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.

Sal jumped the shark a while back.

@littlbrowndog

That well known academic sally Hines. 🤦‍♀️

I can only assume she spends 85% of her life pissed wishing she ever actually did anything worthwhile

@littlbrowndog

That well known academic sally Hines. 🤦‍♀️

Pick me pick me!

Also Sally Hines, about Kathleen Stock.

Oh is that violent convicted rapist Mike Tyson? Odd choice for a debate about politics and philosophy.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Oh is that violent convicted rapist Mike Tyson? Odd choice for a debate about politics and philosophy.

The intention of the tweet seems to be quite clear.

But apparently toxicity on both sides, and why can't people just be kind?

Or, merrymouse, it could be that SH feels that Tyson is such a superior debater if SH has had to concede points to Tyson in the past. So would like to see Tyson’s superior debating skills take apart DocStock’s arguments which SH feels is so inferior to her own.

It could be that SH wants to feel that she is not the only one to be outclassed by Tyson’s nuanced thinking and insights.

Or maybe she's suggesting a violent response is appropriate.

Hines is an unprofessional liability and I hope at some point she faces the consequences of her endless nasty goading and what appears to be close to inciting violence in that specific instance.

I think we're all being slightly flippant here (I certainly was) and it's clear that is what Hines is suggesting.

Oh, I know Eresh, I just wanted to be very clear in case someone hadn't clicked on the screenshot. Disgraceful behaviour on her part.

Yes floral

Horrible tweet. The implication of violence is clear.

Had a look at Pink News last night. It's like taking a slow swim through a sewage bed tbh. Commenters mostly gloating about the bullying of Alex Bramham. They regard April Preston as plucky hero. Whereas , in the real world , she locked her Twitter account because virtually all the replies to her tweet condemned her as a homophobe who put a gay man in real danger. It's like they are in an airlock and can't hear anyone else. So depressing 😞. So nice to come back here and realise it's not me who is going bonkers. I hope

The comments on pink news are shocking. Fascism? Really?

Im horrified by all of this, its the wrong direction. Im fine with including trans folk, i dont give a fuck how others want to identify but gender ideology is awful, damaging to women and plain incoherent.

How is LGB without the T a hate message?

Debate Mike Tyson? What a really weird thing to say.

Yes Floral. You are absolutely right. There is no excuse for the violence implied by that tweet. In fact, I would hope that SH's employer will see it for what it is.

@NotBadConsidering

Horrible tweet. The implication of violence is clear.

Shouldn’t she be reported to her university? I appreciate that SH understandably feels ill-equipped to match Kathleen Stock in debate or any other kind of intellectual exchange.

However, publicly wishing violence on a fellow academic isn’t an appropriate way for Hines to cope with feeling challenged. Wouldn’t it go against most university’s social media policies?

@Helleofabore

Or, merrymouse, it could be that SH feels that Tyson is such a superior debater if SH has had to concede points to Tyson in the past. So would like to see Tyson’s superior debating skills take apart DocStock’s arguments which SH feels is so inferior to her own.

It could be that SH wants to feel that she is not the only one to be outclassed by Tyson’s nuanced thinking and insights.

I think you might have it there

SH definatly an attention seeking arsehole trying to incite violence against an academic she has zero chance of defeating were they ever to debate.
Just though the image of her losing an interlectual debate to Mike Tyson was funny (mainly due to it being entirely plausable)

Crazy Sal is so hilariously clueless, I do actually believe she would lose a debate with Mike Tyson.

Or perhaps she always defers to men?

@BilindaB

There's no point present further evidence and proof to those who already know they are primarily an anti-trans group, but they like that, but won't admit it.

But as of me reading up to about page nine, you've presented a wiki page. I mean its wiki, even I could edit it and til the next person comes along to edit it, my version will stand as the truth. It's a bit of an odd evidence point. I think we all mean something meaty, something that you can point to and state unequivocally that's true. Got anything like that or just hearsay?

Even Wikipedia say that Wikipedia shouldn't be relied upon as a source, so....

Bear with me, I'm getting there but I want to show my workings out ..
Was the T welcomed into Stonewall because they are a marginalised group or because of their sexuality? Because if it was the latter then the T is a superfluous letter surely? They are already represented by being L,G or B?
Or, and I think I can hear the penny dropping in my own head they need the T because some are hetero?

And I do apologise in advance if I've offended anyone, I am genuinely trying to understand here.