Shocking behaviour towards lesbians at Leeds 'pride' today

[CaptainKirksSpookyghost]

Thread 2

Previous thread here:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3656142-Shocking-behaviour-towards-lesbians-at-Leeds-pride-today

And correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t the Equality act also make provisions for ‘presumed discrimination’ anyway. I.e you don’t actually have to be a lesbian to be protected from discrimination from it, the person discriminating just has to think you are?

Lol!!!

How are you gong to decide if someone is being discriminated against for being a lesbian when lesbians can be two blokes hating anal sex?

Muppetry on steroids.

And a follow up from Lara:

When I watch the videos from Leeds, what stands out to me is the faces of the men (many of them not trans) involved. As they chant, curse, scream... They look jubilant. Blissful. Utterly satisfied. I don’t see grief or heartache or worry. I see triumph.

They’re ecstatic to have finally been deputized and praised for doing what they love most -correcting misbehaving women.

So bloody true. Looking at you, RIchard Firth & mates.

Or even having*

For all I know they could absolutely hate it too!

I’m really sick of this cis crap. So we have to adopt cis women because trans women want the right to be called women? Fuck sake.

RosesAndRaindrops you are being totally disingenuous saying you only asked once:

At 1922 Datun posted commenting that the protesters were described a radical and gave her views as to what they said was NOT radical.

At 1932 you asked where they had been described as radical and claimed that wasn't being said.

At 1953 Datun asked you to read the linked article.

At 2003 You again asked where the protesters were being described as radical and insisted that wasn't being said and you definitely didn't say it (no-one said you did)

At 2006 Datun posted a screenshot of the headline of the Leeds Live Report which clearly described the protesters as radical.

At 2009 You said NO that's not what is being said.

At 2014 Datun clarified, again, that the posters were being described as radical.

At 2020 you came back with this switcheroo:

Yes, I know it does but that's not what I'm pointing out, are you missing the point on purpose?! confused
Why can some lesbians not be radical protesters? Does the fact that they're lesbians mean they can't ever take a radical stance or something?

As I explained earlier, the protesters where giving the factual UK Legal definition of what a lesbian is, that is what they were doing and saying does that warrant being labelled radical? Is it a radical thing to say at an event that apparently supports and celebrates homosexuality?

As always, I have zero clue as to point you are trying to make, you are never able or willing to explain clearly or clarify any points you supposedly make. If you think your posts are enlightening lurkers and opening their eyes to your point of view I think you are labouring under a delusion, I consider myself literate and intelligent and I can't make any sense or gain any insight into this debate from your posts.

IRL, you are always in the minority, and if anyone dares to question you it is unfair because ‘we’re only a few woman

Where have you got this idea from?

I don’t write the laws datun two men having anal sex would also be protected under the equality act though FYI.

It's unlikely though, even in your imaginary world, that they would be discriminated against on the basis of being lesbian.

Where have you got this idea from?

could it be the 8 woman that turned up to protest maybe.

Hi Bespin
Can't be bothered with this but I wanted to put a favourite theme of yours to bed before I go there myself.
The snide comments about how few protesters there were, and how old they were.
1/I know plenty of young women in this movement. They do have children. Big surprise.
2/I was part of a group of women who were going to protest at pride. I didn't do it in the end because I am a physical coward and there have been just too many threats to women from trans activists. I'm sure you won't need reminding of the nature of these but I can show you if you want.
3/There are other threats, as I'm sure you know too. The doxxing, the police reports for wrongthink. Younger women have much more to be worried about. Older women who are retired are more likely to take this on the chin. How brave of them.
4/The general public still doesn't have a clue what is going on here.
Sunlight - sunlight and more sunlight is what we need.
Thank you for adding to this ray of sunshine on the thread.
Bigger thanks to the brave women who protested.

I’m really sick of this cis crap. So we have to adopt cis women because trans women want the right to be called women?

No darling .. women do not have to adopt the epithet of "ciswomen" since the term "transwomen" has no legal meaning in any UK statute.

The only reference in any UK statute is to "transsexuals" and, even then, UK law acknowledges that no person can ever change their natural sex.

Possession of a GRC does not change the fact that a man is always a man and a woman is always a woman.

