We must arm ourselves, say trans activists

Maybe try sticking to what I say. If you want to discuss what someone else says then I suggest you take it up with them.

1. Thats why I referred to a couple of hundred at most.
2. The lack of self awareness in trying to tie 100,000 protesters to some anarchists advocating what anarchists advocate for, and then complain about guilt by association. I’d take sharing a protest with anarchists over neo-Nazis any day.
3. By far and away the majority of signs on display on Saturday were directed at Wes Streeting and Keir Starmer. Almost like the target for criticism is based on willingness to make trans lives harder rather than based on the sex or gender of the person doing so.

So are you saying words are not violence? I thought they were. That’s what the TRA have been saying. Are you saying they’re wrong? I thought using the wrong words to someone was assault if the highest order and a matter for the police.

And where do using sex-based pronouns and wanting single-sex spaces, sports & services fit on the scale?

Sure, I’ll try to have a look for an exact example for you once I finish work, as it’s really coming across that you are genuinely interested in hearing another side to this.

1. What there's been more than a dozen at LWS events? Give over.
2. Far right blah blah blah. You really don't want to go down the guilt by association route given the behaviour of TRA's.
3. Or the several women attacked by TRA's at women's rights events? Aberdeen, speakers corner, Edinburgh etc etc etc.

The kind of events which are being discussed in this thread are just a chance for women hating misogynists to openly insult or make violent threats towards women while others present choose not to notice or cheer them on.

Umm, no. I'm saying that insulting someone is not the same as advocating violence against them.

I suspect there's a number of reasons:

1. There is a marked difference between the range of views you will find expressed in a group of 100,000 compared to a few dozen or maybe a couple of hundred at most.
2. Some of those events don't so much need signs when they have actual literal neo-nazis showing up.
3. Again, signs aren't so much needed when you have actual direct violence against trans people and their supporters, such as a steward being assaulted at last year's trans pride protest.

So you’re saying JK Rowling isn’t a woman? You’re really doubling down in the defence of misogynistic men. Wow! So as well as the transphobia you showed earlier, you are also misogynistic. Well they say when someone shows you who they are, believe them. And I think you’ve just done that.

As I said feature. Not a bug.

At least own it.

Still haven't seen your thoughts about why you don't see equivalent signs at women's rights events?

Sigh....

Any sign which call for a person to be armed (from firearm to frying pan) advocates violence.

https://nypost.com/2025/07/26/us-news/fashion-model-learning-to-be-a-man-after-being-pushed-to-transition/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=nypost

'Since quitting estrogen in January, he’s come to recognize other negative side effects.
“I was really crazy on the hormones,” he said. “I was mentally unstable and cognitively impaired. And generally fatigued, tired, not strong at all in ways that I’m only now coming to really understand.”'

So I'll just leave this here after reading both op's post and the above in one morning.

Sure, that one does advocate violence. So that's one out of tens of thousands.

Quite the novelty to see a TRA resisting the policing of opinions.

Personally I think if you see something obviously bigoted at an event you support you should call it out. Both because it is obviously wrong and because it gives a false impression of those taking part. Unless…

No. Insulting people is not the same as advocating violence.

Or this one?

What about this one?

Ooo genocide.

March demanding government action for Foreign People and Foreign States yet ignore the UK citizens killed on UK soil for and by the agents of the UK State.....

And there are anti-semitic as well as anti-israeli people who wont be carrying signs marching.

Anyway your parable fails on the substantive issue

I also don't think anyone protesting the genocide in Gaza against womens rights are anti-semitic against womens rights because some people who participate in protests carry anti-semitic anti-womens rights messaging, nor does that fact mean that the supression of womens rights a substantive issue at the heart of those protests is any less compelling.

I've not seen any posted. But certainly the two out of many thousands that have been posted here, I disagree with. But I suspect I'd disagree with rather a lot of what Hackney Anarchists have to say.

So of the two signs highlighted, which advocate violence against women?

One used derogatory terms for JK Rowling, and another from an anarchist group called for trans people to be armed. Neither sign actually advocates violence.

You'll have to forgive me if I don't give much time to the whinges of Mr Menno about all the dreadful signs using swear words.

Can you link us to any examples of trans men behaving violently at protests?

So you don’t agree with the signs calling for violence against women, then?

Maybe there is still more for you to see. I guess this is an example where more than one thing can be true at the same time.

Not necessarily. Someone doesn't have to agree with a sign to refuse to take on responsibility for policing the opinions of the 100,000 on a protest.

They are indeed. And those that don’t condemn signs advocating for violence against women are misogynistic. And those defending the signs and minimising them are also misogynistic, but in a way worse, as they’re not brave enough to hold those signs and declare openly their hate for women, but they’ll support those that do.