I was one of the transactivists on the channel 4 documentary, I regret what I did — this is why

[OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon]

medium.com/@Betsulimo/i-was-one-of-the-transactivists-on-the-channel-4-documentary-i-regret-what-i-did-this-is-why-7e12350ab6d3

Someone who was filmed trying to stop the “we need to talk” session now thinks they were wrong for attempting to shut down debate and realises that they were intimidating women

Knick knack paddy wack

Maybe I'm taking posts too personally - but my originally post was not meant to excuse poor behaviour on account of youth. If you read right the way through my post you would have read that I had my first child when I was 19 -younger than the idiot in question - and that I feel that being young does not excuse his aggressive behaviour.

My point relates to how worthless it is to engage in 'debate' with someone so young and so closed off. So involved with his own crusade. I find it beneath me to engage with a bunch of 20 year olds- certainly on-line - who ascribe to such behaviour

Likewise I'm tired of having to explain what I really meant on here. I tend, myself, to try to understand where someone else is coming from before I jump down their throat; especially when I see myself as a friend rather than an enemy.

As I said before, good luck finding a job after graduation. If people don't get jobs because their social media profile shows their enjoyment of partying, I suspect terrorism might be an immediate "no" as well

A cynic would say that this 'apology' is a way of getting a job. A 'name' if you like in the 'debate' alongside the Paris Lee's, Munroe Bergdoff etc. Someone to be called upon to give opinion.
I am a cynic.
There is no debate. No compromise to be reached. No men in female spaces ever.

I was thinking about this for a bit this morning. Call me old fashioned, but I had this understanding that of you were properly ashamed of something, you accepted that you had to make amends.

If you wear a mask, intimidate women because you don't agree with them, and have a moment of epiphany when your behaviour is broadcast nationally and you see yourself, then an article saying you are ashamed and shocked by your behaviour isn't really terribly convincing.

Shame-facedness would suggest going to women privately and not parading your very, very partial apology as venue to gain the plaudits of the women you still hold in contempt.

God, when I apologize to someone because I've done something I'm ashamed of, I go to them, I don't put an announcement in the parish newsletter with a few caveats about how I am sorry even though they are still a terrible person.

So I guess I've woken up this morning after mulling it over and come down quite firmly on the "ok, you're sorry for being a terrorist. So do better and don't expect applause for not being a terrorist. That's normal decency, we don't applaud that. That's like applauding someone for not beating up their granny." side of things.

To deal with all this and then see people given a platform to tell you they think trans women are all male fetishists trying to prey on innocent girls can hurt, a lot.

Waaah, waaah, the straw man made me do it!

Bloody women, always making men do bad things to us!

I was going to say "straw witch" but given their penchant for setting women on fire non-jokes maybe that's unwise.

Justhadathought

I agree that for me it's a (possible) explanation, not an excuse, and most of the posts I've seen expressing similar views take the same tack.

I also think it's important to remember that this is really just one individual, whose thoughts and possible motivations are really fairly insignificant in the broader sweep of this issue.

The individuals who are driving the changes to society re trans ideology are mostly older, more powerful, and are undoubtedly using strategic and tactical planning, and they are the ones who really matter.

My position is that Esther needs to direct attention to fellow activist transitioners and men rather than women. It is not us who need to hear Esther's "new" perspective it is fellow activist transitioners and men.

This trans issue is not for women to solve; it is for men to solve amongst themselves.

So, for me, Esther may have some credibility when that is seen to be happening on a significant scale.

Much as I enjoy access to the internet, I think it wouldn't be a bad thing at all if the www system destroyed itself. I'm rather afraid that the genie is out of the bottle though, and the only way to now control it is to stamp on it, hard. I will not negotiate with anyone who is trying to destroy me and those who share my sex. I just won't. If I have to put my docs back on and stamp, to stop myself being stomped on, I will do it.

I am optimistic that this might change things. I understand why people are very sceptical, and no the blog post is not perfect at all, but it is a step in the right direction. I am sure mum, dad, nan, family friends etc seeing the film brought everything into focus. But even so, something has to change and maybe this will start something.

I think Esther is the only trans activist of the 'twaw' camp who has made a move like this, and I am cautiously pleased to see that some of the gender criticals who have been out there under their own names are taking it (tentatively) positively, and are willing to talk.

I don't think this blog is the only thing Esther has done. She has obviously got involved in the free speech society and invited both Heather B-E and Raquel Rosario Sanchez to speak.

I always thought the term 'cult' was an exaggeration, and then I saw the reports from the trans activist 'flighting terfs' event in Sheffield, and it sounded like a cult like situation, or at least a very very separate political bubble. The terminology/nomenclature is all encompassing so it is difficult to think using a different framework to the one which the approved terms are part of. I read Esther's blog and twitter convos mindful of this backdrop. The two camps have to start speaking to each other somehow in order to move forward (I know the gen crit camp has being trying to talk all along), so hopefully this will lead somewhere.

