FFS disability is now on the pride flag

[sashh]

I'm livid. I'm disabled and I do not want to be represented on the LGBTQ+ flag.

Also this quote: Dayna Halliwell (she/her), Content and Engagement Manager at Evenbreak, led the collaboration and organised the Pride visit. She said: “It was very moving and amazing to see the reaction of disabled people in the audience. You could see the joy on their faces of being represented in the parade.”

https://blog.evenbreak.co.uk/2024/07/02/new-disability-inclusive-pride-flag-unveiled-at-london-pride/

You have to wonder why people on the "Right side of History" appear masked and shout rape and death threats at events, for example, where lesbians are talking about their right to meet with other lesbians (not the male kind)

People at these events post photos and video on social media sites like X (Twitter) This opened my eyes to the intimidation that these women face and the shocking lack of action by the police.

Surely a rainbow zebra crossing is still a zebra crossing? If not, what idiots are doing this? Highly dangerous, not only for guide dogs but for children!

The events in NZ and Australia were appalling. Attacks by masked men, shouting, loudspeakers. The Brighton event made sure that the women who had come to speak did not get heard.

Yes it does, here's the Let Women Speak event in Birmingham last year for example:

Well, afaik everyone is NB except transpeople - 98% has no 'gender identity' they are just themselves and either male or female.

Absolutely not. A zebra crossing is carefully laid out in law, include type of paint used. A ‘rainbow crossing’ is just a pattern on the road and means nothing as far a traffic or pedestrians are concerned.

Another example:

Help ! I'm being oppressed.

Appalling!

Ah, so we're talking about pro- and anti- transgender activists, and the 'woke' ones with the loudspeakers are the pro ones. Have I got that right? And only one side does bad things?

The ones with the loud speakers are anti-women’s rights. The ones trying to speak and with the stewards are pro-women’s rights.

If anything disproves TWAW, it’s their behaviour at these events. They want any excuse to beat up and silence women and are threatened by GC feminists because they know that TW aren’t W really.

Or if the Let Women Speak events aren't left-wing enough for you, here's what happened when Labour Women's Declaration (Labour Party members and trade unionists) held a rally for women's rights - masked protestors intimidated attendees, chanted throughout the event, and set off smoke bombs. https://labourwomensdeclaration.org.uk/press-release-womens-rights-rally-targeted/

Not to mention the events at universities, like this booklaunch at Edinburgh University - which at least managed to go ahead despite intimidating protests, unlike others at the university which were cancelled due to protestors constituting a safety risk. https://thecritic.co.uk/burn-the-book/

There are dozens of other such examples, and no, it's not some right-wing conspiracy theory. There would doubtless be even more examples, but the inevitability of disruptive protests and targeting, the real possibility of assaults and physical damage, plus the costs of organising security (costs of money and time) mean that potential organisers of women's rights events are put off or don't have the resources to organise them in the first place.

I haven't heard of groups of women turning up at trans activist events and harassing/threatening people if that's what you mean... (happy to be corrected - anyone?)

The worst they've done is speak, but that's too much for some.... scary wimin talking and disagreeing wiz the menz!! Burn the witches!!

To be clear, GC women aren't anti-trans, they want to ensure safety and fairness for all including/especially anyone who identifies as trans - eg preventing them from getting unnecessary drugs/surgery that will likely harm them in the long term... (guess who benefits from that? follow the $$$$$$)

I thought this one was interesting. The guy filming had nothing to do with the protest or what they were protesting, he just stumbles across the protest. He is an auditor who films the Police and as there were Police there he started to film. It's an interesting watch.

In the message above where I quoted VictorianBigot, I mentioned a couple of the many examples of events that were discussing women's rights being targeted and attacked by protestors who were anti-women's rights (who would probably consider themselves to be pro-trans rights). Do you have examples of supporters of women's rights intimidating people at trans rights meetings, shouting them down, banging on windows, letting off smoke bombs and all the rest of it? I've never seen any, but happy to look at the evidence if I live in a bubble. Do meetings promoting trans rights have to pay loads of money for extra security, have the police in attendance, keep their venues secret until the day or else deal with venues cancelling because they've been bombarded with calls to ban the event? None of the pro-trans rights events in my city (there have been many that I'm aware of, and I'm sure many more that I'm not) have had to face any of that, yet it's par for the course for women's rights groups.

Ah, so we're talking about pro- and anti- transgender activists, and the 'woke' ones with the loudspeakers are the pro ones. Have I got that right? And only one side does bad things?

In terms of violence, threats and intimidation yes only one side does this.

No we are not talking about anti-transgender activists, we are talking about women's rights activists. Filia, whose conference they tried to shut down, is a global anti-violence against women organisation.

Women who have concerns about gender ideology and its impacts on women, do so from the principles of the most basic human rights for women. The right to bodily dignity and autonomy and safety, the right to be in a female only space when recovering from male violence, the right to safety and dignity in sport. The right to basic safeguarding. Its about males in female spaces. We don't make exceptions for any males because that is not how safeguarding works. Its about males, not trans people.

If you still think this is 'anti-trans' then you have clearly not even tried to read or understand the position of those you feel free to slur as 'anti-trans'. How does that ignorance based slurring square with your self view as progressive and into social justice? If it does not square, what action do you want to take about that?

And yes, only the pro gender ideology side is trying to shut down what we say, and using aggression and noise and intimidation to do so. If you can show me the videos of mobs of booted feminists wearing black out and masks and shouting 'nazi and fascist' and blaring noise and horns to silence gender ideologues trying to speak, I'd be interested to see that.

We are the ones who from the very start have been asking for a conversation, dialogue and a debate. We are confident of our ability to hold our own with ideas and words and evidence gathering. Its the other side that has used violence and silencing and intimidation.

This is ridiculous.

It's visually horrific and chaotic.

It's also inaccessible for anyone with a visual impairment.

Also - which disabilities? If you've had cancer you're classed as disabled under the disability act, as with diabetes, hypothyroidism and a number of other chronic conditions. You might however, be very able bodied, athletic even. The disability is due to the long term medication you may need as well as the potential for relapse.

Idiots.

It isn't paint on a zebra crossing, it is thermoplastic which has to meet engineering requirements, such as reflectability and skid resistance. It has to be the right colour next to the pavement to be legally a crossing otherwise guide and assistance dogs won't recognise it. It has to have skid resistance so that if a car brakes on it, it doesn't slip and as people are more likely to be crossing nearby this is a key part of the design. It has to be visible in the dark and in the rain.

Slapping colours on the road, which may or may not be thermoplastic and may or may not meet requirements and aren't even visible by guide or assistance dogs, or by drivers especially in bad weather is a mind blowing waste of money that literally puts everyone at risk. But apparently gay people can now cross a road. Or something.

There's a twitter thread complaining about it here:

https://x.com/latsot/status/1813222908824625418

I would be fucked off of my area invested in rainbow crossings when the state of the roads is so poor. I didn’t realise that guide dogs couldn’t see them - that should be a reason not to use them for safety features like crossings

This was the first meeting of The Lesbian Project I think

I'm not sure that adding another symbol to a flag will change anything there, DawsonsFreak, at least if it's public funding you're talking about

Anyone with experience of bidding for this will confirm that there isn't a hope in hell of receiving anything unless the correct diversity/inclusion boxes are ticked, which is why there's a whole industry of people advising on "how to apply"