Here we go again! Brighton Police want to interview KJK about a hate crime.

[ScreamingMeMe]

Sapphos has literally done what I said my abusive ex used to do. Gone right back to the original (and heavily debunked) accusations, whilst claiming to be the victim of misunderstanding and personal attacks.

I've taken Sapphos at her word up until now.
Not any more.

They're not digs at your personal life. The fact that you are married and live with a TRA is absolutely relevant. Some of us here could never continue to live with an active TRA but the knowledge that you're in that situation is pertinent.

Yes I consider actively inviting TRAs to come to the SFW event and potentially behave violently to be more of a shit stirring act than not attending the event at all and writing a web page explaining why your views do not align with KJK's.

The 'sin page' is simply repeating things that KJK herself has said. KJK was the one who put them out in the public domain, not the Brighton feminists.

Simply stating that some feminists in Brighton don't agree with KJK's statements and will therefore not be attending her event is not a hostile act, its setting boundaries.

TRA's neither KJK or SFW invited, so what is your point @SapphosRock ?

Selectively amplifying, with a distorted interpretation, words KJK has said, is not merely repeating what KJK has said.
If you don't want to attend her events, nobody cares, we are however puzzled as to why you feel she should then be the one to promote local issues in Brighton, when you can't be bothered to attend and promote these issues yourself?

It seems to me you keep trying to coerce KJK's own boundaries, by trying to dictate how she conducts her Womens' Rights Activism, instead of focusing on whatever it is that you do up in Brighton. You do know obsessing over KJK isn't Feminism, right?

Yes. It's all very weird. Not least because it just keeps going, on and on...

i've said it before, but I really don't get it.

“The 'sin page' is simply repeating things that KJK herself has said. KJK was the one who put them out in the public domain, not the Brighton feminists.”

”Simply stating that some feminists in Brighton don't agree with KJK's statements and will therefore not be attending her event is not a hostile act, it’s setting boundaries.”

You know that simply repeating this is continuing the dishonest interpretation of that page.

I am guessing that those women who are leaders of Brighton Feminists and in leadership positions of WPUK and contribute to that AGCL fb page have said this to anyone who will listen to cover their bullying. And I feel you are desperately just repeating it over and over wanting it to be true.

How many posters telling you it is a bullying pattern of behaviour will it take to show the lack of integrity in the description of ‘it is just listing areas of disagreement’?

Here is the link again for any readers. If you do read this link, I suggest skimming the many pages of this thread where it has been analysed and where the hypocrisy is most apparent in the ‘sins’ listed. There is context stripped and the whole thing is extreme bad faith interpretation.

brightonsisters.wordpress.com/differences-of-opinion-between-bwlc-and-kellie-jay-keen/

I always encourage people to read and make their own decisions about people, but this page is dishonest and put up by people who must clearly actually hate KJK from the way they have continued to monster her across the internet.

The hypocrisy is, that we have a poster trying to convince us that this is merely a disagreement, that women can have boundaries and this is part of stating those boundaries and trying to convince us that this is not a bullying tactic.

My very own sin page!

Thank you

Sapphos, i would have so much more respect for you if you just csme out and said you think posie is a liability. You think she is damaging the cause, that discrediting her is a vaild tactic to achieve bigger aims.

But as you say, your very own sin page is above. But this is an anonymous forum. And you can say many things about Posie, but she is
as straightforward as they come. You seem to have just deployed the tra playbook in the one place it will be seen for what it is in an instant. The only thing you have achieved here is discrediting yourself.

Sapphos, i would have so much more respect for you if you just csme out and said you think posie is a liability. You think she is damaging the cause, that discrediting her is a vaild tactic to achieve bigger aims.

I do think some of the things she has come out with make her liability but none of the rest of it. That's purely straw man.

If I was KJK I would be preparing a defence against charges of conspiracy to commit a public order offense, just in case. A conspiracy charge would give the police an excuse to look at her entire organisation and everyone connected to it.

You never know how these things will go. But the fact that screen shots exist to 'prove' a connection between two people and suggest prior arrangements should be a heads up to everyone concerned.

I'm also confused as to what the motivation could be of somebody who repeatedly and sanctimoniously makes contradictory and verifiably untrue posts, and false equivalence after false equivalence, within almost the same page, let alone the same thread.