I was thinking about this for a bit this morning. Call me old fashioned, but I had this understanding that of you were properly ashamed of something, you accepted that you had to make amends.

From the comments after the OP article it is clear that the author had not sought out all (any?) of the women they blocked and intimidated on the stairs of the Jam Jar prior to writing the article.

I think this matters.

Julie Bindel makes herself available there yesterday.

Only 20? Get a grip. We are talking adults here, who are responsible for their actions in law.

I'd seen some grim stuff by the age of 20, like many people here.

I am sick and tired of bleeding hearted liberals, telling me to cut slack for privileged nasty young men, dressing up as "girlies", who think it's a game to terrorise older women. That includes the so called "lawyers" who turn out to have criminal records and strings of iffy companies behind them, and their medical pals, who seem unable or unwilling to treat patients according to their sex.

All I see in this sorry saga, is confidence tricksters, people seizing "opportunities" to make money, sexual deviants looking for new ways to groom, and the groundlings and rejects of the likes of the Bullingdon club.

I don't think this blog is the only thing Esther has done. She has obviously got involved in the free speech society and invited both Heather B-E and Raquel Rosario Sanchez to speak.

This is absolutely not true.

Do you think Best organised the event Heather was speaking at in Bristol last week? No. Betts showed up to ask questions, and the free speech society also showed up to try to take over the agenda and make it all about their free speech. Have you misunderstood this?

electron1 manderley -- i think the Heather B-E talk was hosted/organised by the SU Free Speech society.

Esther is also a member of the Free Speech society (perhaps having joined sometime after the Jam Jar meeting - maybe this has influenced their thinking, and i think might be part of the shame they felt on seeing their behaviour exposed on national TV)

Esther did host a members in the pub discussion on trans activism with the Free Speech Society www.facebook.com/events/294402734498401/ but didn't organise either Heather B-E or Raquel Rosario Sanchez 's talk (the second one was WPUK).

....I think its just a misunderstanding.

From HB-E

twitter.com/brunskellevans/status/1066641006886641666

I was one of the big ‘ts’ you came to hear. The lesson you learned last week is that dialogue is healing. The lesson you learned is that terfs are not trans exclusionary or hate filled. You said sorry to my face and I hugged you. That’s the truth

Heather Brunskell-Evans response to the author, presumably at the recent free speech event at Bristol.

PilarTernera apologies, X posted with you.

While I may be willing to give Esther the benefit of the doubt, I would not be able to go so far as hugging.

I admire Heather for that. The lesson she is trying to teach is dialogue is healing, that feminists are not trans exclusionary or hate filled. Whether or not it's Esther, I hope the message gets through to someone.

electron1. and the free speech society also showed up to try to take over the agenda and make it all about their free speech. … Have you misunderstood this?
I understood that HBE recent talk was hosted by Bristol Free Speech society. 21st Nov on their events list
www.facebook.com/pg/BristolFreeSpeech/events/?ref=page_internal

candidpeel. Raquel Rosario Sanchez 's talk (the second one was WPUK)
RRS spoke at the Bristol Free Speech society as well as at WPUK. I read the transcript.
It's the 24th Oct meeting on their events list above.

From what I'd seen Betts was saying she was involved in inviting these people to speak, aswell as the session she led. That could be exaggerating involvement, but given that uni socs are usually run by a fairly small committee it wouldn't surprise me.

At 20, in 1984, i was taking part in the miners' strike pickets, and I went to Greenham Common twice as well. Because I passionately believed in those causes and wanted to support them. I did some things I'm not particularly proud of looking back (I was also a hunt saboteur and a little later a poll tax protester), and yes I had not a balaclava but certainly a face-covering. I was young, idealistic and thought I knew it all. i thought all I had to do was shout loud enough and everyone would listen, because I couldn't possibly be wrong. I don't think it's fair to castigate anyone for the enthusiasms of their youth.

I agree with Flo. Lets take this as an opening move and see where it goes. Handle with caution, see if the deeds match the words.

The arrogance of youth knows no bounds as the saying goes, but there is another cliche that says with age comes wisdom.

I'll just sit on this fence a while longer, til the splinters get totally unbearable.

I got the impression from her Twitter and Facebook that she was sincere. Even the profile pic had a "This is me being a twat type comments"

Imagine if we could all have a big hug and work out some better path. That would be good.

Bagsy not hugging Haddock or Stepho though.

"Some might say that I'm a dreamer....."

No tellytubby big hugs from me.

I was definitely more of a twat than a responsible adult at 20 - no criminal activities (other than nicking the odd pint glass and traffic cone), and most of my twattery was based around earnest discussions with philosophy undergrads about post-modernism

Even if EB isn't completely sincere and is still missing complete comprehension of the issues, it's definite movement in the right direction. One of the things that keeps Westerners tapped in ISIS is the fact that they will face criminal proceedings if they manage to leave and return home. Why would anyone return home if they are going to be reviled and imprisoned?

We don't need to hug it out though (damn American day time shows, promoting that as the solution!)