Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

I'm waiting with bated breath for Peter Tatchell to show us all the evidence of attempts by feminists to threaten, initimidate and shut down transactivist meetings

52 replies

WillNotBeSilenced · 14/10/2018 09:39

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/14/women-claim-intimidation-silencing-gender-recognition-act-debate

OP posts:
rightreckoner · 14/10/2018 09:42

Yet he is opposed to the banning of anti abortion protestors outside abortion clinics.

Their free speech against a group of distressed women must be upheld but women themselves may not meet to speak about their own reality.

Manderleyagain · 14/10/2018 09:47

He says he has personal experience. He's no shrinking violet and has been on the receiving end of at least one assassination plot and must have experienced some v bad abuse over the decades. So I'd be surprised if he's just over sensitive. I have seen nastiness towards trans people on twitter. But like you I can't see the two sides as equal in this. I'm not surprised he didn't sign but I'm surprised at the reason he gives.

rightreckoner · 14/10/2018 09:53

It’s very odd. He seemed to be throwing his weight behind the ‘free speech no matter what’ argument hence agreeing with the judgement of the court in the gay cake case. This must have earned him some ire from the LGBT lobby. Good for him, I thought. He’s not beholden to any lobby, even the one that puports to represent him. But supporting women’s free speech it seems is a step too far Angry

NameChangedAgain18 · 14/10/2018 09:53

I am so happy to see that letter in the Observer that’s linked to in the article. Two academics at my work have signed it. I am about to do something to raise my head above the parapet, and have been losing sleep over it. It makes a big difference knowing there are others out there.

Redkeyboard · 14/10/2018 09:55

Thanks to all who signed that letter

Ereshkigal · 14/10/2018 09:57

Tatchell:

On Saturday the human rights campaigner Peter Tatchelll^ said that he had refused to sign the letter, condemning it as “one-sided” and “totally devoid of compassion for the suffering of trans women and men”.
“It does not acknowledge and condemn the abuse, threats and intimidation by some feminists against trans people and their supporters, including really vile abuse directed against me personally because of my support for trans human rights,” he said. “I always stand with the oppressed. Trans women and men are certainly some of the most vulnerable and oppressed people. They deserve our support, but this letter does not offer even a shred of solidarity.”

I've just read the letter. It's not about trans rights, and makes no comment on what should happen with the GRA, it's about activists stopping women from speaking. Why would they have to mention anything else, in condemning that?

arranfan · 14/10/2018 10:03

Because, "Will You Condemn-a-thon" is a popular pastime among pundits and political people (I heartily recommend the comments):

crookedtimber.org/2008/02/14/will-you-condemn-athon/

Will-You-Condemn-A-Thon
Sporting pursuit
Amusing internet pastime, in which several Decents quiz a pro-fascist, repeatedly demanding denunciation of a vast range of randomly-chosen murders, atrocities, war crimes and military actions in an increasingly hectoring tone.

“I agree, Guantanamo Bay is an affront to democratic ideals. But Will You Condemn Palestinian suicide attacks on Israeli restaurants?…

Yes, well, Do You Condemn Jihadist chlorine-bomb attacks?…

Okay, I knew you would be too sly to openly support such acts, but Will You Condemn terrorist attacks upon the American military?

What about the Battle of Teutoberg Forest, then, Will You Condemn that? …I see.

FissionChips · 14/10/2018 10:03

PT was on RT a couple of days ago, said that TA threats and violence should be dealt with leniently because something about them being the most oppressed. He also said there was new evidence showing pink and blue brains.

R0wantrees · 14/10/2018 10:12

I think that some TRAs with poitical influence have been collecting and collating 'receipts' for some time.

These are likely to then be presented out of context etc as 'proof'

cf Aimee Challenor's 'evidence' :
Intimidation in Public Life: Evidence from the Green Party
The Committee has received evidence from the Green Party as part of its review on the subject of the intimidation of Parliamentary candidates.

Published 5 October 2017
From:
Committee on Standards in Public Life

www.gov.uk/government/publications/intimidation-of-parliamentary-candidates-evidence-from-the-green-party

ahagwearsapointybonnet · 14/10/2018 10:30

Wow at that last post with LM. Do they know about LM's "Down with cis" secret Facebook group do you think? Among the many other examples of LM not being exactly "kind and gentle" Hmm

Great letter though, well done those involved - and especially as the Guardian/Observer have been very poor on this so far (excepting Hadley Freeman)!

merrymouse · 14/10/2018 10:37

He also said there was new evidence showing pink and blue brains.

