Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Posie Parker in Belfast

126 replies

OnAPostItNote · 16/04/2023 15:13

Just back from the rally. ‘Protesters’ shouted it down. They shouted death threats at Posie. Police did nothing. I wonder why? No such thing as free speech.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
StephanieSuperpowers · 17/04/2023 20:18

I think the point is to set the bar for women to speak so high that eventually we will all be disqualified.

FOJN · 17/04/2023 20:32

Then maybe that's what the event should be, because platforming people like that legitimises and emboldens then. I'm not GC and I genuinely do not know how people can stand beside overt and known racists just because in that moment they are not being racist

Insisting that we are in some way 'unsavoury opinion adjacent' because one speaker at a LET WOMEN SPEAK event holds views the majority of us may not agree with actually emboldens the soup throwers who would brand us all Nazis and use that to justify violence.

Babasghost · 17/04/2023 22:24

Villagetoraiseachild · 17/04/2023 17:50

Well done Babasghost!
What a long drive on your own, getting through the hostility and speaking!
Was that you first to speak?
How very courageous....
It looked very well supported.
Thanks for feeding back.
I hope Dublin can happen this year too.

Thanks lovely.
I felt compelled to do it. Definitely recommend, it's a safe bunch of women and men who protect you when you are there.
Had a 3 hr nap today hooray!

Flounder2022 · 17/04/2023 23:14

AlisonDonut · 17/04/2023 20:04

Not being funny, but is she
a - a woman?

If so, then she is as entitled to speak as you are.

You get that right? You do not control what everyone else thinks, says and does.

Honestly, this is beyond stupid now. If you wanted to speak then you could have gone along, and spoken.

PEOPLE YOU DISAGREE WITH HAVE A FUCKING RIGHT TO SPEAK - THAT IS THE FUCKING POINT.

Show quote history

No need to shout!

and my point is that no, none of us get to control what others thing, say or do. But we do have control over how we react to what they say or do and we have the choice whether we platform them, stand beside them or align ourselves with them. You obviously have no problem doing so.

Clymene · 17/04/2023 23:50

@Flounder2022 - did anyone say anything remotely offensive? I heard lots of women talking about wanting to have single sex spaces and the very moving ways why that was really important to them. But I didn't hear anyone say anything racist or homophobic or disablist or any other kind of hate speech.

The whole premise of Let Women Speak is in the name. I don't know who any of the individual women were who spoke and I don't care.

If you want to hold an event where only your pre-determined list of women can speak, go ahead.

BIGLYLETTERSMUM · 17/04/2023 23:57

That's not shouting. This is shouting

PEOPLE YOU DISAGREE WITH HAVE A FUCKING RIGHT TO SPEAK - THAT IS THE FUCKING POINT

IwantToRetire · 18/04/2023 00:13

we have the choice whether we platform them

Hello??!!! Did you do any organising of this event? Are you part of Let Women Speak.

The event is clear advertised as not being feminist but about free speech specifically for women.

You chose to go.

So pointless getting in a huff about there being speakers you dont agree with and coming over all sulky because someone you dont "align" with was in the vicinity.

As said earlier if you only want to go to events where those speaking are on your approved list then I suggest you join the silent accolytes who dutifully turn out for WPUK and pay for the privilege of silently listening to their friends and comrades as the only ones allowed to have a voice. (Totally off topic but sort of related. I see the infamous Actual Gender Critical Left has disappeared - but keep an eye out for infiltration of other groups along with WPUK!)

There is no we. Its pot luck event. Maybe nobody wants to speak and a load of men get to w--k off about how they know how women should fight for their rights.

Has it every occured to you that one of the reasons the event is so sucessful (look at the turn outs despite threats of violence) is because women dont feel dictated to. Because it does what it says on the tin (whether Campbells or any other variety!) - it lets women speak.

If it came to politics I probably wouldn't agree with KJK.

But I am more than happy to acknowledge that what see has achieved in getting women's issues into the public domain, and showing women that they can have a voice, is a huge achievement. So a Flowers for Posie.

crunchermuncher · 18/04/2023 00:39

Listening to a variety of viewpoints isn't 'aligning' with them!

Bloody hell, 'no debate' was how we got into this mess with women's rights. The very point of free speech is that it's free, for everyone, EVEN THE PEOPLE YOU DISAGREE WITH.

(Sorry to shout but ... I'm flabbergasted that anyone could seriously suggest that free speech is only for the nice people, like us).

Otherwise, who gets to decide who has a voice?

