New York - Let Women Speak tour - violent attacks, arrests

[ArabellaScott]

twitter.com/mrandyngo/status/1592248525555126272

Hoping everyone is okay.

I'm not suggesting our feminism has borders I'm pondering if our resources would be better used elsewhere.

If it's true that the only way for gender critical thought to break the US is for the liberal press to accept it, and therefore start telling the democrat voters what to think, I don't see how we'll achieve that?

I wonder if our energy would be better focussed on Europe but then there's the language barrier.

All I know from what you've posted is that you are glad that the tour hasn't been covered on msm. I now know that you think it should be (even though you're glad it isn't.) Your reason for being glad about the lack of coverage is apparently because you think people would side with the terrorists over the women trying to speak.

I got the impression that shiny was glad that it wasn't covered by msm because it was being covered by the right and most of the people who are gender critical are from the right and her left leaning family and friends would be horrified to be associated with thinking the same thoughts as the right.

I'm talking myself out of my last post now because that would mean abandoning American trans widows.

So if msm covers something that has been covered by the right wing press then left wing people will think that the issue itself is right wing and will therefore have to dissociate themselves from gender critical ideas?

So it's better for msm not to cover it so people don't realise that the right wing press have covered it?

Sorry if I am being thick, but this doesn't make much sense to me.

Surely if the msm covers the event, it's good because more people know about it and will be able to see for themselves what's really going on?

Yet still prepared to give them their vote and support, happy for women's rights to be thrown on the bonfire just so they can keep themselves politically 'pure'.

If it's true that the only way for gender critical thought to break the US is for the liberal press to accept it, and therefore start telling the democrat voters what to think, I don't see how we'll achieve that?

I don't think that is true. I think it would be good if the msm accepted GC thought but like in the UK, it will probably work the other way round. The press will follow what people are already doing and thinking. Women on school boards and in local government and working on local campaigns are going to start making a difference.

Plus a lot of people really don't get their news and opinions from msm these days. If KJK could get on Rogan, that would be a huge deal too.

Sorry if I am being thick, but this doesn't make much sense to me.

Surely if the msm covers the event, it's good because more people know about it and will be able to see for themselves what's really going on?

Sorry to say, but yes, you are being very naive of US politics/media here.

Socfems aren't responsible for the violence at the SKW events.

They may not have directly organised violence but when you rabble rouse and demonise someone as an arch supporter of right wing facists christian fundamentalists, you have played a part.

I said this earlier in the thread, the reality is that if Antifa's Aunt Lydias hadn't put so much energy into making out that the US was about to be invaded by a threat to democracy and decency, 99.9% of the US would have been totaly unaware of the tour. A few women who follow SfW might have had the chance to meet up with other women locally and that would be that.

How many other women's groups spend their time diligently stalking a political opponent. Is there a facebook "feminist" group that prioritises posting about WPUK?

Just think if AGCL had not put their energy into lets sneer at KJK, they could have organised their own events, sparkly or not. Seems like they like the confidence in their own politicies that they dont do that. Just like all those tiresesome student "left" groups who dont actually do anything but demonstrate against everyone else.

Can you explain more? Why would it be bad for there to be coverage of these events on msm?

Voting Dem isn't about political purity. It's because overall their policies are less harmful to women and other minority groups.

And otherwise you vote Trump.

Do you really think 6 Jan insurrectionists, incels, Trump supporters, antifa and misogynists got wind of these events and behaved violently because of a women's Facebook group IWantToRetire?

Can't remember which rule of misogyny it is that men's violence is caused by women, but that's from that playbook.

There seems to be plenty of 'stalking' of Facebook groups, MN posts etc going on in a lot places at the moment, including from some posters on this thread.

The US situation seems to me to be far more tribal in terms of politics than the various UK settings (England, Wales, Scotland, NI, all slightly different imo). The extremes are their own tribes, and if one side states that water is wet the other side will start a foundation to sell desiccated water. In other words, it is almost impossible to have an actual political debate across the tremendous political chasm.

