I'm confused what gender critical people want. Could someone clarify?

But isn’t the advice to women when being threatened by a male to fo SING. And the G stands for groin. So are you telling off all those self defence experts who advocate for women to commit violence if words don’t work?

lots of comedians use the threat of violence as a comedy tool. We know they don’t mean it literally. We watch slapstick comedies and cartoons knowing full well they aren’t there to encourage us to chase roadrunners or to kill mice. Using it as the punchline of a joke isn’t a crime. There is massive issue in the country about where the line of ‘inciting’ violence is. My bar is exceedingly high. It would have to be very specific and targeted with absolutely no room for anyone to dispute its meaning. The GL tweet doesn’t come close

Since people who know that humans can't change sex are not a homogeny (any more than people who know that the earth is roughly a sphere or that water is wet) you are likely to find differing opinions among the group re to what extent speech should be policed.

However, what I suspect most people would vehemently agree with is that the law should be applied equally.

Do you think that GL should have been arrested? If so, I assume that you also agree that trans activists calling for decapitation or punching of others should also be arrested and that it is a public scandal that they were not?

One of the things that comes through strongly in the thread dealing specifically with Glinner's arrest is the conviction that that farcical piece of authoritarian overkill will result in a significant uptick in conversions to a gender critical viewpoint. So I'm glad this latest nonsense from Chris has made it onto Trending - thanks Chris, have you never heard of the Streisand Effect?

What's that got to do with it?

Do you feel the same about people attempting to incite violence in other circumstances? Racial violence, for example.

Has anyone actually guillotined a "TERF" as a result of those signs being held up? Is that somehow different?

And what a lot of deletions there are on this thread and I’m only about 30 posts in!

It's a case of read one, oh a deleted one, read one, oh a deleted one.

What have you naughty women been doing? No doubt you've all been dastardly and been telling the truth again

I don't think anyone should be punching anyone and I don't think anyone should be suggesting it even as a last resort.

And I said "suggestion of violence in his tweet" in his tweet, not "violence in his tweet".

Interesting that your defence of his wording seems to be that it's reasonable to punch someone (as long as you have done two other things first). His defence was that it was a joke based on the relative height of women v men. So, despite the fact that he actually wrote it, you seem to think he had a different motivation than he claims.

Obviously, as you would see if you read my post rather than just jumping down my throat, I also abhor the call to violence against "TERFS". As I said, I don't think anyone should incite (autocorrect error in my original) violence.

I'm in a good mood today, so I'm going to be helpful to OP.

Chris, mate, if you're confused about what women want, I can recommend a very entertaining movie starring Mel Gibson that might even teach you something.

And ultimately how many women have done as he wrote, got arrested and then said ‘I did it because GL wrote it in a tweet?’.

Someone may have done this already, but I'm playing catch up.

the violence in his tweet? being the advice that - should you encounter a man in a woman's toilet - you do 2 other things first and when all else fails you punch them in the balls? that one?

interesting.
Where do you stand on "Kill All TERFs"?

I want annoying pricks to fuck off with their boring hyberbolic bullshit.

Oh and @DoinFineIThink Chris is not above posting outright lies. No one likes a liar.

Are you sure it's the same people? Because I don't think anyone should ever invite violence, and while I'm a big GL fan I don't agree with the suggestion of violence in his tweet.

So, it may not be the same people. We don't all share one brain.

VAWG to be taken seriously, child safeguarding a priority and no men in women's single sex spaces

Sounds so reasonable and simple doesn't it?
Yet for some reason it isn't....

Why haven’t you dealt with the crux of that post?

This thread is trending - excellent.

Chris's opening post highlights the kind of things posted or placarded by some TRAs for any readers who may otherwise not be aware, while the explanations following clarify (and exemplify!) the difference between this and the approaches typically taken by GC feminists.

Chris has been hanging around this board for years scolding us & posing the same old faux naive questions over & over again. He's not required to come here, it's not compulsory. If he doesn't like it he's free to simply not come

however as he's here so much he clearly enjoys it

Awww my sweet summer child. Stick around the boards a bit. You’ll see why the OP gets that treatment. @Christinapple has no compunction in showing the hatred of women and sexism of any other TRA and is quite happy to scold us on a regular basis. It’s a fun game.

More faux naïvety from Chris.

Doesn't he have a job or a hobby of some sort, aside from plopping stupid questions with wide eyed pseudo sincerity on here to try and start a bunfight?

Chris doesn't care what women want. If he did, he'd leave us alone.

Laws should apply to everyone - including those TRA activists who have been inciting violence towards GC (ie those who believe in reality) for years. Causing them to lose their jobs etc

Equality.

If GC people are going to be visited at home for reeducation by the police or arrested for wrongthink, i want every single tran who has involved himself in threats of death, hanging, assault, and rape whether this be online or via placard to be treated in exactly the same way.

@DoinFineIThink my reference to Chris' whining is because Chris starts the same threads/makes the same posts over and over again and never actually takes on board any of the responses.

thats the issue isn’t it. I got the joke straight away. He’s a comic writer. The way it was phrased, whilst I am sure has a serious undertone, was set up with a punchline. The thing about any sort of writing whether it is letters, texts emails etc is that the delivery is all in the reader not the person writing it. If you read it as if a comedian was saying it with the right pauses and last line you can imagine that it would get a chortle. Ricky gervais did a whole routine on ‘old fashioned women’ (ie biological ones) and covered a lot of jokes that many would find offensive

it just so happened that the Camilla thing was timed at the same time which does make it interesting! The difference I suppose was that she was under threat but just a trans women being in the women’s loos isn’t necessarily one even if perceived to be.

I think you may not have noticed the other 100 or so posts?

Seriously, why on earth post something like this in the middle of a thread which is predominantly thoughtful, discursive and courteous?

For you to just pick out the few posts that are ironic/satirical/insulting? Well, it "kind of puts paid to the "we're just wanting a discussion [Chris opens with], which is clearly a load of bullshit."

And I really didn't like quoting you there, precisely because I feel your own tone is also a bit emotional, aggressive and dismissive.

Come on - your post's the definition of irony.