A GRC only ever changes the relationship that the GRC holder has with specific aspects of UK law but not in all aspects of society.

Any person claiming "transsexual" status who does not hold a GRC has to be treated as their natural sex in their relationship with UK law and in practice of all aspects of society.

13, bespin. And look at the fuss those 13 women caused. A whole Pride Parade stopped to silence them. And you're still talking about them days later.

And you're still talking about them days later.

I know! It's awesome!!!

Eight women, with a Herculean impact.

I'm more than happy to keep these threads going. Google loves it.

bespin

They may be in the minority at Pride, but in the public more generally? I don’t think polling tends to support you on that, not in the UK anyway.

although I suppose it depends on exactly which topic, I haven’t personally seen polling on whether two trans women with penises having anal sex is considered lesbian sex by the majority.

A whole parade stopped to condemn them!

Bespin was responding to the question along the lines of ‘why do you think GC woman are in the minority IRL’

With the fact there were only 8 (or 10, or 13) woman.

A transwoman with a GRC is legally a woman, and could legally be a lesbian too. Since we’re so focussed on legal definitions. Which again seems counter productive.

Why do you care so much that the equality act doesn’t cater to transwoman or trans woman who identify as lesbians? Do you want them to face discrimination and get no legal protection?

Or are you raising awareness that it should extend to them, to ensure everyone is protected from discrimination?

NewarkShark

I know and that is why I am worried just like when we thought people would not beleieve that it's immigrants who were a threat. keep linking trans people to a threat like. People did in the 80s to gay men then people will think that, for a short time anyway but that short time will do damage.

After Birmingham, the most populated city of UK is a metropolitan borough, namely Leeds. the city holds a population of over 800,000 people.

www.ukpopulation.org/leeds-population/

How many people attended Pride, [assuming all attendees were citizens of Leeds] ... was it 60,000 ... that is not even 10%!

Enough said!

Since y'all decided to continue the debate, I thought I'd join in. Because there is something that really bothered me about the narrative employed by those condemning these 13 lesbians.

It's why I decided to describe that 15 minute video for those who couldn't watch it. But it seems I was too subtle (and my post was very long).

So for the record I shall highlight the most important fact here:

Members of the TransPride group deliberately set upon, insulted and crowded 13 lesbians BEFORE they had done anything other than be present as lesbians at Pride.

I repeat:

They were called "bigoted homosexuals" BEFORE they unfurled their banners, BEFORE they got out their megaphone, BEFORE they started chanting slogans asserting their lesbian boundaries.

This false narrative of what did they expect, they protested at Pride, surely the TransPride group had a right to respond falls flat on its face when one considers the actual sequence of events:

1.) 13 Lesbians are present in an area set aside for spectators of the Leeds Pride Parade. Two wear t-shirts bearing the following words: Lesbian - female homosexual and Detrans Lesbian. They are guilty of nothing else. No banners, no megaphone, no slogans.

1. TransPride members start insulting them, crowding them, intimidating them (I posted the details in the other thread). Attempt to get police to remove these 13 lesbians. They tell them they're not welcome via the usual slogans containing the TERF slur.

1. The 13 lesbians respond by starting their own protest.

That's the sequence of events. Intent is irrelevant. The 13 certainly planned a protest, but as they hadn't done anything yet, members of TransPride were actually the ones who started a protest against lesbians at Pride.

TransPride members initiated this intimidating, aggressive and hostile behaviour.

They did not come across a protest and decided to protest back. They came across a group of lesbians they saw as gender critical and therefore their enemy and behaved accordingly. They chose to go on the attack, unprovoked.

They also never moved on from that spot. So contrary to the claims on the first thread, there was no steady flow of additional Pride members marching past joining in with condemning the lesbian protest. There was one TransPride group who picked a target and then pursued their objective of intimidating a perceived enemy into silence.

Obviously the existence of a lesbian in a t-shirt defining her sexuality was considered to be a serious enough threat to and by these individuals to result in such reprehensible behaviour. (Although I can't help wondering if the proudly Detrans Lesbian wasn't seen as the bigger threat...)

Not legally a woman, no, or they would be able to be excluded in certain circumstances.

And the number of GC protestors? Around 0.001%?

JackyHolyoake

omg you are so right it's 10% so what is 12 in 800,000 lol