Woman's Place UK meeting threatened with "device"

[hungryhippie]

twitter.com/Hastings_police/status/1007627071122759681

What the actual f*ck?

Anyone got a recipe for KFC?

One of the things that shocks me most is that it has come out now that this isn't the first WPUK meeting that has been threatened with a device/bombing!

And I keep thinking of all those venues that cancelled women's events - Millwall ffs! - which at the time I thought was strange - I mean if it was usually that easy to get events cancelled (get a dozen of your friends to email and phone repeatedly using different voices!) prankers and assorted nasty gits would be doing it all the time.

And several (most, all?) of the venues cited safety and security concerns. How many of them recieved threats of serious violence?

"It's not the being transsexual that's the issue, it's the inability or refusal to engage with women as people with boundaries, needs, and rights of our own that's the issue."

So how far does that go? Does that give you the right to exclude us from where we have been for decades? How far do you want to roll our rights back? AWP misrepresents a reform which would make a minor administrative change in a thing many trans people don't bother with as a sudden prospective invasion of Men in Women's Spaces. What they say is not true. How should I engage with that, do you think? I could explain that the offence of perjury carries a prison sentence, for example.

Are you still here ClareFlourish??

How many of them recieved threats of serious violence?

I have wondered this. How often have they threaten violence and it's been played down?

The desire to stop women talking and to abolish women only spaces seems to be leading to more extreme behaviour.

I could explain that the offence of perjury carries a prison sentence, for example.

You could, but then you'd have to explain how to tell a real from a false gender identity for the purposes of a prosecution.

Perhaps look up the meaning of perjury?

You could, but then you'd have to explain how to tell a real from a false gender identity for the purposes of a prosecution.

Brilliant!

Whatever the new name for a FOI is, is anyone organising questions being asked of venues and the police? What were the threats? Did they report the threats to the Police?

Clare, we have heard the minor admin changes position before. We are not mis-representing anything. It is obviously minor to you (or you want people to think it is) but women and girls will not experience it that way.

Why are you trying to find the venue and get the meeting shut down? Are you afraid of women talking? Are you going to tell us if we speak then people will die? That is the usual next line. Shut up or people will die. Emotional blackmail. We have heard all the same tropes over and over again.

Why are women not permitted to speak in Hastings without your approval Claire? Are you in charge of Hastings? Are you in control of speech in Hastings? Who put you in charge? Are you self appointed? Is your voice more important than ours Claire? You are behaving as if it is?

Also have fun explaining why a judge attempting to force Maria, who was attacked at Speakers Corner, to refer to a person she does not believe to be a woman as "she" and "her" is not perjury!

Christ on a bike. We're not on the perjury bollocks now, are we? Because, y'know, bomb threats. How vile can people actually be? Is there a limit?

Going back to the actual topic of the thread, if this isn't the first meeting where there was a bomb threat that would explain a lot, including Millwall developing a sudden case of cowardice.

Why has this hushed up?

Does that give you the right to exclude us from where we have been for decades?
Keep it up Clare, more than happy to pull the (figurative) welcome mat out from under your feet.
Bad house guests are rarely asked to ever return. Think about it.

that would explain a lot, including Millwall developing a sudden case of cowardice
Agreed

to a person she does not believe to be a woman as "she" and "her" is not perjury!
It absolutely is forced perjury, AAK.

People attending meetings were not given informed consent before attending? Collateral damage?

Does that give you the right to exclude us from where we have been for decades?

You were there because the women in question allowed you to be there. The women in question can change their minds - it's called consent.

There is a difference between asking, and being allowed to do something that you otherwise wouldn't, and demanding that you be allowed to do something because you want to. Like at a turning - perhaps a person will stop and let me out, but they are under no obligation to do so, and just because by habit people have done it, doesn't make it a right, or the law.

If this goes to court it could be very embarrassing for those who have used threats of violence to try to shut down other feminist meetings.

You can never be sure what the CPS will decide but given a threat plus bomb making materials found it sounds as if charges will be brought. The more light that can be shone on activists who seek to disadvantage and silence women the better.

We don't know that the threat and whatever materials that have the potential to become explosives are linked though. It would interesting to see if the organisers know any more.

Yes, I'm sure many of us wondered exactly how Millwall were induced to cave.

A bomb threat would have been very effective.

It also explains how the Houses of Parliament didn't cave. Their security will include facing the threat of bombs on a daily basis, I should think.

And publicising the venue at the last minute will also foil threats.

A Hastings KFC bargain bucket is not all that it seems.

Background (includes formation of WPUK) and comment by Debbie Hayton who has spoken at Womans Place meetings.

Guardian article by Gaby Hinsliff 'The Gender Recognition Act is controversial – can a path to common ground be found?'

(extract)
“As a trans person, I don’t want my rights or protections to be based on feelings, because people don’t believe it. They may tolerate it. But it takes away my credibility as a trans person.” As for all-women shortlists, Hayton says, “hell would freeze over before I’d go on one, because I was socialised as a boy and I have those advantages still”.

"Such views aren’t necessarily popular among trans activists, and Hayton has been accused of being “self-hating”. Yet in a movement focused on giving everyone the freedom to define themselves as they choose, it seems odd to deny her the same leeway.

For Hayton, sex is a biological fact; she describes herself as “male, and I prefer people to relate to me as if I were female”. But in an ideal world, free of all stereotypes, what she would have liked is to present as a feminine man. “This is really difficult to explain but by asking to be treated by society in the same way that they would treat a woman, I feel more comfortable,” she says.

“I transitioned because I couldn’t cope with the way society was treating me as a man, the expectations it placed on me, and the restrictions.

“The problem is, as a teacher, if I express myself completely as non-gendered, I couldn’t get on with the job. If somebody comes in saying: ‘I’m not a woman or a man’ then every time I did a new class, you would have to go through that with them, when what you really want to be doing is teaching them.” Transition was, for her, a pragmatic if not ideal solution to a complex issue." (continues)

www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/10/the-gender-recognition-act-is-controversial-can-a-path-to-common-ground-be-found

This is really difficult to explain but by asking to be treated by society in the same way that they would treat a woman, I feel more comfortable,” she says.

Funilly enough, this is the conclusion I came to when I first started to read about all this.

For the AGPs they want to be treated like the hypersexualised victim of a woman that plays out in their porn fantasies.

For the dysphoric, I can easily see them imagining that women are treated as maybe more trustworthy, softer, more polite, gentler, etc. Some imagine that women are put on a pedestal and 'protected'.

It tallies with the lack of understanding of how women are actually treated.

And the rage and/or indignation when women point this out.