Violent trans rights protest in Manchester.

The way trans rights activists, and other "macho" activist groups, police their rallies in public spaces seems part and parcel with their chanting of, "Whose streets? Our streets!"

They are in a public place giving public speeches but they aggressively prevent members of the public from filming them and sometimes from even observing what is going on.

I suspect that along with the tactics stolen from black-bloc, the mask-wearing and use of umbrellas to block visual onlookers, that they frame these measures as "protection of dissidents" from state surveillance and "the fash".

They think that they are the good guys, fighting the good fight and taking back the streets from fascists who want to put them in camps and kill them. They think this because of the lies they have been told by LGBTQ+ "Community Leaders".

(I have seen this play out in real life on social media. There were dire scaremongering posts on Facebook from local LGBTQ+ activists about a ticketed meeting that had been publicly advertised on Eventbrite (indoors on this occasion). Activists posted disinformation that this was a secret meeting where "feminists" were organising to go out on the streets that night to hunt down trans kids and hang them from lamp posts! There were replies from terrified school children and students who were arranging for parents to pick them up in case the TERFs found them and killed them!)

Looking from the outside we see the macho aggression of TRAs and an incel-procession appropriating and in direct opposition to the "Reclaim the Streets" women's marches of the 1970's. The general public, including random YouTubers, see marches and rallies that include many people who appear to be mentally ill and physically unwell.

Meanwhile, the trans-allied mainstream media bolsters their myth of a brave generation uniting against oppression, misunderstanding and exclusion and, hippity-hop, left-wing opportunists jump on and then propel the bandwagon, recruiting waifs and strays along the way.

This is an instructive first-person account of how the SWP treats their female trans-identified members - the Trigger Words warning at the top of the post states, "transphobia, transmisogyny, SA, gaslighting/manipulation, general trotskyist bullshit":

https://www.tumblr.com/swp2023/746919391301648384/swp-account

(Paste that URL into web.archive.org or archive.today to avoid Tumblr wanting you to sign in.)

When women meet in public and give public speeches, trans rights activists make an unholy racket, aggressively trying to prevent the women who are there from hearing the speeches and also trying to block their words from being live-streamed and recorded so that others can hear them.

They cannot and do not want to hear the women either. So we end up with videos where women speak about how women with severe disabilities have been raped by male carers and infected with HIV, while in the background men in frocks scream and shout that we can suck their cocks!

Mainstream media misrepresents women's rights gatherings, where they speak to each other and do not obstruct or attack antagonists filming them, as "anti-trans protests". The mob opposing them are portrayed as virtuous "counter-protesters", legitimised by the support and presence of trade unions and ostensibly "anti-racist", "anti-fascist" and even "feminist" groups.

IMHO the random YouTubers who turn up at both types of events are providing a very valuable service. Their audience is the general public who otherwise would be relying on a biased mainstream media for information and perspective.

For an example of how other women's rights rallies are demonised, listen to this woman, Paula, at a Let Women Speak event describe how Oxford police, media, the SWP and middle-class do-gooders colluded to suppress public awareness of the atrocities committed by local grooming gangs.

"Shocking account of how the police in Oxford went to great lengths to stifle any debate or protest about grooming gangs. They labeled protesters, including mothers and sisters of victims, as far-right bigots and allowed far-left extremists to silence them."

Video:
https://x.com/lucymarionbrown/status/1926727509388714225

Paula mentions that the "anti-racists" in Oxford made so much noise to drown out the women speaking that she and her daughter only found out what the women were saying when they went home and found footage of the event on YouTube.

You just don't get it. Most trans people either deeply wish they were the other sex, or genuinely believe that in their brain or heart or soul their identity is that they are the other sex. This might well be misguided or wrong, but it feels real to them. If you can't even try to understand that then there's not really anywhere to start from is there?

If a trans person or TRA posts on here then I politely try to understand their viewpoint. I have been doing so for years, because it didn't make sense to me, so I assumed I must be missing something.

