Gay man 'bullied' off Manchester Pride for wearing LGB Alliance hat and t-shirt

[Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g]

LibDem activist delighted by this. Here are two of her tweets. The gay man who turned up in an LGB hat and t-shirt was allegedly advised by police to leave for his own safety and seems to have had the hat stolen.

Another young fool tweeted that 'bullying the guy in the LGB Alliance shirt who came to the protest march is my favourit part of Pride so far xx'. He has since deleted this (possibly because he is now sober and/or has seen how many people had reported this to his employers) and now claims he was just chanting 'Trans lives matter!'. 'Bullying' is an odd choice of words for this. How could anyone think admitting publicly to 'bullying' was a good look?

The LGB Alliance man has been advised that people shouting at him is actually assault if he wants to take it further. Doesn't sound like he does, though.

Unedifying, to say the least.

Stonewall is not the leader of every trans person or "TRA" in the country. They do not set the common agenda that all "TRA"s abide by. Do you genuinely think they do?

As you are an “also legally qualified gay man” are you saying that Stonewall has had no influencr whatsoever in UK court and law? Are you from the UK? Are you actually in the legal profession?

[quote plodalong12]@JustPassingThrough3
Could you kindly clarify for me how the man at Manchester Pride was "assaulted"?

Of course. He had an item of clothing stolen from him, by way of snatching a hat from his head, and was mobbed by a crowd to the point where he needed a police escort. Now, I realise it may not be on the same level to you as misgendering, because we all know that is LITERAL VIOLENCE, but it does remain an assault. Do you think if you were wearing apparel that indicated you were gay and a mob of people crowded around you, shouting at you, before snatching clothing from your body isn’t assault? It wouldn’t cross your mind to think you may have been targeted because you are gay? Your threshold for tolerance is lower than mine, if so.[/quote]
If I was wearing a hat which said "Gays For Boris Johnson" and a gay man came up and snatched it off my head I'd assume he hated Boris Johnson rather than hated me because I am gay.

I posted a link that defines common assault. We don't need to guess, or have an opinion. What happened constitutes assault.

Stonewall is not the leader of every trans person or "TRA" in the country. They do not set the common agenda that all "TRA"s abide by. Do you genuinely think they do?

Although they seem to be able to set the terms according to which gay people can attend Pride marches.

@plodalong12

Stonewall is not the leader of every trans person or "TRA" in the country. They do not set the common agenda that all "TRA"s abide by. Do you genuinely think they do?

As you are an “also legally qualified gay man” are you saying that Stonewall has had no influencr whatsoever in UK court and law? Are you from the UK? Are you actually in the legal profession?

Stonewall has no more fundamental influence than any other person or organisation in law, they just choose an activist approach. I am both in England and a qualified lawyer.

If I was wearing a hat which said "Gays For Boris Johnson" and a gay man came up and snatched it off my head I'd assume he hated Boris Johnson rather than hated me because I am gay.

And if the hat simply said “Gay Pride” or “Gay Support” (which are closer equivalents to what actually occurred)?

We do genuinely know what Stonewall have been lobbying for.

Start with removal of sex as a protected characteristic. Fact not fiction.

Why do they do that, do you think?

@FloralBunting

Stonewall is extremely influential.

And you are being tedious, disingenuous, and I'm not in the least surprised you don't know any lesbians or gay men that would share about being pressured or coerced to change or hide their sexuality. If I knew you personally I wouldn't tell you because I'd be expecting to be high-handedly dismissed as you have done on the thread.

Stonewall are far less influential than they were ten years ago, and they don't simply issue commands and every single TRA sit back and listen. I don't even know who the head of Stonewall is anymore.

When have I said they shouldn't be able to have a charity or a group?

Oh, so they can legally have a charity or group but not expect not to be assaulted in the street? Good to know.

@plodalong12

If I was wearing a hat which said "Gays For Boris Johnson" and a gay man came up and snatched it off my head I'd assume he hated Boris Johnson rather than hated me because I am gay.

And if the hat simply said “Gay Pride” or “Gay Support” (which are closer equivalents to what actually occurred)?

But that isn't what it said. To many people, "LGB Alliance" means "against efforts to make trans people's lives easier". It doesn't simply mean "yay for gay people!"

@Ereshkigalangcleg

When have I said they shouldn't be able to have a charity or a group?

Oh, so they can legally have a charity or group but not expect not to be assaulted in the street? Good to know.

If you had read my posts you'd have seen that I thought what happened was over the top and aggressive, but not a homophobic assault.

A qualified lawyer?
Then explain why what happened was NOT common assault...