I believe the right began the process of turning much more extreme, in fact so extreme that the far right is now entirely undemocratic and authoritarian. It is also a men's rights movement.

So even though the left has now also become authoritarian and woman-erasing, it is extremely difficult for lefty women in the US to be openly gender critical as the right is doing that.

Never mind that the reasons for opposing the gender identity ideology are diametrically opposed (the right needs women to be the sex they wish to control and keep submissive as a resource, gc feminism wants women to be the name for the female sex so that the right's attempts can be fought against and sexism and misogyny and sexual violence and sex discrimination addressed): Anyone openly criticising the concept of abstract gender identities as the proper replacement for biological sex in everything is assumed to be a right-winger and a bigot.

This means that turning this particular ship will take much more time here than in most European countries, if it can be turned, and what happened to Roe makes this even harder as gender critical women now have no place in politics which would support traditional women's rights.

You don't come across as knowing much about US politics EndlessTea. I can't agree that it's bullshit not to want Trump to get into office again, or any other Republican for that matter.

What about Hands Across The Aisle?

Hard agree Nepta.

So it would be bad if the msm covered Let Women Speak because... ?

No, I can’t agree that other feminists are responsible for this violence either.

However, they certainly don’t seem to be recognising it as violence and do seem to be blaming KJK and SFW for it, all at the same time.

It’s the same in the UK. I was devastated when the Tories got in back in 2010. So many supportive structures for women and children were stripped away in the name of ‘austerity’, blaming ‘Labour overspending’ for the effects of the global financial crisis.
Trump is a psycho, but I’ve seen people saying that even though they were liberal, they just didn’t ‘trust’ Hilary Clinton and they would vote for Trump. Similar to the Red Wall going to the Tories because labour is such a shit show.

Do you really think 6 Jan insurrectionists, incels, Trump supporters, antifa and misogynists got wind of these events and behaved violently because of a women's Facebook group

Let's be honest, it's antifa and misogynists who are the problem here. They were the ones behaving violently. It's not fair to lump 'Trump supporters' into this list as though they are some kind of fascist group. As for Jan 6th insurrectionists, I think we've covered that, haven't we? The guy was a peaceful protestor who spoke at an event in support of women. No problem there.

I don't think anyone's saying that antifa get their info from feminist facebook groups.

I believe the right began the process of turning much more extreme, in fact so extreme that the far right is now entirely undemocratic and authoritarian. It is also a men's rights movement.

Don't be ridiculous it's well established that the MRAs are TRA incels and actually very left wing.

Do you really think 6 Jan insurrectionists, incels, Trump supporters, antifa and misogynists got wind of these events and behaved violently because of a women's Facebook group

I think a group that deliberate misrepresents what another group is does draw attention to that group. Especially when that group posts not just on facebook but antifacist groups / papers and "alerts" others to the group they share a responsibility. Many of the US members of that group are contributors to left organisations.

As I said early it would have been more than likely that the SfW tour would have gone ahead with a few small unreported meetings.

I am not making women responsible for men's violence, but when you know that antifa and taggers on are looking for a fight, a chance to perform their righteousness, and you say look here, look at this right wing, homophobic, transphobic, etc group you should be held accountable. Not only for going out of your way to alert networks that have no natural interest in the purpose of SfW but because they are known to organise violent attacks.

This didn't happen in a vaccum.

Endless Tea:
What about Hands Across The Aisle?

I have tried to find out more about them, to see how popular they are. But my impression is that they are still coded right-wing by more lefty women, and they seldom come up in the media and feminist sites I visit. But perhaps they will grow over time.

I wonder if anyone will answer my question.

The group I loosely call MRAs (Men's Rights Activists) has several parts (religious patriarchal groups, pickup artists, male separationists, white male supremacists etc.), many of which are rather firmly what was called (and maybe still is called) Alt Right, including the Proud Boys.

The TRA-part is a more recent development, and does, indeed, include left-wing misogynists who are not themselves trans.

What incels might be in politics (if anything) could vary, but many of their sites I have visited are based on evolutionary psychology pseudo-theories originating more from the right than the left in the US.