Broadly speaking, these people are not interested in "being understood" or communicating their viewpoint unambiguously. I have been insulted, ignored, told I'm lying, told it's too complex, etc etc. There have been a few posters who have been articulate enough to explain what being trans means to them (and bearing in mind that anyone on here can claim to be anything).
One was happy to say they feel alienated by the TRA, and the other essentially said they thought there were male and female personality types which everyone fell into, and had been brought up to think this sexist worldview by parents who reinforced what was acceptable for boys to be like.

I'm sure lots of people feel that "what X people are all like" and "what Y people are all like" feels very real to them (and may well influence their actions) but that fact doesn't mean these views shouldn't be held up and analysed.

I’m reminded of the justifications given for beating up Maria McLachlan at Speakers Corner, and destroying her camera.

People videoing events are something that both the stewards and organisers need to understand will happen and accept, because it is the public space. Just as all those in attendence have to accept that they may be recorded.

The women’s events have had people from other disconnected groups live streaming and recording them. It happens and despite all the fuckwittery that goes on, about how just because a group is recording the women are now automatically aligned with them politically , the reality is that it cannot be stopped. The women’s organisers had to accept that very early on. Anyone can photograph, or record the event and the crowd.

I don’t believe I have ever seen a person who was videoing a women’s event be aggressively treated though. They have been asked to move if they are blocking view but that is about all. This is part of the polarisation of the two groups.

Those women who come and speak at the women’s rallies are proud to speak up. Those women who attend and listen know that they will likely be in footage from various streams. Therefore, what does it matter if it is not just the official live stream they appear on. Plus people splice the footage and reuse it for their own purposes.

So if someone is videoing and not making noise, the women don’t react with aggression whereas this group consistently does react that way. The difference is stark and it says a great deal I think

I agree, the stewarding was pathetic. The crazy aggressive man with long hair ( aka Meatloaf ) should have been swiftly removed and if they'd been doing their jobs properly or police were there he would have been. He was possibly one of those people who just turn up to any event like this to cause trouble, I don't know that for a fact but anyway he looked off his head.

Great idea.

And if that was that group’s idea of stewarding, it was very poor. It is really quite enlightening to see that when the women’s events are stewarded it is to protect the women who are attending from people protesting them. Whereas it looks like that group needed far more stewards who knew how to protect people who entered the crowd from their own attendees.

Fine well we'll leave it there then. Everyone is entitled to their point of view.

Yes. I have watched it. I still disagree with you and I still believe you have victim blamed where the responsibility is on the people who chose to surround them and act with aggression.

Have you even watched it yet? Did you see hoody lesbian getting in amongst them with her body cam, as well as the other lesbian up on the steps? They put themselves in amongst a protest that they didn't agree with and that they had no need to be amongst. I really am not going to keep responding to you anymore on this. It's quite ridiculous when you say you haven't watched it. You stick to your view and I'll stick to what I actually saw.

How was billboard guy shutting them down by standing silently. If he had been usiing a bullhorn, music or whistles to drown them out or physically attacking the TRAs that would be different

Sorry but I think they were wrong. When women gather for let women speak or similar and the TrA’s shut us down, we have the morale high ground. Anybody is allowed to protest without people getting in amongst them. If the shoe was on the other foot I think we would be livid.

I know what you mean. I know that filming isnt illegal but I think there’s a line which many cross when they upload to monetised channels. If you were filmed but asked them to conceal your identity and said you didn’t consent I think they’d have to comply or risk being sued.

On the other hand if it weren’t for these films there would be no evidence of this behaviour. The stewards ignore it. The police ignore it. The press ignore it. Thats not ok so I’m glad that “neutral” ish observers are there.

This is what victim blaming looks like.

The vast majority believe sincerely that they have the soul or essence of the sex that their body is not.

I'll want to see robust stats on that please.

So, they were in a public place. And the sandwich board man and the women stood in the front of the crowd. They did nothing else, just stand there. That was an example of peaceful protesting if ever I saw an example. I wish to fuck that was all that those protesting women's event did.

