escalating violence

It would be a bizarre claim that Australia is more supportive than the UK of LGB rights? Or is it the ‘T’ that you see as less supported in the UK ?

"LGBT", and hence "LGBT rights" refers specifically to the gender/queer/whatever ideology, and the rights of its supporters. Nothing to do with any of what the letters originally stood for, or the rights of individuals.

So it is true that Australia is more supportive of the "LGBT" group's "rights", in that it lets them harrass women more freely. And NZ is even more "supportive", in that it will keep the police away when they storm a women's event. (And again, to re-emphasise, don't forget that many of the "LGBT" mob won't be any of those letters' original meanings, while many of the women being were of course lesbian.)

(You could similarly talk about which countries are more supportive of Scientologists or Westboro Baptist Church rights...)

But it's clear that places like Canada, NZ, and the like has a huge problem with basic universal civil liberties, human rights, etc - people are being allowed to run riot if they've got the right "identity" label, and others are left undefended.

I think the UK has already been through the violence phase. At the time Maria MacLachlan was attacked, the authorities were firmly TWAW and bending over backwards to accommodate these poor, marginalised, stunning-and-brave victims of the worst oppression ever.

It was before Stonewall's role was properly understood, before it became apparent that they and their Champions scheme was behind so much of the pressure to cancel any opposition to their agenda.

Back then, not only was Maria assaulted and Paula Lamont bullied off her picket line, but the TRAs would disrupt any event organised. They forced their way into the JamJar and Millwall FC was terrified by TRAs into cancelling another Women's event. That's when bomb threats were happening.
The reason Maria was at Speaker's Corner at all was because the intimidation of Women's events was so bad, they had to meet up first to find out where the next event was being held as they didn't dare publicise it first.
Helen Steel reported a similar tactic to the one used against BillboardChris last week:
https://helensteel12.wordpress.com/2017/11/22/my-statement-on-events-at-london-anarchist-bookfair-2017/

As I see it, the turning point came when David Davies MP offered a room at the House of Commons as an alternative, in the name of free speech. Now there was someone in authority giving backing and space for these women to speak - and what a furore he raised for doing that!
More importantly, it brought attention and publicity and the general public began to see and hear what was going on. People were at last able to see these men who claimed to be such put-upon victims - and to discover the revolting backgrounds of some of them.
Jane Fae and Jane's friends were forced to re-think their strategy, drop the more embarrassing TRAs who were giving them such a bad name, and go on a charm offensive.

The difference at the moment between the UK and Canada/Australia/NZ is the authorities and media are no longer as captured and the TRAs, despite all the hard work they put into infiltrating these bodies, are not having it all their own way.

How can you have homosexuality if sexes are irrelevant? That seems rather homophobic to me. How about you? Would you say a male can be a lesbian? If so, aren’t you erasing female homosexuals?

" if sex is erased, you can’t have homosexuals can you?"

???

@MerlinsLostMarbles what don’t you understand? That if sex is erased, you can’t have homosexuals can you? That lesbians are being called “sexual racists” for refusing to accept males in their dating pool? That gay men and lesbians are told their “genital preferences”. (Sexual orientations) is transphobic? How is any of that not homophobic?

"seeing as trans ideology erases homosexuality, you must mean Australians and kiwis are homophobic? Can’t have it both ways."

I don't understand?

Refused compensation for the broken camera as she wasn't considered kind enough to her attacker.

Wasn't the assault on Maria MacLachlan back in 2017? And was forced to refer to her attacker as 'she' in court. Although I suppose we can be thankful that the police did act.

I wonder if those posters condoning the assault on women are ok with any other groups being assaulted for talking about their rights? If not, it makes them misogynistic doesn’t it?

It would be a bizarre claim that Australia is more supportive than the UK of LGB rights? Or is it the ‘T’ that you see as less supported in the UK ?

the “both sides” stuff is so disingenuous anyway.
it would only be “both sides” if a pro trans group set up a similar “let trans people speak” and a load of GC women turned up screaming shouting forcing their way through barriers , throwing soup over the organiser and punching and intimidating the trans’s speakers and / or the people that had come to listen.
And that would never ever ever happen.

I don’t know how people can see videos of that NZ mob or the video of the guy in a placard being attacked and say that it was both sides or he started it

and honestly I’m sat here quite satisfied that I’m an OK person, because if i saw that the other way round with someone walking round in a placard saying something I didnt like or someone talking on a bandstand and saying things i don’t agree with I wouldn’t join a gang to attack them or a mob!

I have two theories about why NZ escalated and was much much more violent than we see here in U.K. ( although there has been violence here too but less) and that is
a. U.K. media is many times more balanced than in NZ. So we get to hear the problems with trans ideology and self ID etc and we know it is not clear cut. “No debate” has also been over here for about 3 years or so. And likely UK police are aware of this too. NZ is still “no debate” and behind us in the discussion.
b. NZ is just a much much smaller population ( although the country itself is bigger than the U.K.) and so KJK coming became a much bigger deal than it would be here or say in the US where there are multiple events happening on any given day. It seemed like the whole focus on the country was KJK’s visit and that blew it up.
ironically if they had just allowed the event to go ahead it would not have made any international headlines and the world would not be debating what a misogynistic country NZ is.

Women are saying no and men are using a typical male response which is violence

Anyone that excuses it by downplaying it or doing the they asked for it line which has cropped up isn’t on the side of peaceful women

Yes there has been a few words like this eg resistance on here

Not just stating what happened, that is unprovoked violence against women

Clearly not, you mean they’re more pro trans, but seeing as trans ideology erases homosexuality, you must mean Australians and kiwis are homophobic? Can’t have it both ways.

