Found this in the New Forest!

[Boomboomboomboom]

Thought you would all enjoy this little bit of guerrilla feminism spotted deep in the New Forest, Hampshire today. Brought a little Christmas cheer to my sister and I!

I never said I don't like women's safety.
Don't try putting words in people's mouths.

That’s a fantastic slate.

And slate is a nature material so quite at home in a forest.

@Rhannion

And slate is a nature material so quite at home in a forest.

Yes, but the act of writing on stones/slate as someone pointed out at the beginning of the thread could be seen as a kind of graffiti?

Yes, but the act of writing on stones/slate as someone pointed out at the beginning of the thread could be seen as a kind of graffiti?

Hyperbole is never good for either side's case.

This is graffiti.

That slate, regardless of what one thinks of the message, is not graffiti.

It's scribbling political messages onto natural stones.
That can also be seen as a form of graffiti.
It doesn't have to just mean spray paint cans on a wall in an underground subway or whatever.

Oh come off it.

There's a world of difference between something which can be removed in a second by any person seeing it, if one feels inclined, and which is causing no damage at all to the vehicle used for its display and something which has vandalised the display vehicle and requires calling out workers with specialist equipment to remove it.

Lovely, true message Boomboom thanks for sharing it.

Yes, but the act of writing on stones/slate as someone pointed out at the beginning of the thread could be seen as a kind of graffiti?

It's careful writing on a nice heart shaped slate, drilled for a piece of string to hang it from. Trying to characterise that as 'graffiti' is just silly.

I have to say I find the presence of a small slate in a forest far less offensive than female prisoners with trauma history find a male sex offender in their prison.

There's 'mildly offensive to my delicate sensibility of the pastoral' and there's cruel and unusual punishment contrary to the Geneva convention.

It's not hateful to discuss women's safety.

It's not anti-trans to discuss women's safety.

It is hateful and misogynistic to think that men's validation is more important than women's safety.

@lovelyweathertoday

I have a friend who has recently come out as trans. Trying to imagine going for a walk through the forest with him and coming across that. Just why?!

I don't understand - why would the message upset a woman who identifies as a man?

I didn’t understand either.

The trans friend should realise it’s not all about him/her/them. This person sounds very self absorbed.

that message definitely is anti trans even if you argue its for women's rights - going on about validating men's feelings is

Okay. So saying that women are not obliged to validate men's feelings is 'anti-trans' ? How so?

Walking through the woods and suddenly coming across something you feel is threatening, that makes you feel unsafe and perhaps frightened?
Welcome to the world from a female perspective.

What you are saying is that any woman who make a a statement about validating men is 'anti trans'? I really would like to hear your reasoning here, NotMe. What is it in the sign that women should not say?

The trans friend should realise it’s not all about him/her/them. This person sounds very self absorbed.

It's entirely possible that the friend might realise that if the cap doesn't fit, there's no reason to wear it, and not react as that PP imagines.

I suppose men who think their feelings are more important than women’s safety will feel angry when they read such a message.

Many women are afraid of men’s anger. Some women deal with that fear by attacking the women who they perceive add to the danger by inciting men with statements of fact or pro safeguarding/female safety opinion. These women prefer the strategy of coercing all women into demure submission and obsequious flattery towards men in the hopes that men won’t hurt us.

Decent, confident, mentally healthy men are quite capable of setting aside their feelings, and more for the safety and protection of women and children. Nor do they require continuous external validation of any aspect of their identity from strangers.

I have to say I find the presence of a small slate in a forest far less offensive than female prisoners with trauma history find a male sex offender in their prison

Indeed I'm sure female prisoners would feel much safer to be locked up with a 'unsafe' piece of slate with a statement of fact on it, than locked up with a transwomen who has retained their penis. Particularly as around one in two transwomen in the female prison estate are sex offenders.

The first one seems quite mild. The second, downright dangerous.

Puts the principles of what it means to feel safe into perspective really.

I don't care what anyone says, that message definitely is anti trans even if you argue its for women's rights - going on about validating men's feelings is whether you like to think it isn't or not.

Read and learn, folks.

At a stroke, the entire business of arguing that female people's welfare matters more than men's feelings (aka feminism across the globe) has been cast as anti-trans.

OK. What would people who say that taking about women’s rights is anti-trans doing to help women? Or to stop various kinds of evidenced abuses against women?

that message definitely is anti trans even if you argue its for women's rights

All this insistence that women's rights are anti-trans? What happened to "rights aren't pie"? Is it now ok to say that trans-rights are anti-women?