Sisters Uncut

[OrderOnline]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5406353/Protesters-wearing-Times-T-shirts-BAFTA-red-carpet.html

What do we know about them?

Are they anything to do with the protesting last week in London and Edinburgh?

Why do you ask?

Very surprised to hear they are against "gender-based violence" when they team up with Action for Trans Health which supports beating up women who disagree with them:

www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2017/09/trans-rights-terfs-and-bruised-60-year-old-what-happened-speakers-corner

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4914582/Radical-transgender-group-says-FINE-punch-women.html

They were indeed protesting at the recent Edinburgh event. Know almost nothing else about them though.

And they are continuing to support and try to raise money for an organisation which advocates violence against women:

www.facebook.com/sistersuncut/

They were in Edinburgh last week banging pots and pans together and shouting, "you can stick your gender binary up your arse!".

I believe that the men who assaulted Maria at Speakers Corner last year were also part of, or associated with Sisters Uncut.

I’m so confused!!!

They are supposed to be a feminist campaigning group but sadly have drunk the kool aid en masse.

They're utter traitors

I've got a friend who is heavily involved and I don't really understand their agenda - it is totally two sided!

What I will say is that they are all very young, and completely revel in big publicity stunts.

I went to a couple of sisters uncut meetings last year in my nearest city as council were closing refuge and I though women only campaign group a great idea. I stopped going as there was a man who said he was a woman in the meetings.

Sisters Uncut were formed a while back as an offshoot of UK Uncut - both there to protest austerity but Sisters Uncut focused on cuts to women's services. They have always been a self-ID group as far as I know. But I think being quite so rabid about it is a relatively new thing.

They have done good anti-austerity work - on cuts to DV services and in alliance with housing groups such as Focus E15.

I can't support them if they're self-identifying

How can they say they campaign on behalf of women who have suffered domestic violence but support a man attacking a women in public, on camera?? Or, oppose women who wish to meet up to discuss something that will directly impact on women. What kind of irrational thinking does it take to square this in their head?

There is something very off about them IMO. There is lots of positive virtue signalling on the outside and they say some inarguably positive things. I expect there are some genuine campaigners for vulnerable women and trans sufferers of abuse who get involved - like Wisterical for eg.

But if you look a bit closer there is a serious trans agenda. So if you look at what they've done (eg scroll through twitter/Facebook) it doesn't really make sense for an organisation that is supposed to exist to protect vulnerable women.

For a day to mark violence against women they protested at Holloway prison - the Facebook group mentions one woman and three transwomen, but nothing about why these transwomen were in prison or how it links to domestic violence and abuse. If they had written it as 'a woman and three men incarcerated for...' they would never have got away with doing it or posting it.

There are MRA 'what about the menz' Comments scattered on their page, going on about how domestic abuse and violence affects men just the same as women. They all get told to F off in no uncertain terms. Yet I
would bet money if they said the exact same thing about a man who put on a dress or just changed their name to a female one and said he was now female, they could make the exact same type of argument and be cheered on.

Just doesn't feel right - this is not an org that seems driven to help vulnerable women feel safe. Which should surely be a defining feature of an org founded to support women's refuges.

I think in the current political climate if you cover yourself in a cloak of genuine social justice actions and hypnotise the crowds with the 'trans women are women' mantra you can, as a man, walk into pretty much any previously barricaded safe space for women just by claiming you are one. No one wants to be transphobic so no one dares ask, or question the narrative that all trans people are vulnerable to violence.

I am sure many trans people are - and should be supported. But that doesn't make a man who has abused women and decides to say he's trans to gain sympathy, access, power or whatever suddenly vulnerable to abuse himself. Except in the trans narrative that's what he becomes.

It is obvious to anyone with half a brain and morals that it is not transphobic to ask the intentions of an intact male wanting to enter vulnerable women's private spaces. But that is what the TERF culture has turned it into.

Maria Miller's committee's self-id proposals, and Corbyn's current party policy aren't progress - they are a pattern for Jimmy Saville's magic dress. Everyone I have spoken to so far can see that immediately. Why can't they?

Because they and their parties had better have some good answers, because people are starting to realise.

I think they have an umbilical attachment to sections of Class War and the anarchist scatterings around London. And I say that as a lefty.

I don't personally think they are feminist women, or 'sisters' to me as a woman, or anything that's helpful to me as a woman, tbh.

They are circulating on social media a photo of the meeting room of the WPUK GRA meeting in my city the other week, showing the panel seated at a table, creepily asking people to come forward if they have any information as to where the room in the photograph is, so they can hold the venue managers to account. Totally outrageous.

On their fb page they say the DV and Abuse Act is a 'distraction' and creates 'pro-arrest environment' "in which everyone involved in a domestic abuse incident is more likey to be arrested. As a result. the number of victims wrongly arrested by police rises."
What does that mean? Its Class War ffs- are they trying to prevent the arrests of abusers?
I would be highly suspicious of anything connected to Class War-if anything like they used to be very creepy and fetishous.

I wondered that, dogends. Very odd argument to hear from an org supporting victims of DV. The only people I would have thought were more likely to be arrested due to new laws around coercive control would be the (almost overwhelmingly male) perpetrators of domestic abuse against the (almost overwhelmingly female) victims of it. Which you would think supporters of women's refuges would support, right?

The argument Sisters Uncut are making AGAINST such measures to criminalise abusive behaviour would be more the kind of thing you would expect to hear from a perpetrator of DV or a Men's Rights Activist, who would try to smokescreen the facts that DV is overwhelmingly against women, and help to enable it. The kinds of people who would desperately love to be able to find a way to have the outside world validate their deluded but deeply held belief that they are actually the victims not the (usually) woman they are abusing.

If ONLY there was a magic costume an abuser like that could put on to make it clear to the world that truly it is he who is the victim.

Oh wait.

The act the protesters are complaining about has cross-party backing and a big tick from Women's Aid, according to the Guardian; www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/01/scotland-set-to-pass-gold-standard-domestic-abuse-law

Some people from the group are on bbc breakfast right now. Unfortunately I have just missed it all. Did anyone see it?

On their fb page they say the DV and Abuse Act is a 'distraction' and creates 'pro-arrest environment' "in which everyone involved in a domestic abuse incident is more likey to be arrested. As a result. the number of victims wrongly arrested by police rises."

This means that they're "anti-carceral feminists". If you look it up your opinion of them is unlikely to improve. It also means that they've been influenced by MRAs, even if they don't realize it.

We had someone on here defending the whole anti-carceral thing a while back, maybe she'll pop in again and explain why arresting men for DV is undesirable.

(If you're a delusional muppet. Just so nobody thinks I'm in any was supporting any of this nonsense.)

They have gone from a really good group of women who wanted to work to save DV services for women to an adjunct of ClassWar which never did a bloody thing for women.

Fuck them, and the horses they rode in on.

Looked up anti-carceral and got to Penny White who I know from u-tube. Now i know Angrykitten. Cheers,

My local group had some members who were also very active in the revolutionary communist party. Thing is, all the sisters uncut women I met were committed, energetic and brave but saw me as a prejudiced dinosaur and after getting yet another patronising lecture about intersectional feminism I stopped being involved with them.

This means that they're "anti-carceral feminists". If you look it up your opinion of them is unlikely to improve. It also means that they've been influenced by MRAs, even if they don't realize it.

This ^ This whole movement is a front for MRAs, it's so glaringly obvious. Although, I'm not sure if the people who advocate for it are unaware of what they are doing. They can't be. Claiming to be against VAWAG while simultaneously supporting groups and positions which promote it is such an obvious contradiction they must realise what they are doing.