There was still no need for aggression or intimidation. And it is clear to me that those who surrounded them were the people who got in close to them. That was an act of intimidation.

Fully agree.

They said they were lesbians.

Yes, that is an interesting question.

They were young women, not children. I had no idea from watching the video that they were lesbians and I don't know if the fact that they are lesbians is relevant. I have never seen them in any videos before. Is it known or just being assumed that they are lesbians? (Genuine question, not rhetorical.)

IMHO "Sidewalk Steve" did do a quietly provocative thing by going into the open space in front of the War Memorial from where the speakers were addressing the crowd.

He had no sooner arrived and stood quietly facing the crowd than a bunch of people rushed up, apparently to block the crowd from seeing him, or maybe to prevent him being centre stage if the event was being filmed?

Then the woman with the camera and dreadlocks rushed in and tried to put herself between him and the crowd pressing into him.

There was a fleeting moment when she moved in front of a woman with short hair who was holding a placard and when she was beside the woman she pointed her camera phone towards her. I am not surprised that the woman did not react because she did not appear to have been pushed, the camera seemed to be to the side of her rather than "in her face" and it was all over extremely quickly.

There seemed to be plenty of Stewards in attendance but they did not intervene to ask Steve to move and they did not have their crowd under control, which is the biggest part of their job. Instead, we saw a very familiar intimidatory manoeuvre whereby a group of people crowd in closely around an individual, blocking their view and blocking them from view of onlookers.

Relevant that Steve is a small, slight, quietly spoken older man. He stands out from the crowd, being very neatly dressed in a tweed waistcoat and flat cap and would be noticeable even without his Sandwich Board placards.

He spoke respectfully to those surrounding him, asking at least one person if they would like to speak to him and be interviewed away from the crowd. He showed he was still willing to communicate respectfully while the crowd pressed in, blocked his view, jostled him and held placards in front of his face.

That is a very unsafe situation with a mob surrounding an individual. While Steve looked only mildly surprised, the woman with the dreadlocks looked very worried about his safety and I can well understand why she rushed up to try to put some space between Steve and the people pressing in on him.

We're there children there or are you referring to adult women when you say girls

I'm not victim blaming, I've acknowledged the aggressive man. But the girls played a part. If you're not going to watch it there's no point in discussing it. I'm going to have my tea.

There were stewards and it wasn't just in a street. I think it was some sort of square. There were steps at the front where the speakers were standing. The sandwich board man and the lesbian went up to the front of the gathered group, on the steps or very near them so they were putting themselves front and centre. The lesbian pushed aside a woman and shoved a camera in her face, the woman didn't react. It was people standing together in a group and both girls got in and amongst them. It wasn't like these people were walking down the street. They were all standing together. The girls had to actually go and put themselves in that group. Why do that? If you haven't actually watched it how can you even comment on it?

I haven't watched it. But you seem intent to keep missing my point.

These lesbians walking around with cameras should not have been seen as provoking a violent or aggressive response. That is where I keep disagreeing with you. It was a public street , yes? It wasn't being stewarded where there was a group of people monitoring others coming in and out like the women's rallies and protests are? So, you are assuming they are being provocative just by being there. That is victim blaming by the way.

You said you haven't watched it I think? I'm not disputing that there was a crazy aggressive man in there who should have been turfed out. I'm just saying that rather than just standing by and watching the protest these girls actively got in there and weren't totally innocent either. It was a stupid thing to do and I think just stirred up trouble. Which some would say was why they did it.

I don't know anything about them. You are assuming that they were there specifically for that protest. Were they? They could have been off doing something else and passed through. I have no idea but I am not the one saying they may have been provoking the reaction.

As I said though, the provocation is actually irrelevant. These are supposedly adults protesting and if they cannot handle two lesbian on lookers in their space, that is something that shows clearly that they lack the impulse control to be out there protesting.