irony of her pledge to re-educate herself about causing distress to others, her apology wasn’t enough. Many local Labour activists remained very unhappy, and before any disciplinary action could be undertaken Udy resigned from the Labour Party - just 6 days before polling day - citing 'lack of support'.

www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/politics/labour-election-candidate-resigns-portsmouth-party-after-anti-semitism-row-and-says-politics-poison-1035225

This led to a very interesting situation whereby her name was still on the ballot paper as a Labour candidate on election day, yet she was not the official Labour candidate. She won the election as an Independent councillor, but hardly any of the electorate voting Labour would have known that.

She has since persuaded another councillor to join her in her crackpot 'Progressive Portsmouth People Group' of which she is the Group Leader. (I imagine she gets an extra allowance from tax payers for that.) Her term of office is May 2018 - May 2022. It’s hard to imagine her being re-elected under that banner, or any banner tbh. Possibly she is trying to join a political party again but she would still have to go through candidate selection procedures to stand again in the local elections in a winnable ward.

The reasons that she is seemingly so protected are complex, political and personal, and connected to weak and venal political leadership of both the Council as a whole and the Audit, Governance and Standards Committee; and a group of officers who seem to think, ‘Well she’ll be out in May, what’s the point in dealing with complaints about her?’ and citing ‘freedom of expression’. She has also forged at least one strong personal relationship within the Liberal Democrat Group and would appear to have traded her vote in the council chamber, keeping the Lib Dems in power, in return for committee places and appointments such as Chair of Licensing and children & young people's champion.

Her promotion of PornHub for a long period of time is well-known and documented.

Nevertheless she has, as all elected members are required to do, signed up to Portsmouth City Council’s Code of Conduct, and it could well be that this time she has gone too far - as have the people who defend her.

Complaints can go straight to the Chief Executive and the main Group Leaders – Cllrs Gerald Vernon-Jackson (Lib Dem), George Fielding (Lab) and Simon Bosher (Con) – as well as to the Monitoring Officer. Their email addresses are on the Portsmouth City Council website. They should see what they're defending.

So is it ok for over 18s to endorse forced oral sex? Cause it looks like none of them thought it was a bad idea until it was pointed out on twitter. Honestly they are so full of shit.

Any ideas of how and where to organise it? I wouldn’t be able to do it until tomorrow eve at earliest

New excuses just dropped. The trans activists have said that we should not share that picture of that sign, with the sexually violent threat, because the person sitting next to it may be under 18, and not understand the gravity of what they're being pictured endorsing
What, they’re not old enough to understand that “suck my cock you cunts” is misogynistic sexual abuse, but they are old enough to consent to sterilise themselves because they like clothing/toys stereotypically designated for the opposite sex?

Yeah that stacks up

New excuses just dropped. The trans activists have said that we should not share that picture of that sign, with the sexually violent threat, because the person sitting next to it may be under 18, and not understand the gravity of what they're being pictured endorsing

I've as much patience for this as to the doorstep evangelists who go out with their children in the rain knowing that, when they knock on the door, nobody is going to say what they truly think to them because they use the tiny child to recite what the adult normally would. And they tell the child to keep on going when you invite them (including an infant in a pram) into your house to dry off and wait out a particularly bad deluge.

Just mouth open that in the wake of the murder of an MP just a couple of days ago, public groups are endorsing and celebrating violent rhetoric in politics.

Chalked on pavements in rude words. Like children.

Just reminding all: the age of criminal responsibility is ten.

And if an employed adult: endorsing this should be an urgent disciplinary meeting because massive disrepute issues. Your typical adult will respond to this with wtaf, I don't pay taxes for this.

New excuses just dropped. The trans activists have said that we should not share that picture of that sign, with the sexually violent threat, because the person sitting next to it may be under 18, and not understand the gravity of what they're being pictured endorsing.

Yet one of them is smoking so, unless they lied about their age to purchase tobacco, is at least 18.

What bollocks saying they don't understand the gravity of what they're being pictured endorsing, they know full well. If they were at all unsure they wouldn't have done it and if any of the other protesters thought it was the wrong thing to do/say they would surely have told them so, did they? Did they hell as like because they too endorse it and mean every fucking word of it.

More and more pitiful excuses because the TRAs are realising just how them stating their truth is being so badly received by the general public. This is who they are, what they stand for and what they didn't want anyone to see or hear hence the No Debate tactic.