(The Times article headline actual says that this is what feminists are saying, so part of the point in posting is because this headline is sloppy reporting implying all feminists think like Sisters Uncut... and there are no commenting options.)
Explaining its alignment with the Palestinian cause, Sisters Uncut said: “As intersectional feminists we know our struggles are connected; nobody is free until we are all free. The same colonial logic of white supremacist patriarchy that oppresses feminists the world over is murdering Palestinians right now, through isra*l’s [sic] racist apartheid settler-colonialism.”
More recently, the group has campaigned for the rights of transgender people and minorities. On its website, the group describes itself as “women and gender-variant people who live under the threat of domestic violence”.
In July it supported Sarah Jane Baker, a transgender rights activist who told a Pride event to “punch a Terf” [trans-exclusionary radical feminist]. Baker had previously spent 30 years in prison for kidnap and attempted murder. Baker was later acquitted of a charge of inciting violence in connection with the Terf comment.
Other members of the “joint struggle bloc” include Soas Detainee Support, which supports detained immigrants, and the social justice group Land In Our Names. Also listed are the Dyke Project, which describes itself as “a collection of trans, cis, non-binary lesbians and queers of all persuasions”, Queers for Palestine and London Trans Pride.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sisters-uncut-pro-palestine-protests-feminism-oppression-london-32qcf0s5g
Full article can be read at https://archive.ph
So just to repeat I am not posting this to aggravate the really strong feelings the terrible situation between Israel and Gaza is provoking. But because it is an example of how over the years Sisters Uncut, through mounting sucessful media eye catching events, leads to false reporting that they are representative of feminism/ists. The reality is that their political practices is to piggy back on other events, an example being of their gate crashing the peaceful and respectful Sarah Everard event, intentionally to provoke the police now means the media, as in this article, say it was their event. I would have thought the Times would have higher reporting standards than this. Which makes me wonder what their motive is in reporting what seem to be so many supportive articles about women's sex based rights.