It really is massively disrespectful to the intelligent women here.

So if you don't agree with the rest of it, why to you repeatedly defend the the Brighton Women sin page on KJK that does exactly that?

If I was KJK I would be preparing a defence against charges of conspiracy to commit a public order offense, just in case. A conspiracy charge would give the police an excuse to look at her entire organisation and everyone connected to it.

Good point, she is probably reading this thread, so hopefully she will see it.

And if you don't believe the rest, why did you introduce the idea that KJK has befriended an agitator journalist who is deliberately stirring up TRA activity at KJK's behest?

And if you don't believe the rest, why did you introduce the idea that KJK has befriended an agitator journalist who is deliberately stirring up TRA activity at KJK's behest?

Yes, that's quite an accusation Sapphos. Why do it if not to undermine and discredit KJK?

I don't think SapphosRocks is saying that though.

Her argument on this thread seems more nuanced to me. I do miss the days when I understood what people were talking about on FWR. All these references and links to Facebook groups, pages of sin, other threads and in-talk about 'Brighton feminists' is a bit over my head.

This statement is like the head girls/socfems and goodness knows whoever else saying to KJK 'I would have so much more respect for you if you just came out and said that you're positioning yourself as a right-wing social media influencer'.

Maybe they have? Maybe she is? What has this got to do with KJK being invited to police interview for a hate crime (the title of this thread)?

To me, this thread looks like a pile on to SapphosRocks including a poster suggesting that, on a public forum, everyone ignore her due to her being guilty of Wrong Think.

Ereshkigalangcleg

I hope someone gives KJK a heads up and asap. Conspiracy is potentially a much more serious charge.

Or @Shinyredbicycle it could be because @SapphosRock has made false statements, attempted to gaslight people and generally just not discussed in good faith. That is why it was suggested they be ignored.

@Thelnebriati - that would be paranoid.

You would have to get it through the CPS to make it stick. And a police officer who was a little bit smarter than a few posts on the internet and a lot of supposition.

I hope PP or KJJ gets a good lawyer who would mince some of this absurdity instantly. Some of this content about KJK borders on the defamatory.

The irony of claiming KJK is the one being bullied. I have made no personal remarks about KJK and I have definitely not said the following about her.

I really, really feel for anyone in this person's life. it must be a total head fuck

Sapphos has literally done what I said my abusive ex used to do.

the headfuckery comes across in so many of your posts - you must be able to see that surely?

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes @SapphosRock

It does feel like the person here is bringing a very unhealthy dynamic

Reading this thread reminds me of the headfuckery induced by my narcissistic, self aggrandising, gas lighting ex.

So if KJK is ‘alt right’ by her associations, does that mean Sappho is a TRA? And as Brighton feminists are working with the TRA.‘behind closed doors’ does that mean they’re TRA too?

Yes, (Sappho is) sleeping with the enemy enemy because they would erase my sex, my sex-based rights and my right to be same-sex attracted would not be possible for me.

Sappho's flying a false flag.

A person who can’t be honest with themselves is unable to be honest with others and therefore may be more trouble than they’re worth to deal with

I've known toddlers who are more convincing.

I no longer think you have any interest in women's rights and suddenly your involvement here is clear to me.

no @SapphosRock but you did imply KJK had deliberately used her friends to get TRAs to show up at the event. That would have been heinous if true, as we all know what the TRA are capable of and that would have been putting women in danger.

I really didn't. Even if KJK and the journalist were best friends it doesn't mean KJK is responsible for the journalist's actions.

Are you responsible for every decision your friend makes?

There is lot more than that. Implying someone knew, or otherwise facilitated an arrangement to cause violence is very serious.

Is anyone saying that here?

For some reason people were desperate to stir the pot in Brighton before the SFW event. This journalist friend of KJK was messaging TRAs inviting them to come along and make videos. She obviously wanted the TRAs to cause maximum carnage in Brighton to make a good story.

I think these people forget there are some of us who have to live here and we are the ones having to deal with the aftermath.

so this wasn’t you @SapphosRock ? Really?

Is any real evidence for any of that statement?

Also, please elucidate "maximum carnage"?