Why is listening to someone speak so terribly dangerous? If you disagree, get up there and tell everyone why! That's how discussion / debate works. If you cant discuss an idea, you lose the opportunity to see what's wrong with it.

Adults don't need to be protected from ideas/ thoughts/ points of view.

crunchermuncher · 18/04/2023 00:42

If even listening to what someone has to say is considered aligning with them, this polarises opinion and shut down debate. Because people become afraid to even listen to ideas that challenge their worldview in case they are assumed to agree with them, and vilified.

NecessaryScene · 18/04/2023 07:41

and we have the choice whether we platform them

No we do not, except by the choice of making the events closed and invitation-only, which changes the entire nature of the event.

This is very simple. An event is either open, or it is closed.

A closed event has a thing called an "invitation" where you "invite" known people, and thus have some control over who attends.

An open event does not have invitations. Anyone can participate buy turning up, or buying a ticket.

Open events do not vet who turns up or buys tickets, nor do they have the ability to do so. They can have behaviour checks inside the venue, and can eject people, but there's no pre-vetting.

So, for example, your Jolene whoever-she-is can take a bus, go to a Sam Smith concert, post on Mumsnet, or even attend and speak at a Let Women Speak event. Those are all open.

If you want to prevent her or any other Bad Person from doing any of those things, those things have to stop being open to permit the vetting by a designated Good Person to take place.

She has the choice to invite and vet people, but then they wouldn't be "Let Women Speak" events any more. Just as Speakers' Corner has the choice to not platform people, but if it didn't it wouldn't be Speakers' Corner any more, and women's spaces have the choice to admit men or not, but if they did they wouldn't be women's spaces any more.

All of those are not about individuals, it's about a fundamental mode of operation - open or closed - so in all cases focusing on individuals is disingenuous and avoiding the fundamental question.

PS using an open platform like Mumsnet to decry open platforms seems a tad hypocritical.

DerekFaker · 18/04/2023 07:44

crunchermuncher · 18/04/2023 00:42

If even listening to what someone has to say is considered aligning with them, this polarises opinion and shut down debate. Because people become afraid to even listen to ideas that challenge their worldview in case they are assumed to agree with them, and vilified.

Oh, that ship has long sailed...

crunchermuncher · 18/04/2023 08:14

Indeed.

Doesn't stop me raging against the sheer nonsense of it though....

Babasghost · 18/04/2023 08:51

Ultimately does this woman you don't like need single sex spaces away from men?
Does this woman face death and rape threats for wanting single sex spaces?

She is female therefore is impacted by the trans creep in law and life.

All women are.
Letwomenspeak.

AlisonDonut · 18/04/2023 09:36

Yesterday we had 'removing the wombs of teenage girls will help the high birth rate environment crisis' and now we have 'it is fine for kids of right wing women to be castrated/sterilised and live a life of intense pain'.

OldCrone · 18/04/2023 09:42

Flounder2022 · 17/04/2023 23:14

No need to shout!

and my point is that no, none of us get to control what others thing, say or do. But we do have control over how we react to what they say or do and we have the choice whether we platform them, stand beside them or align ourselves with them. You obviously have no problem doing so.

Show quote history

But did you find what she said at this event offensive?

ArabeIIaScott · 18/04/2023 09:54

NecessaryScene · 18/04/2023 07:41

and we have the choice whether we platform them

No we do not, except by the choice of making the events closed and invitation-only, which changes the entire nature of the event.

This is very simple. An event is either open, or it is closed.

A closed event has a thing called an "invitation" where you "invite" known people, and thus have some control over who attends.

An open event does not have invitations. Anyone can participate buy turning up, or buying a ticket.

Open events do not vet who turns up or buys tickets, nor do they have the ability to do so. They can have behaviour checks inside the venue, and can eject people, but there's no pre-vetting.

So, for example, your Jolene whoever-she-is can take a bus, go to a Sam Smith concert, post on Mumsnet, or even attend and speak at a Let Women Speak event. Those are all open.

If you want to prevent her or any other Bad Person from doing any of those things, those things have to stop being open to permit the vetting by a designated Good Person to take place.

She has the choice to invite and vet people, but then they wouldn't be "Let Women Speak" events any more. Just as Speakers' Corner has the choice to not platform people, but if it didn't it wouldn't be Speakers' Corner any more, and women's spaces have the choice to admit men or not, but if they did they wouldn't be women's spaces any more.

All of those are not about individuals, it's about a fundamental mode of operation - open or closed - so in all cases focusing on individuals is disingenuous and avoiding the fundamental question.

PS using an open platform like Mumsnet to decry open platforms seems a tad hypocritical.

Yes, good points.