If there is evidence of pink brain/blue brain, why self ID and why not just test for pink brain/blue brain; and why is it necessary to distinguish between pink brains and blue brains anyway?

PencilsInSpace · 14/10/2018 10:39

Great letter.

PT may have experienced abuse. Trans people experience abuse. I want receipts that it's coming from feminists. Judging from Paddick's feed, we are being blamed for every random troll on twitter.

NotBadConsidering · 14/10/2018 10:45

I think the take home message from the article linked by the OP is much more encouraging and positive than picking out the one voice they quoted as being opposed.

Here is the letter:

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/14/observer-letters-theresa-may-siren-words-fool-no-one

terryleather · 14/10/2018 10:53

“It does not acknowledge and condemn the abuse, threats and intimidation by some feminists against trans people and their supporters, including really vile abuse directed against me personally because of my support for trans human rights,” he said

I'd like to see proof of these very serious claims from PT against feminists.

PT got absolute pelters from TRAs in 2015, so bad that he was "unable to sleep" according to a quote from the Independent, after he signed the letter along with Mary Beard and others in support of free speech.

But now it seems that what so called feminists have said and done must be far far worse...

gendercritter · 14/10/2018 10:58

It's a good article. I think if I didn't know anything about the issue I'd be horrified by being being silenced.

I don't believe feminists generally threaten or intimidate people. Most women are feminists because they've experienced or witnessed injustice and/or oppression. Expressing a robust point of view isn't a threat. But I've no doubt trans people experience abuse - there are some very horrible people online who are aggressive. But women are on the receiving end of abuse too

Now100 · 14/10/2018 11:03

Why did the guardian choose a man who refused to sign to comment on letter? I find it really strange that trans people are considered the most oppressed when it feels they have been extremely successful in stopping women from being heard. It's almost as though the fact that women are routinely ignored throughout society despite being 50% of the population makes them not an oppressed group.

CrazyToast · 14/10/2018 11:09

I've seen some insults but most 'abuse' from feminists is just robust disagreement-- which is seen as literal violence, akin to death and rape threats by TRAs. This is obviously bonkers.

Floisme · 14/10/2018 11:25

Why did the guardian choose a man who refused to sign to comment on letter?
Exactly. A letter about silencing women and here’s the Guardian devoting two paragraphs to a man who didn’t sign it.

R0wantrees · 14/10/2018 12:36

current thread with copy of the letter published in Observer, 'Let A Woman Speak' and signatories:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3394224-Let-A-Woman-Speak-Observer-Letter

DisrespectfulAdultFemale · 14/10/2018 12:42

On Saturday the human rights campaigner Peter Tatchelll^^ said that he had refused to sign the letter, condemning it as “one-sided” and “totally devoid of compassion for the suffering of trans women and men”.

Fuck you, Peter.

terryleather · 14/10/2018 12:56

I'm with you Disrespectful, that quote..I mean what kind of fucking selfish bitches would give any thought or consideration to their own rights, suffering or discrimination when they should be centering at all times the "suffering" of they-who-must-be-obeyed like proper women should.

Fuck the fuck off to the far side of fuck Peter, and when you get there fuck off some more.

BlardyBlar · 14/10/2018 13:22

“Judging from Paddick's feed, we are being blamed for every random troll on twitter.“

I think a lot of angry women are now objecting. Being on the receiving end must be intense, but it is borne of infuriated frustration. I reacted. Difficult not to: so much “I’m listening and will consider” then purported acknowledgement followed by a brush off: “transwomen are not responsible for anything and must therefore be given everything they demand.”

There don’t need to be trolls. Make thousands of people justifiably angry on Twitter and you will feel it, even if they’re reasonable people.

I think these men are too arrogant and self-absorbed to differentiate between deep justifiable anger and bigoted hatred.

GulagsMyArse · 14/10/2018 13:35

terryleather
Fuck the fuck off to the far side of fuck Peter, and when you get there fuck off some more
Bravo!!!!!

GulagsMyArse · 14/10/2018 13:36

I've posted elsewhere about the oh so fragrant PT. Can not top terryleather sentiments