Australian womens rights activists recieve death threats in the lead up to a Sydney Womens rights rally

[Manyanamanyana]

Sal Grover and Kirralee Smith, both recently fined ($100k and $95k) for misgendering men imposing on womens spaces, have recieved death threats from a range of transactivist organisations. Sal Grover, a single Mum, has pulled out. I don't blame her one bit. It is sickening that women exercising free speech in this country are subject to this bull sh*t. Kirralee has decided to proceed and both are Warriors. Let Women Speak events in Australia require (and tbf, recieve) considerable police presence in order to defend these (usually middle-aged) women from the "be kind" crowd, who have in the past been violent and are always abusive and disruptive. What Government boasts about having sex-parity with the party, and yet sides with Men who behave like this towards women asking for their rights? All of them, actually. In Australia our sex discrimination act was altered beneath the radar to remove the definition of women and men, and elevate gender identity, meaning that a man who identifies as a woman is for all purposes, a woman in law. This is what Sal and Kirralee are fighting for: a repeal of the changes. Our Prime Minister and his tribe of handmaidens call this a culture war. It is in fact a war on womanhood.
https://archive.md/Eaeru

I am very glad that the rally went well and that they managed to get to speak without the noise and intimidation that a counter protest would have brought.

It is abhorrent that Sal and Kirralie have been receiving threats of any kind.

Nobody needs to see any statistics or be a biologist to understand that men and women's bodies are different. The boys that are playing in girls sports are or men playing in women's sports are not being fair. There are, however, obviously women who are happy to play with those men who would prefer to play with women so extra teams would be fine when it is all agreed. I don't want to say to people or say they can't play sports but that is what is happening now. There must be some fairness and compromise and public discussion otherwise what is the point?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4yy4dv2dyo
This is an example of a news worthy item being covered in national press.

If the ABC and other outlets are hardly covering this subject in a country where sports are a big part of the culture and prides itself on being a fair place where people can have an opinion then why not?

https://www.savewomenssport.com/post/swsa-condemns-abc-news-for-biased-coverage

It is a subject worthy of press coverage. It is in the public interest to have this covered.

I wouldn't be yammering on about anything if I couldn't answer the question why my personal desire to use women's spaces should be higher priority in Australian law than a woman's desire not to share single sex spaces with a body with male genitalia.

You guys are absolutely terrified about how women in the UK are empowering women around the world, aren't you?

https://www.savewomenssport.com
The video, The Inclusion Delusion is a good one to share. If the press aren't going to cover this is Australia then it will have to be grassroots and I don't think you can get prosecuted yet for sharing a video like this one. It could be sent to every sporting body both big and small and local in Australia.

Please do educate us as to when JKR&co has ever attempted to censor anything except perhaps death threats?

If you want to see censorship in action try going about usual internet use with and without a VPN turned on with a U.K. location vs an Australian location. Just looking at X and news feeds, not looking for anything unusual. It’s quite surprising.

You guys are absolutely terrified about how women in the UK are empowering women around the world, aren't you?

🎯

Let’s hope. Coming back from the UK after 25 years away I can’t understand what has happened. Aussies used to be more outspoken / willing to express their views out loud than Brits (or us kiwis for that matter - I nearly died of shock when I first moved to Aus in the 90s).

I think there should be a dog walking chat campaign! Take your ear buds out and talk to people when walking your dog. Women of Australia, talk to someone about keeping women's sports for women and girls, or about the Tickle vs Giggle case, or about Gender Ideology being taught to children as fact. Chatting to fellow human beings who are also walking their dog is a good place to start.

Death threats over a protest are just insane. You can disagree with someone’s views without literally threatening their life. Debate the issue, don’t make people scared to show up.

Hmm. I don’t want to get another dog at this point but I will see if I can bail up one of the multiple dog walkers at my local park maybe 😁. Maximise that Overton window.

x.com/salltweets/status/2091804088568832173?s=46

'Lawfare', as you refer to it, has been the only path available for many employees and others, to force their employers and other organsations to have to actually listen to, and address, concerns and objections without the immediate reach for censorship and social shaming.. It has taken, and no doubt will continue, to take 'lawfare' to continue to do so. See multiple successful cases in the U.k, which is at least 5 -10 years ahead of other countries when it comes to this issue.

JK Rowling's financial support is, and will continue to be, very gratefully received, as each new court case shines light into the dark corners of this pernicious ideology.

I wonder if Sall Grover could set up Giggle for Girls again but with it based in the UK?

I've read the links. It allows ten year old boys who ID as girls to take part in girls' sports and presumably they are able to share those girls' changing facilities as well. Puberty gets going at about 8 years old. Boys should not be in girls' sports, full stop, doesn't matter how they identify, they are boys. Girls discomfort and safety and dignity matter.
The rest of the link shows that any organisation that wants to exclude transwomen (i.e. men) from women's sports/organisations etc has to go through hoops showing that stamina, strength etc will effect participation. Transwomen are men and do not belong in women's anything for any reason.
Further, various bodies do not meet either the criteria of 'voluntary' bodies or are not recognised e.g. sporting organisations and they are not allowed to exclude transwomen at all. So local sporting groups cannot exclude transwomen.
Australia needs to make it abundantly clear than men (including the ones who identify as women) are not allowed in women's sports, lesbian groups, prisons, refuges, hospital wards etc because they are men, and for no other reason (because there isn't one - they're men).

affect, not effect participation.

Thanks for sharing this, is a must watch!

It amazes me how much support Sal has, reading they're comments for example, crowd finding is another, and how gutless the Govt is to act. I think Labor could be persuaded with enough advocacy. Please everyone, write to your MP. I send thank- you cards to journalists and politicians who speak up in favour of women, and 'get well' cards to those who speak up for gender ideology. And yes, as other posters have said, talk to people if you can when you can!

Sall says that her Arc speech is the most viewed on their Instagram - ever

That would be amazing, I know so many women who would love this.

I do find it puzzling that people criticise the women who have brought and won legal cases against people breaking the law, but not criticise the actual people who are breaking the law.

Its bizarre.

Are they anarchists?

Do they think that laws only apply when you agree with them, kind of an 'opt in' basis?

Its like they're too thick to realise you can't take someone to court and win over nothing.

They just hate women saying no. They consider it ‘female entitlement’.
The fact that said women then have had the courage and temerity to put their money where their mouth , - and to get a judge to agree with them is too much for them to take.

Dr Jillian Spencer talking about her experiences of questioning gender affirming care at Queensland Children's Hospital.

In a U.K. context I have a half baked theory that it’s become a habit to think that U.K. law might be trumped by some sort of supranational commitment after being in the EU for half a century - so people say “but rights!” quite confidently - and perhaps do think that laws they regard as morally wrong are in some way optional (at an institutional level as well as an individual level - look at some of the govt agency push back against falling into line with the FWS decision. Or some of the arguments made in the litigation over the Colston statue in Bristol). Different in Australia but maybe some sort of cross-contamination? Separately AI tells me that constitutional literacy is low in Australia and points to a recent Parliamentary report with evidence suggesting that around 50% of people think there’s a bill of rights in the constitution, add to that the complexity of where sovereignty sits in a federal system and maybe some people do see law as optional / subservient to “rights” in some way?