Police called to National Theatre to deal with gender critical feminists sitting on chairs

[Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g]

twitter.com/DadRogd/status/1147181198231429124 has picture of the unfortunate police officer sent to investigate.

Earlier in his tweet thread he says:

National Theatre Green Room bar just refused to serve us. Their grounds? Allegedly, we are a political group with views a member of staff finds offensive. So they offend a dozen customers instead.

Problem is apparently with t-shirt worn by Anne Ruzylo sporting a dictionary definition of a lesbian. As someone else has pointed out the NT is in breach of the Equality Act, given that sexual orientation and sex are both protected characteristics. I wonder how this will play out.

Where to start with the National's response in that article?
The National Theatre has hit back at the group's claims, saying they didn't give prior notice that they would be wearing campaign material
Then further down: Lisa Burger added: 'The clothing, gender or sexuality of the group was not a factor in the decision,
Yet they had previously stated above that clothing was a factor.

It is alleged that the women refused to put placards with controversial slogans out of sight.

It should be easy for the NT to provide photos then if they wouldn't put them out of sight.

And still the National haven't provided any details of this disruptive behaviour was. Or statements from these witnesses.
And whilst this is a more questioning article than the others, yet again the reporter doesn't seem to have pushed them to provide it.

The non existant placards are a big point in the story I think. That that excuse was used when it can be proven wrong, and HAS been proven false..shows NT staff are simply looking for any excuse for what they did and hoping it will stick. Which shows, they know they were wrong for what they did, if they are trying to cover it up and explain it by lies.

And yes. Still interested in expansion of the disruptive behaviour that occurred, alone with the abuse staff apparently suffered.

They imagine it could have been hurtful.

I'm really curious as to why it seems to be beyond the wit of every journalist so far - even this journalist - to question the National's statements and point out the inconsistencies. It's not as if they're hard to spot. Isn't asking awkward questions meant to be part of their job?

The National Theatre has hit back at the group's claims, saying they didn't give prior notice that they would be wearing campaign material

This bit's new. I noticed it contradicted the earlier statement as well, Floisme. They're tying themselves in knots.

Maybe a dog ate the placards

Are they really now saying that lesbians must give prior notice that they intend to drop by for a drink while wearing t-shirts bearing the definition of lesbian? During Pride month? At a venue with a giant fucking rainbow cascading from the roof?

The 'Bum Boy' tshirt was also 'campaign' material in the sense that it was referencing Boris Johnson who is currently running for PM. He was served without prior notice.

I wonder whether the mail are being deliberately cautious about what they say because there might be a court case?

They may not have questioned the NT's inconsistencies but they have included them in a way that's easy to spot.

Surely "campaign material" during pride would include, well, all sorts? Such as - for eg - a "bum boy" t shirt? Do all groups need to seek permission before attending? As "bum boy" was deemed acceptable...?

If pride is still a campaign, cough, not a party which is what I'd vaguely categorise it as?

X post with ova, from a different angle!

Namechange time :)

I think they have the right to announce a dress code and to state that all campaigning clothing must be cleared with them beforehand, just as long as they're consistent. So all political or religious slogans, comic relief T shirts etc etc etc - all checked in advance. They may need to divert some funds for that new department they're going to need to handle all the enquiries. But if that's what they want....

Seems our Lisa doesn't have much time for women full stop: www.independent.co.uk/voices/national-theatre-female-writers-directions-sexism-rufus-norris-lisa-burger-a8857986.html

Oh my goddess, better NC again, just read it as "No T" rather than the "NoT" (NT) I had intended. Don't want a ban, so better amend ASAP... 😬

Better

I wonder whether the mail are being deliberately cautious about what they say because there might be a court case?
I'm not a lawyer but the Guardian weren't being too cautious over their reporting of Anne Ruzylo so that doesn't make sense to me although someone else may know better.

I'm finding it hard to look away from this thread. I've always had such high regard for the National Theatre and to see them twisting and flailing like this - when words are supposed to be their business - is quite discombobulating. But I'm also at the failure of journalists to nail them.

I think they have the right to announce a dress code and to state that all campaigning clothing must be cleared with them beforehand, just as long as they're consistent

They could just ban all clothing with writing on it. If I'm ever in charge of everything it's on my to do list. I might, if you speak nicely to me, allow band t- shirts.

The Daily Mail comments are just puzzled by it - but to a person deplore the waste of police time.

I am offended by so many things these days, I don't know where to start. Apart from knowing I don't need to start with the police

I think this comment about sums it up for most people:

I consider myself a well educated person with an enquiring mind and open to listening to those who hold beliefs different to my own. However, even after reading this article and looking at their website I am non the wiser to what they are actually arguing about!

The idea that TWA literally W, or that "lesbians don't have penises" could be controversial, is just so beyond baffling to most people that they can't believe that's the actual root of the conflict!

Maria MacLachlan has written an excellent blog post about the events at The Green Room on Friday.

www.peaktrans.org/blog-a-gay-man-and-several-lesbians-walked-into-a-bar/

"Maria MacLachlan has written an excellent blog post about the events at The Green Room on Friday.

www.peaktrans.org/blog-a-gay-man-and-several-lesbians-walked-into-a-bar/"

Excellent - totally nailed it! Needs to be shared as wide as possible.

Were there actually any placards? I see no sign in the video.

The idea that TWA literally W, or that "lesbians don't have penises" could be controversial, is just so beyond baffling to most people that they can't believe that's the actual root of the conflict!

YY, it's difficult to comprehend. The Annals of the Terf-Wars by Jane Clare Jones is a good primer for those who can't get their heads around the New Genderism.

So I wrote a complaint to the NT on Friday, I received no response, so this morning I resent my complaint and received this in response:

"Thank you for your email. We absolutely understand your concern at the version of events that you have heard.

We have multiple accounts from witnesses. They corroborate that a group who attended the Green Room restaurant on Friday 5 July were ultimately asked to leave the premises as a result of a series of disturbances. These began with their refusal to put placards out of sight that featured messages which upset other customers and contravened our visiting policy, and culminated in abusive behaviour towards our staff.

The clothing, gender or sexuality of the group was not a factor in the decision, which was reluctantly taken on the basis of the group’s behaviour and what was said. The National Theatre must be an inclusive place for everyone, and that means asking visitors to conduct themselves in a way that respects that principle.

I hope that this fuller account of what happened gives you reassurance that the National acted with due consideration in the circumstances"

Haven't replied yet.

Erm, evidence please?

Clearly lesbians need to start wearing body cams when out in public to defend themselves.