Merlin

I'm not condoning any of the individual acts of violence (there were incidents on both sides just to add).

I've seen this claim from several posters now, but none have answered my (and other people's) requests for evidence.

I don't think that anyone can seriously compare Lidia Thorp being bundled away, entirely unharmed, with diminutive old ladies being bashed.

Also, it seems somewhat underhand to compare the event in NZ with the one in Australia, as if they were one.

Do you mean fury from GC women? I think that that is probably what it's going to take, tell the Lammys to bloody well shut up for a minute and listen to some facts.

And obviously i was right merlin

those two examples of ‘violence’, by kjk’s supporters specifically, are the only two examples you have

Or you’d produce evidence

Thank you for the correct name there, I couldn’t remember it for the life of me.

Women can be wrong about things…

i believe in ‘let women talk’ 🤷🏻

https://mobile.twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1642267617380519938?cxt=HHwWhMC-gc3swMotAAAA

Middle class culture, this is what group think, limited application of critical thinking skills and a gigantic ego are playing, this particular group have abandoned a moral compass and live with a world view dictated by their HR department DIE, diversity, inclusion, equality and be kind, only for certain people though.

1. disregard for the opinions of others
2. hypocrisy
3. self interest
4. authoritarian tenancy

https://twitter.com/andrewlawrence/status/1641737107252076551?cxt=HHwWjoCzxezMz8gtAAAA

Yes! This is absolutely what I am seeing but you have spelled it out a lot better than I could have.

https://twitter.com/YPinfo101/status/1642210244322377729

The push at the UN by many countries means this is going to get worse. I note that the UK isn't listed.

Back to the original question:

I don’t think it’s because they “realise the gig is up”, unfortunately. I think it’s about group dynamics. There are different dynamics in different parts of the world.

I think the UK situation is still mostly at the level of student politics. Student politics is not known for its restraint. Campaigning students have plenty of time, opportunity and enthusiasm for loud objections. They are also often easily influenced.

The huge majority in the UK are of the student protester type. They are excited by thinking they are doing good. As we saw in the Laughing Auditor’s video, what is mostly occurring, is still not actively violent. Blocking someone’s path, shouting loudly to drown out the opposition, name-calling. These are all antisocial behaviours, but still well within the realms of what students might see as being reasonable, non-violent protest. They can still tell themselves they’re on a righteous path.

Consider children (especially teenagers) who push boundaries, more or less for the sake of it. What happens when they receive no push back or where there are no clear boundaries set? They crave attention and so they escalate. I think that plays a large part in what we are seeing here. Easily led young people, attracted to the idea of righting societal wrongs, attracted to confrontation, feeling excitation at fighting back, particularly against older women who (like their mothers) are trying to stop them having fun.

There are others amongst them, however, who are very different, for whom violence is normal. Those students, with their unquestioning adulation, are the perfect front. The police (who are never sent in sufficient numbers to actually deal with any law breaking) are especially tolerant. As someone said in another thread, those students are the offspring of members of the class who hold the power. The “protest” is still on the edge of legality. Small boundaries are being pushed. The students who enjoy confrontation will feel excited by this minor law breaking, and with the fact that they are getting away with it.

Then another boundary is pushed. A minor assault, committed right in front of the police. Because they are already allowing the law to be broken, because they are there in insufficient numbers, this escalation is also allowed to pass. The students see this tolerance and thus this escalation is normalised in their heads as well. Those abusive men have used the escalation tactic before. They know how it works and how long it can take before the naive will realize they are being used. Suddenly they have the power they have always craved.

In addition, young men who enjoy violence for its own sake can see this dynamic and its attractions. In some protests they have begun to turn up in their black clothes and masks. They were not present in the Laughing Auditor’s video, but they too see the dynamic that is developing and will use it.

The escalation is related to these various group dynamics and the wholesale lack of any kind of restraint or reaction from those who should be keeping the peace, but who have decided to achieve that by tolerating minor infractions. Rather than nipping this in the bud, the police are choosing to ignore and (presumably) hoping it will all go away. There are probably many among them who see it is only women who are being intimidated and think that the women could easily avoid putting the police in this position by shutting up.

I think the end of “no debate” has changed the dynamic. Women meeting has provided an opportunity for bullying in the form of student-style protest along with the unsavory undercurrent. The women are not shutting up, ergo those who enjoy abuse and violence and will use any excuse, see an opportunity. Crowd dynamics, the tendency to follow others, are all being put to use.

In NZ I think we saw misogyny, which had been pushed underground, find an outlet. There is also financial and social instability pervading the western world at present. The anger and fear people are feeling is being given an outlet as well. And there are those who simply enjoy conflict and are reveling in the opportunities the current, febrile atmosphere presents.

I think it is impossible to see the situation in NZ as one where those demonstrating barely suppressed anger, (mostly) sub-violent behaviour and intimidation as being one where the perpetrators think they are losing. I don’t think they have any doubt at the moment that they are winning.

But I think it is obvious from the Laughing Auditor’s video that, even in the Uk, those involved do not see themselves as losing control of the situation and becoming desperate. They are still indulging in what they see as righteous anger and are still being supported by the powers that be. As they escalate, the optics are increasingly bad and it will reach a point where their behaviour is no longer tolerated. I suspect many rational people are already dropping out. But I’m not seeing fury and frustration. Only cold manipulation from a minority, married to gleeful engagement in antisocial behaviour from rebellious youths.

I think we will reach the stage where there is fury and frustration. I just don’t think we’re there yet.