Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Venice Expelled from KLPA (Ladies Pond(

188 replies

MidnightPondSwimmer · 28/05/2024 17:15

Venice has been expelled from the Ladies Pond. It means nothing really as they are just a stakeholder group, but it makes them look terrible like little authoritarian ignoramuses.

Here's Venice's tweet with their silly email. x.com/roseveniceallan/status/1795437142757532118?s=46

She'll still be able to swim, she just won't be allowed to attend the utterly pointless but entertaining AGM.

It's interesting because they sent an email round a few weeks ago asking members to agree to the constitution and if anyone failed to agree then they would be expected to leave the KLPA.

OP posts:
Helleofabore · 30/05/2024 16:16

DrSpartacular · 30/05/2024 16:11

Exactly, not a protest, but abuse directed at a speaker. Having been to WNTT events and watched all the others online, this was the only one I could recall where any attendee had been ejected. I'm interested to see PinkDog's examples of meetings plural where attendees were also ejected.

Thank you for clarifying. Shouting abuse at a speaker just because you disagree is likely a situation where someone should be removed.

DialSquare · 30/05/2024 16:16

YourPinkDog · 30/05/2024 16:10

@GoodAfternoonGoodEveningAndGoodnight you are exhausting to talk to.
Some transactivists who protested were removed from the meeting. I think Venice was right to get them removed.

Welcome to our world

Karensalright · 30/05/2024 16:20

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Helleofabore · 30/05/2024 16:22

YourPinkDog · 30/05/2024 16:12

I accept it was a protest. I also think the group are right to exclude her from future meetings.

This is perhaps where we differ.

I think that she most likely should have been ejected from that meeting after her protest However, it did look like it was at the end anyway. And I don't have a problem with people who want to legitimately peacefully protest at AGMs as long as it is peaceful and that the meeting can proceed.

In saying that, I don't believe that she should be permanently banned from future ones.

People shouting abuse at speakers. They are a different story.

YourPinkDog · 30/05/2024 16:31

I am sure Venice would not allow the transactivists who she ejected from her meeting to attend again. They were not shouting abuse. They stood up and chanted Transwomen are Women.

Helleofabore · 30/05/2024 16:32

YourPinkDog · 30/05/2024 16:10

@GoodAfternoonGoodEveningAndGoodnight you are exhausting to talk to.
Some transactivists who protested were removed from the meeting. I think Venice was right to get them removed.

Ok. Thanks for clarifying. I appreciate it.

I think generally that if a single activist stood up and had something to say, that wasn't abusive, but was within the topic under discussion that it is not a bad thing usually to have them say their speech. It can be a discussion starter if it is that kind of event. I have been to an event that was peacefully protested before and the people protesting waited until the speaker had finished and was taking questions. They then started their speech. It was not abusive and their signs were not abusive either. It also was relevant to the event. They were removed and people resumed listening to the speakers.

I think it can be done well. However, as soon as abuse is involved, then it is not appropriate for them to continue.

Sometimes at AGMs, protests are relevant and are needed. That is where I baulk at permanently banning members from protesting peacefully.

Helleofabore · 30/05/2024 16:34

"I am sure Venice would not allow the transactivists who she ejected from her meeting to attend again. They were not shouting abuse. They stood up and chanted Transwomen are Women."

Ok. Thanks again for the clarification.

Helleofabore · 30/05/2024 16:42

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Sometimes it is just not that hard, and doesn't require more than a glance. There are many different patterns. And again, this is a 'general' comment. Sometimes the pattern is simply the lack of clarity about a stance but taking the opportunity to scold a group and demonise or vilify the group at any opportunity. There is the occasion MRA on another board that I have realised is the same poster with the exact same arguments - but I have not seen him for a while.

YourPinkDog · 30/05/2024 16:44

I am not a name changer. I regret getting drawn into this. It came up on active.

Peskysquirrel · 30/05/2024 16:49

YourPinkDog · 30/05/2024 16:44

I am not a name changer. I regret getting drawn into this. It came up on active.

It's a shame you regret getting drawn in. FWIW I've appreciated your posts for their context and info.

Helleofabore · 30/05/2024 16:50

For what it is worth PinkDog, we did get the Sheila clip posted (I am going to watch that later on) because you mentioned Venice had ejected someone. That looks like a good one to watch.

Karensalright · 30/05/2024 16:51

@Helleofabore tsk deleted wonder why?

Karensalright · 30/05/2024 21:14

@MidnightPondSwimmer back to the issue i noted that the KLPA is a stakeholder group which presumably was set up by the Local Authority, for the purpose of “consultation”

There is nothing to prevent those who have an interest in the use of the pond setting up a new group, along the same lines with a management committee agreement and statement of objectives. To assert a sex based amenity.

This group could then approach the LA for recognition as a stakeholder group and take things from there.

I have seen locally stakeholder groups for eg around public transport where there is more than one stakeholder group.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread