Violent trans rights protest in Manchester.

But why did they even get in amongst them? Surely they could have just filmed from the side.

They are not ' mythical' I know quite a number of trans people and none of them are like these people that are being described.

I know very different people to you then and I'm sorry you have unpleasant people in your life. If you take any group of group of people though there will always be the unpleasant ones, racists etc etc. There are plenty of white people who are racist and bigoted, doesn't mean I am just because I'm white. You could literally apply it to just about any group in society and there will always be the trouble makers, football hooligans for example. So many many different examples and they shouldn't mean everyone else is tarred with the same brush

They weren't getting in the crowd. The crowd surrounded them. It's a common TRA tactic, surround and kettle people them complain about them being violent and invading TRA space.

Why were the two lesbians going to the front and getting in the crowd when they clearly didn't agree with the protest. One had a body cam on. It's almost like looking for trouble. Seems weird to mr

Whats going on in their heads is irrelevant, if they know they are trans because if they do, they know their gender identity isn't the same as their birth sex and the law has been clear about this.

They therefore make a clear choice to ignore the law.

We have had this conversation before as well on here.
Trans people by and large are not "lying" in their heads. The vast majority believe sincerely that they have the soul or essence of the sex that their body is not.

You might think this is a mental disorder, an abberation, brainwashing, a cult, you might disagree with their thoughts and feelings.

But the vast majority of trans people (especially the young, vulnerable ones) are not deliberately lying when they say that they believe they are the other gender.

All trans people are lying, though. They are pretending to be members of the opposite sex and invading the opposite sex spaces etc.This causes women (including TiF) great harm. And women at LWS or other meetings, demos or rallies do not behave in an aggressive manner in any way at all. Unlike TRAs.
Interesting to watch was the number of allies being asked what rights trans people had lost, and not being able to answer except 'all of them' or 'lots of them'. Since no rights have been lost at all this was very instructive - groupthink and indoctrination.

It was even more ironic than that. From what the Nottingham YouTuber said about who invited him, it sounded like it was the TRA women at Nottingham Women's Aid (?) who contacted him out of the blue, suggesting that he come along to film them protesting the LWS event.

I am happy to be corrected but that is what I took from what the Nottingham YouTuber said.

I also find it very hard to imagine that LWS invited him to record the event. LWS events are set up to be live-streamed by KJK, direct to YouTube with one camera and direct to Twitter/X with another camera. They do not need to invite independent YouTubers to record the events on their behalf, although they do sometimes turn up.

Whatever, as PP have mentioned, the main things of note here are not how random YouTubers and sometimes "auditors" conduct themselves at events but

• how those who are being filmed react (comparing women's rights activists to TRAs) and
• the fact that otherwise there would be no public record at all or only a mainstream media propaganda version.

The "Laughing Auditor" has been wrongly criticised for seeking out "click bait" after he accidentally stumbled across the protest outside the building where the Lesbian Project was being launched. That was an unexpected baptism of fire for him and he has subsequently attended events where he expects to film more Men in Frocks Behaving Exceptionally Badly.

I honestly do not understand why the YouTubers and "auditors" are being blamed for the bad behaviour of people who have a habit of launching unprovoked attacks on women and innocent bystanders.

The YouTubers go all around the country filming and talking to random people on the streets without incident. It is no wonder that they are shocked when confronted with the naked aggression, harassment, obstruction and unhinged behaviour of TRAs.

IMHO at least part of the reason for TRAs behaving so badly at these events is that TRAs have taken over Anarchist and Antifa groups while "Anti-Racism" groups that are a front for the SWP have taken both them and free-floating TRAs under their wing.

Hence the paranoia, mask-wearing, self-righteous omnicause sloganeering (eg. Free Palestine and Trans Liberation in the same breath); mainly male crowds with a smattering of female Anarchist "cis allies" promoting "sex work" alongside representatives of "inclusive intersectional feminist" rape crisis services for "all women"; "Anti-Racist" groups organising the protests against the protests against "Drag Queen Story Hour" events, etc. etc.

There is a lot of fighting talk along with the usual suicide scare-mongering and genocide hyperbole in polemics published under the rubrics of "Tranarchy", "Trans Anarchism", "Trans Anarcho-Communism", etc. It is possible that the minority of those attending TRA rallies and protests who are violent, paranoid and obstructive might be driven as much by extremist political indoctrination as wrong-sex hormones and/or mental instability.

Quite. This is NAMALTing.

It's like 'oh but you can't keep men out of women's toilets because what if you accidentally questioned some poor woman who looks a bit masculine' which is trying to manipulate women for men's benefit by leveraging their concern for other women and desire to be nice.

Fuck this. Fuck it completely.

At this point the TQ movement had less blotted their copybook than peed on it and set it on fire. Any bridge building with women is now going to have to come entirely from this apparently vast population of women-friendly reasonable TQ people.

But I repeat, again, all the TQ people I know, who are not peeing everywhere and screaming obscenities at random shoppers for no apparent reason, all absolutely believe in the entitlements, the harm, the violence, the primacy, they are cheering it on. It IS in their name. This is what the TQ movement is.

