The solution to drowning out speakers at events

[FruHagen]

I have just seen a short Facebook live where Posie Parker was being drowned out at her Brighton event. Drowning out seems to be the main counter attack they have, hence response of "let women speak".

I think I have a rough answer to how we can get around it, it's too late now for today but we should use the same technology they use at a Silent Disco.

Has anyone ever been to one? You wear headphones and the DJ plays the music into each individual's headphones. Well we could use the same technique for these events.

Everyone gets a set of headphones and the speakers words are sent to the headphones. You will hear a bit of the background noise but you'll still get a much clearer audio experience. You will hear women speak.
Everyone can have a set of headphones - all can hear if they want. Even the TRAs.

At the same time the live stream of the speakers is broadcast online so that a huge audience can also hear.

What do you think? Could it work?

Someone would need to help Posie or whoever needs it, implement it but could be a funny workaround?

Completely defeats the object and the mic would still pick up the noise. The solution is for the police to keep the mob far enough away and to let women speak.

I think it's an interesting idea.

However I completely appreciate Doyoumind's comment about the police keeping the peace so that women can speak.
(to overcome the mic picking up background noise, the speaker could use one of the mic sports' reporters use)

Yes maybe. Important to have voices heard.

Do you think the police will be better this time?

It is an interesting idea. I think I like it more as a statement or art concept.

However, I think if you were at the point of receiving headphones, you're probably already aware of the issues.

I think the very best thing women have on their side is usually provided by TRAs themselves (by TRA I do not mean trans person. Many, even most, TRAs are not trans themselves).

Remember "no debate ' was demanded because they barely actually have anything to debate with. Theirs is a faith-based religion. It means when there finally is an attempt at conversation, TRAs look illogical and hyperbolic.

Often TRAs provide the optics which prove women's point for them - be it drowning out, physical intimidation, male dominance displays, or placards with rape threats.

The best women can do is keep trying, keep appearing in public, keep demanding the police do their job without misogynist bias. And keep recording and publicising the results.

This sounds excellent, I wonder if they are readily available?

It was interesting to note which group ignored the minute's silence.

I'm furious. I honestly think TRA's are doing so much damage to trans people. Someone was hit on the head by a smoke bomb. There were some excellent speakers there today.

Interesting idea, but if I was at one of those events I'd want to be fully aware of what was going on around me and headphones would interfere with that.

Agreed

Watching today, I think it's important to hear each other (in context)

Maybe this is performance art at some point

Although it's vastly irritating to have TRAs drown out the women, I imagine it's part of Posie's strategy, in order to show them up, and their tactics.

Which of course it does.

Quite.

'Let Women Speak'

And the answer is a loud, angry, threatening and derisive 'no' . On cue. Beautifully performed. Angry, violent misogyny and threats screamed at women talking about assault, the experience of Autism, other sensitive issues.

I don't think the general public is going to have much trouble figuring out the issues.

People who make the effort to attend these public meetings will, for the most part, already support the aims of the meetings.

It is so important that bystanders, observers, the curious, reporters, even opponents, should be able to hear and understand the issues.

They are as important as lurkers on these boards.

Making the speeches only available to 'subscribers' cuts these 'lurkers' out.

This strategy would also look similar to the measured faces of the anti-women's-rights protesters. What have the speakers got to hide?

Protesters shouting at secret speeches is completely different to protesters trying to drown women out and heckling during a commemorative silence.

This strategy would also look similar to the measured faces of the anti-women's-rights protesters. What have the speakers got to hide?

...the masked faces...

No reason it couldn't be live-streamed and people could listen on their own phones/headphones whilst standing there - a decent mike would help with that, and just letting people know that it is possible - it would be a little out of sync, but still..

Although the TRAs will likely just set up (illegal) jamming - not hard to get hold of devices that'll make a silent disco basically unusable.

Yes, the more talks that are held, the more the public will see the truth.

I do like the suggestion of headphones and if I were able to go to one of these events (I can't as I live in Australia), and if I wasn't able to hear the speaker, I'd love to use headphones to hear.

Or the police could cordon the area off. I didn't go, but it looks as though they stood between the women and the activists, anyway. Could they perhaps have done it a little further out? The further away the whistling, shouting and drowning out is, the less effective it will be.

If the event is all about "let women speak" why is there so much hate targeted towards Emma Watson coming from the Gender Critical movement?

Is it "let women speak as long as they are gender critical"?

No one is stopping Emma Watson speaking, Marge. No one is throwing smoke bombs at her, are they.

No I don't think it is a good idea. Many women present were listening on the you tube live stream in one ear anyway. Plus we would be vulnerable with both ears covered. We do not need to submit or change our methods, why should we.

I went, I hardly heard anything, but that isn't why I went. I knew I could watch later on You Tube. I went to support the right of women to meet and speak in public about what matters to them. I chatted to other women and learned their stories. I watched the protestors and felt sadness for them. Many looked ill and in need of food. But mostly I had a big smile on my face and didn't let them bother me. No reaction is the best reaction I used to say about my abusive ex, these protestors are just the same.
Being kind and adjusting how we behave to accommodate the patriarchy isn't what this is about.

This framing of 'hate' as being anything at all that is less than full on approval is getting beyond tiresome.

I'm setting a definition here based on observed behaviours:

if it involves rape threats, death threats, kettling, dressing up in balaclavas and intimidating/trying to surround, screaming and shouting to drown out, throwing any missile including smoke bombs, or screaming at babies that is hate.

Anyone I see behaving like that has my utmost disapproval whatever they think they are standing for.

Well said Imhere. Disagreeing with someone isn't hate and it certainly isn't genocide. But strong action should be taken against threats of violence and actual (literal?) violence

I think the speakers at these rallies should use musicians earpieces as they drown out the loud noises, so you can still hear yourself, less distractions.
The cost of giving out headphones to those attending who be too much & I doubt any TRAs would give them back, they would just destroy them.

I would trust any of these buggers sneaking up behind me when I was wearing bins!

Wouldn’t - wouldn’t!