And if you read the posts of many people on this thread, they disagree.

that so-called gender critical beliefs

There's the give away so-called. Posting in good faith, yeah right.

But that isn't what it said. To many people, "LGB Alliance" means "against efforts to make trans people's lives easier". It doesn't simply mean "yay for gay people!"

But to many people, that’s exactly what it does mean.

Stonewall are far less influential than they were ten years ago, and they don't simply issue commands and every single TRA sit back and listen. I don't even know who the head of Stonewall is anymore.

Your ignorance is your own problem. Bored with the mansplaining now. Bye.

@CuriousaboutSamphire

A qualified lawyer? Then explain why what happened was NOT common assault...

I don't think you'd persuade a Crown Prosecutor that the evidential or public interest thresholds had been met – let alone a jury so as to be sure – that what happened caused anyone to "suffer or apprehend immediate unlawful violence" within the meaning of the law.

Stonewall are far less influential than they were ten years ago, and they don't simply issue commands and every single TRA sit back and listen. I don't even know who the head of Stonewall is anymore.

So if you think Stonewall with their multi million pound income, tax payer grants and considerable reach in the civil service and private sector are not very influential why all the panic about the LGB Alliance, a fledgling org run on a budget by two lesbians?

Surely if a huge org like Stonewall has little influence then the LGBA will matter even less?

To many people, "LGB Alliance" means "against efforts to make trans people's lives easier"

That's a silly and disingenuous understanding of what it stands for. If trans activists advocated for being able to lock everyone up who didn't agree with them, and LGB Alliance said no, they would also be "against efforts to make trans people's lives easier". It completely depends on how reasonable you think the demands of trans activists are, and as we can see, opinions differ.

@plodalong12

But that isn't what it said. To many people, "LGB Alliance" means "against efforts to make trans people's lives easier". It doesn't simply mean "yay for gay people!"

But to many people, that’s exactly what it does mean.

And that is why it is not inherently the case that anything that happens to someone who professes to support LGB Alliance is homophobic.

It can be! For instance if someone assaulted someone wearing an LGB Alliance hoodie who didn't know who LGBA were and simply attacked the person because they thought they were gay, that would be homophobic assault.

But if the aggressor knew who LGBA were, and yelled at the person because they disagreed with their support for the aims and focus of LGBA, that is not homophobic, because that comes down to a disagreement on views, not a hatred of the person for simply being gay.

But that isn't what it said. To many people, "LGB Alliance" means "against efforts to make trans people's lives easier". It doesn't simply mean "yay for gay people!"

and that give them a right to assault someone does it?

If I was wearing a hat which said "Gays For Boris Johnson" and a gay man came up and snatched it off my head I'd assume he hated Boris Johnson rather than hated me because I am gay.

But if Boris Johnson campaigned specifically for the rights of gay people to reject demands that they enter heterosexual relationships, I think the impression would be that the problem was with the belief, not the person.

I think you also need to think a bit more about how people date these days. It’s often through apps so there is plenty of opportunity to mislead, but also a need to narrow down potential partners. You can’t do that if the app company has been told it’s transphobic to discriminate by sex.

they don't simply issue commands and every single TRA sit back and listen

No one thinks they do. Think you have it the wrong way round.

@OvaHere

Stonewall are far less influential than they were ten years ago, and they don't simply issue commands and every single TRA sit back and listen. I don't even know who the head of Stonewall is anymore.

So if you think Stonewall with their multi million pound income, tax payer grants and considerable reach in the civil service and private sector are not very influential why all the panic about the LGB Alliance, a fledgling org run on a budget by two lesbians?

Surely if a huge org like Stonewall has little influence then the LGBA will matter even less?

You're right, the LGBA has very little influence as well! I am simply suggesting that people who think Stonewall controls what "TRA"s do and sets the policy agenda for the trans movement in the UK are mistaken.

If I was wearing a hat which said "Gays For Boris Johnson" and a gay man came up and snatched it off my head I'd assume he hated Boris Johnson rather than hated me because I am gay.

Yes that might be true. But following on from that, snatching the hat with the LGBA logo on it, from a gay man, would signify that the person hates the LGBA. Which is an organisation for same sex attracted people. Thus it would be more than reasonable to assume that the reason they did that is because that person has an aversion towards same sex attracted people.

But that isn't what it said. To many people, "LGB Alliance" means "against efforts to make trans people's lives easier". It doesn't simply mean "yay for gay people!"

Ignorance is no defence. It might be best if these individuals educated themselves if this is how they move through life, ignorant of the facts, yet aggressive. I hope that person presses charges against them for a homophobic hate crime / harrassment and at the very least, technical assault.