So - are you saying that TRAs and trans people are two completely separate groups? If so it might be the first time in history that advocacy for a group has come only from those not in that group…

if not (and we know there is overlap) then it is valid to say that many TRAs are also in the trans group…

the irony being pointed out that there is a claim being made in video that trans people are ‘delicate flowers’ while at a protest where they are clearly showing anything but!

this is yet another issue to be challenged - the deliberate lies to distort the truth… on the one hand make loud claims of minority (accurate) / vulnerability (while physically and verbally attacking others including death threats) / ‘literally suicidal’ (despite literally not being suicidal!) / oppressed (while being the oppressor)… while on the other hand every action showing the absolute opposite

as others have said - if this is not the habit of trans people then where are those criticising it?

as a man I am happy to stand up and say not in my name - they may be men, but they don’t speak for all men, nor is what they do something of which any man would be proud

Agree. These YouTubers are an embarrassment.

I think we are getting a range of issues now. I agree.

However, there really is a difference between someone who is standing back but using zoom functions and recording and someone who is in people’s personal space. Those who are deliberately up close can be said to be there provoking reaction vs those who are recording but are then brigaded.

In saying all that though, again the differences in reaction when one of these auditors is close up to the women who are there to listen and speak about women’s rights still don’t react in the same way as those aggressive protestors. The difference is remarkable. And it is consistent.

I think we should discuss these points cos it's relevant and I do see obvious issues starting to arise. The 'both sides' argument raises its ugly head unfortunately.

The ones who simply record the event giving commentary as they go, seem inevitably to be provocative just by being there.

This is the sense I get tbh. The people there can hear the editorial line straight away.

Position in the crowds is also another issue. Having a camera up close is different from filming from a wider angle. Regardless of intention it can create a sense of intimidation.

I think we are going to get more issues with this in future on a range of issues.

I have mixed feelings about the auditing / citizen journalist community. However, since the protest in front of the Victorian State Parliament House, I do have an appreciation for some of them.

The footage collected by Rukshan was vital in understanding what happened that day. There was not enough footage taken by others to give the depth of understanding. There was no news service coverage. And other people’s footage was fine to see perspective from some vantage points but they were static and not moving around the area.

From watching his footage, he only interacted with people who knew him. But he documented the day, as a whole, better than anyone else.

Same as the guy who audited the NZ rally and had the camera that is very high up as well as at least one other camera.

Whereas The Laughing Auditor does seem to interact with people and it has to be said that some of this interaction could be provocative. However, on the other hand, in the footage he collects it does seem that those who are acting reasonably are not the ones who are antagonised by his presence and questions. Of course, I also don’t think he or anyone should be distracting police with unnecessary questions in those situations. It seems some of the auditors are there to get footage of police negligence. I think there are some auditors who use this provoking style.

The ones who simply record the event giving commentary as they go, seem inevitably to be provocative just by being there. Just recording the group with no other interaction is met with aggression. People at women’s events protesting don’t want to have their actions recorded, they are the ones blocking cameras or knocking them out of hands or trying to chase anyone with a camera away.

It is significant that I have never seen the women attending to listen or speak react in this way. If someone is recording them they might move away, if they ask the women provocative questions they might get humorous comebacks as answers or calm and considered answers. They don’t get aggressive behaviour from the women from what I have seen.

What these auditors do however is provide a continuous stream of footage, usually live streamed. And they are not participating otherwise so they are flexible in where they go. Their objective is to record any controversy as it is happening so of course, if there is any they will find it. (Even if the controversy is showing the aggressive tactics of those supposedly ‘peaceful’ protestors.).

Often these uncut streams are vital to understanding the truth in a situation. Obviously that is their purpose. Piecing together various other footage to establish what has happened is also useful but is time consuming and anyone doing that kind of aggregation takes time before it can be released. And even then need, that needs to be verified too. Often using auditor live streams to do so.

I expect Muslims to push back when people say "all muslims are terrorists" and i am with them on that.

But when a terrorist organisation says they are acting in the name of Allah, and Islam has just claimed responsiblity for a terrorist act in the name of Islam - and often shouting "Alluh Akbar" (sorry if spelling is incorrect) - i expect Muslims to say "nope, not in my name". The same as i expect men witnessing sexism to address it with other men.

That is exactly how what you wrote is interpreted grammatically. You wrote

"Allies (claim) trans are the most marginalised and vulnerable .....while the delicate flowers are on film acting violently and attacking women (and men)".

So whether it was your intent or not, you made no distinction between trans people and TRAs and did in fact in what you wrote, blame trans people for the actions of TRAs.

Good reminder, and I thank you. That's important to remember and I really understood your Muslim analogy.

They end up antagonising the situation though. They aren't neutral bystanders. They have a firm agenda and a vested reason to want aggro. It gives them a career. So yes they are part of the problem because they are making a career out of it.

We live in an age of mobile phones. If something happens then there's footage that can be used. It's much less confrontational and if it's coming from those affected it's not adding this element of professional YouTuber looking for drama.

YouTubers could use this. They don't because they want to be the one with the insight, exclusive or scoop. And that's where it goes wrong.

And their in lies a lot of the problem. They aren't neutral observers. They benefit from sensationalism. Many have very clear agendas. And that raises questions about the information they give you.

It's fuelling problems and they become part of that problem as a result.

It creates situations which are being manipulated to cause disorder.