So this is a free speech event for women. That's it. That's the premise. Women go and speak, without vetting or censure. I vaguely understand the idea is inspired by taking 'Speaker's Corner' on tour? (Good plan, because we don't have a 'speaker's corner' or anything like it in Scotland, and it seems a very valuable engine of democracy).

It does seem to be a concept that many find bewildering and puzzling.

Maybe because so much of what we do currently is performative and curated, tribal and political.

It's not a rally. It's not a 'protest', even. There are even similarities to the original meaning of a 'safe space' - somewhere ideas and speeches can be made and heard without judgement or attack.

So women might talk about politics, or their life experience, or whatever.

https://www.royalparks.org.uk/parks/hyde-park/things-to-see-and-do/speakers-corner

Fascinating history.

'Of the estimated one hundred speaking places found weekly in London between 1855 and 1939, Speakers' Corner is the last to survive.'

Speakers' Corner

Speakers' Corner is a traditional site for public speeches and debates since the mid 1800's when protests and demonstrations took place in Hyde Park.

https://www.royalparks.org.uk/parks/hyde-park/things-to-see-and-do/speakers-corner

3timeslucky · 18/04/2023 18:41

Flounder2022 · 17/04/2023 17:43

Then maybe that's what the event should be, because platforming people like that legitimises and emboldens then. I'm not GC and I genuinely do not know how people can stand beside overt and known racists just because in that moment they are not being racist

Show quote history

I don't think you need to point out you're not GC. Surely your previous posts have made that crystal clear?

I'll hand it to you though. You're effective at derailing the flow of a thread.

3timeslucky · 18/04/2023 18:43

pickledandpuzzled · 16/04/2023 16:14

So disappointing the police are useless.

Was there violence beyond the noise intimidation?

The PSNI were very good. KJK suggested the Met could learn a thing or two from them. The NZ police certainly could.

3timeslucky · 18/04/2023 18:44

@Babasghost

Thank you and well done! I listened to it all (and watched most of it) and there's no-one who came across as nervous as you describe yourself.

You women did good!!

howdoesatoastermaketoast · 18/04/2023 20:01

BIGLYLETTERSMUM · 17/04/2023 23:57

That's not shouting. This is shouting

PEOPLE YOU DISAGREE WITH HAVE A FUCKING RIGHT TO SPEAK - THAT IS THE FUCKING POINT

perhaps this deserves a t-shirt.

howdoesatoastermaketoast · 18/04/2023 20:12

@Flounder2022 "But we do have control over how we react to what they say or do and we have the choice whether we platform them,"

You have a perfect right to your opinion but this attitude does not sit well with a functional democracy. Talking about ideas, discussing things with people with a different perspective and even heated exchanges with people with whom you passionately disagree are vital components of a healthy 'marketplace of ideas'.

Talking to and listening to people with whom you disagree and finding the areas on which you do agree is part of disagreeing well.

Not being able to listen to / read / watch non-approved messages as exposure is viewed as endorsement and you are therefore tainted by association is a quality typically consistent with single party states and cults. Consider the McCarthy communist witch hunts, I always thought it was kind of ironic that the committee effectively endorsed the position that attending a single meeting would be so persuasive that you would turn into so committed a communist that you no longer be trusted.

Happylittlechicken · 18/04/2023 20:20

MerlinsLostMarbles · 17/04/2023 01:41

Anyone else feel uncomfortable watching the 11 year old girl speak? I have a feeling she didn't come up with all that on her own and may just be doing it to please a gender critical parent. The very vast majority of Gen-Z are not gender critical, so she probably didn't get it from her peers.

So are you saying children may be influenced by their parents and parrot back their parents ideas for praise/attention? But wouldn’t that be exactly the same for all the so called “trans children”. By saying this girl is just parroting her parents ideas, then you will also be saying the same about children who claim to be trans/gender ideologists?

ArabeIIaScott · 18/04/2023 20:23

The very vast majority of Gen-Z are not gender critical

Met any, recently?

Abhannmor · 19/04/2023 10:38

Well @ColadhSamh as others have said it is called Let Women Speak I guess. I just hope the concept isn't tested to destruction by an influx of antivaxxers and racists.

I have a lot of respect for KJK and also for Julie Bindel. You were brilliant @Babasghost ! Fair play for the epic drive.

Musomama1 · 19/04/2023 16:01

I feel that all women should unconditionally be able to speak up about this. (unless they've done something extremely awful in which case they should be on prison for life and I don't even want to hear their opinion on baked beans).

It's an issue that unites all women. The nice ones and the not so nice ones.