escalating violence

[dropthevipers]

Just that. Does anyone else think the increasingly violent scenes (such as recently witnessed in NZ) shows that the Koolaid gang realise the gig is up and are lashing out in fury and frustration?

the “both sides” stuff is so disingenuous anyway.
it would only be “both sides” if a pro trans group set up a similar “let trans people speak” and a load of GC women turned up screaming shouting forcing their way through barriers , throwing soup over the organiser and punching and intimidating the trans’s speakers and / or the people that had come to listen.
And that would never ever ever happen.

It would be a bizarre claim that Australia is more supportive than the UK of LGB rights? Or is it the ‘T’ that you see as less supported in the UK ?

I wonder if those posters condoning the assault on women are ok with any other groups being assaulted for talking about their rights? If not, it makes them misogynistic doesn’t it?

Wasn't the assault on Maria MacLachlan back in 2017? And was forced to refer to her attacker as 'she' in court. Although I suppose we can be thankful that the police did act.

Refused compensation for the broken camera as she wasn't considered kind enough to her attacker.

"seeing as trans ideology erases homosexuality, you must mean Australians and kiwis are homophobic? Can’t have it both ways."

I don't understand?

@MerlinsLostMarbles what don’t you understand? That if sex is erased, you can’t have homosexuals can you? That lesbians are being called “sexual racists” for refusing to accept males in their dating pool? That gay men and lesbians are told their “genital preferences”. (Sexual orientations) is transphobic? How is any of that not homophobic?

" if sex is erased, you can’t have homosexuals can you?"

???

How can you have homosexuality if sexes are irrelevant? That seems rather homophobic to me. How about you? Would you say a male can be a lesbian? If so, aren’t you erasing female homosexuals?

I think the UK has already been through the violence phase. At the time Maria MacLachlan was attacked, the authorities were firmly TWAW and bending over backwards to accommodate these poor, marginalised, stunning-and-brave victims of the worst oppression ever.

It was before Stonewall's role was properly understood, before it became apparent that they and their Champions scheme was behind so much of the pressure to cancel any opposition to their agenda.

Back then, not only was Maria assaulted and Paula Lamont bullied off her picket line, but the TRAs would disrupt any event organised. They forced their way into the JamJar and Millwall FC was terrified by TRAs into cancelling another Women's event. That's when bomb threats were happening.
The reason Maria was at Speaker's Corner at all was because the intimidation of Women's events was so bad, they had to meet up first to find out where the next event was being held as they didn't dare publicise it first.
Helen Steel reported a similar tactic to the one used against BillboardChris last week:
https://helensteel12.wordpress.com/2017/11/22/my-statement-on-events-at-london-anarchist-bookfair-2017/

As I see it, the turning point came when David Davies MP offered a room at the House of Commons as an alternative, in the name of free speech. Now there was someone in authority giving backing and space for these women to speak - and what a furore he raised for doing that!
More importantly, it brought attention and publicity and the general public began to see and hear what was going on. People were at last able to see these men who claimed to be such put-upon victims - and to discover the revolting backgrounds of some of them.
Jane Fae and Jane's friends were forced to re-think their strategy, drop the more embarrassing TRAs who were giving them such a bad name, and go on a charm offensive.

The difference at the moment between the UK and Canada/Australia/NZ is the authorities and media are no longer as captured and the TRAs, despite all the hard work they put into infiltrating these bodies, are not having it all their own way.

It would be a bizarre claim that Australia is more supportive than the UK of LGB rights? Or is it the ‘T’ that you see as less supported in the UK ?

"LGBT", and hence "LGBT rights" refers specifically to the gender/queer/whatever ideology, and the rights of its supporters. Nothing to do with any of what the letters originally stood for, or the rights of individuals.

So it is true that Australia is more supportive of the "LGBT" group's "rights", in that it lets them harrass women more freely. And NZ is even more "supportive", in that it will keep the police away when they storm a women's event. (And again, to re-emphasise, don't forget that many of the "LGBT" mob won't be any of those letters' original meanings, while many of the women being were of course lesbian.)

(You could similarly talk about which countries are more supportive of Scientologists or Westboro Baptist Church rights...)

But it's clear that places like Canada, NZ, and the like has a huge problem with basic universal civil liberties, human rights, etc - people are being allowed to run riot if they've got the right "identity" label, and others are left undefended.

Homosexuals are homosexuals regardless if transpeople exist or not. They aren't being "erased" from existence.

Well, they kind of are. The head of stonewall claimed lesbians refusing to sleep,with transwomen. (Males), are sexual racists and it is akin to apartheid. That seems like coercive rape and conversion therapy to me, how about you? Lesbians are being kicked out of pride for refusing to say males can be lesbians and therefore welcome in their groups. That seems like lesbophobia and homophobia to me. What about you? Veronica
ivy, a prominent trabs activist, told lesbians they should “get over their genital preferences and date males if those males identified as women ”. That seems like homophobia to me, what about to you?

If we borrow from the trans activists, can't we say it's a "genocide"?

Well lesbians refusing to date males is apartheid so why not. If the gender ideologists can make offensive comparisons, I don’t see what we GC people can’t. Equal rights right?

No, it's just incel men being incel men and loving the fact that no one is stopping them from indulging in their violent aggressive delights.

My little sister is a lesbian and actively has to avoid transwomen and "non-binaries" for her own safety, for this exact reason. She said this one guy who was at least 6'2 (she's even shorter than me at 5'4) came along to one of the lesbian meet ups with his "girl friend" and he proceed to lecture them (the lesbians) on how they were all so prejudiced and bigoted etc etc...They didn't feel safe before. But these men now make them feel even more unsafe. I

t's the same old historical sexual trope of "oh, look, a lesbian - she just needs a penis to know she actual loves being rammed by a male", vomit.

Yup @YouJustDoYou my daughter is a lesbian and gets the same. I can’t see the difference between the gender ideologists saying “you just need the right Dick” and the awful blokes down the pub doing it. Apart from the fact saying no to the blokes won’t leave you in danger of losing your job or being bullied for being a “transphobe”.

Or alternatively we know there are higher rates of domestic violence and misogyny in Australia and New Zealand so the appalling violence was less unacceptable for them.

I do think we are definitely progressing in this fight and that’s why they have upped their violence. But we women are 50% of the population and this hateful ideology trans is so disliked by the general population. We are winning and they know we are.

Absolutely- this gender ideology is deeply homophobic and misogynistic

Wait what?? She was not kind enough to the violent man who assaulted her? wtf?!

Maria has written a lot about it on her own blog. You can read her reflections on the case here:

https://www.peaktrans.org/district-judge-kenneth-grant/

Thank you for the link I will read this later tonight

@PriOn1 I didn't want to quote your entire brilliant post, because quoting long posts in their entirety annoys me hugely. So I just want to say thank you for such a clear argument!

They are erased in the sense that their own definition of themselves as solely being attracted to individuals of the same sex is not allowed, and if they act on that definition, they are called bigots.

It's like a trans writer in the NYT a year or two ago wrote that the wide rewriting of the meaning of common terms such as 'woman' and 'man' are not erasing women as the writer's 'cisgender' wife was still sitting next to the writer.

But now that woman is supposed have an abstract identity not based on her sex, and she is supposed to view her sex as the more privileged part of the new identity-category 'women' where her male spouse is now part of the less privileged sub-class.

In fact, all our embodied identities are being erased!