- Date published:
9:49 am, March 25th, 2023 - 333 comments
Categories: feminism, gay rights, gender critical feminism - Tags: detrans, gender identity ideology, kellie jay keen, Let Women Speak, trans rights, trans rights activists
This post is for discussion about the Let Women Speak events in New Zealand this weekend. It is open to people of any sex, any gender identity and those without a gender identity, who want to talk about why women are speaking, women’s sex based rights, and gender identity ideology.
The space is for progressive and thoughtful commentary no matter which side you sit on. Please bring your best debate, and please read the site Policy and Commenting Guidelines below.
I’m providing this space because I believe that women (biological females) have the right to speak about our sex-based rights, our own politics, and our own concerns. In the words of left wing feminist and philosopher Jane Clare Jones,
What we’re saying is actually quite simple.
Female people exist.
We’re oppressed on the basis of sex.
We have some rights. We would like them to be respected.
We have a right to self-definition, we have a legitimate political interest in the existence of our class in law.
How is that controversial?
Women’s rights campaigner Kellie Jay Keen Minshull, the organiser of Let Women Speak events, is a controversial person and opinions about her actions and beliefs vary even among left wing gender critical feminists. The women speaking at Let Women Speak cover the political spectrum/compass and include progressive, left wing and gender non conforming women.
I’m putting this post up primarily to highlight what the women speaking themselves are saying. It’s possible that left wing and progressive women’s voices will be missing this weekend at the events, due to fear of gender identity ideology activists, cancel culture, or disagreement with KJK’s approach and views. Hence this post to provide a space especially for progressive and left wing women’s voices.
Let Women Speak is in Auckland Saturday 11am – 1pm, and in Wellington on Sunday 2 – 4pm. Details below.
Auckland live stream,
Resources and reading for progressive, left wing voices on the gender identity ideology/sex based rights war,
Posts on The Standard on Gender Critical Feminism and Gender Identity Ideology.
Women’s Liberation Aotearoa Statement on Let Women Speak events, March 2023
Please bring your best debate. Be mindful of what you say and how it might impact on others reading or wanting to comment, even if they are people you disagree with.
From the Policy,
We encourage robust debate and we’re tolerant of dissenting views. But this site run for reasonably rational debate between dissenting viewpoints and we intend to keep it operating that way.
What we’re not prepared to accept are pointless personal attacks, or tone or language that has the effect of excluding others. We are intolerant of people starting or continuing flamewars where there is little discussion or debate. This includes making assertions that you are unable to substantiate with some proof (and that doesn’t mean endless links to unsubstantial authorities) or even argue when requested to do so. Such comments may be deleted without warning or one of the alternatives below may be employed. The action taken is completely up to the moderator who takes it.
I’m asking that people post back up for claims of fact at the time they comment, rather than others having to ask.
Back up means this: make an argument in your own words, quote from elsewhere and always link. If linking to video or audio, please provide a timestamp. The onus is on the person making the argument to do the work of making their point clear, not expecting others to read or watch long pieces and try and parse the point.
For parts of the day, pre-moderation of all comments might be in place.
If you are unclear on anything, or need something explained, please ask. There are people here on all sides of the debate who can bring their knowledge and experience.
Please don’t use the word ‘terf’ as a derogatory term (terf is a misogynistic slur even if you are unaware of this). Please don’t call trans people and trans allies ‘groomer’, this is also a derogatory term.
Most of all, please listen to women as they speak.
— LOUT (@l_o_u_t) March 24, 2023
— LOUT (@l_o_u_t) March 24, 2023
Let Women Speak Sydney
Yes, let’s just let women speak
The thing that's stood out to me about media coverage of this so far is that the women involved are completely absent from it. They talk to Shaneel Lal, they talk to Max Tweedie, they talk to Chris Hipkins, they talk to Michael Wood, they talk to Caitlin Spice. Women are mostly absent and the women who attend the events completely absent. These events are recorded and posted online, ffs – it's not that hard to find out what they're actually about and show some of the speakers in your news coverage.
The 'they' who spoke to Max Tweedie is in fact Kim Hill, a woman, who spoke to KJK about an hour after she spoke to Max. Kim let KJK say a lot of things on the air, unchallenged.
My God, one journalist actually spoke to the woman the NZ media's been maligning in their news coverage for days? How generous!
Link to interview:
Billionaire comment refers to the work of Jennifer Bilek (and others) who have traced significant funding streams through organisations to individuals.
There's also a disturbing connection between WPATH and the Eunuch Archive
It is false to say that Hill let her say a lot of things on air unchallenged. She interrupted constantly and tried to catch her out at every turn.
Yeah, something I’ve noticed, we don’t seem to hear the voices of middle aged feminist women.
My mother, an elderly stroppy feminist from the 70’s & 80’s has plenty to say about these issues. But along with her like minded friends, they feel are not able to be involved.
how come they feel they can't be involved Terry?
Well, I guess age & energy is one thing. They’ve been there done that. Found they had a voice, but now if they step out of line, they feel threatened.
Other than that, you’d have to ask I guess. Their grandchildren see them as irrelevant baby boomers. My mother was shouted down by one of the grandchildren’s (gay male) friends when she tried to hold him to account for using what she felt was misogynistic language. Apparently it’s ok for certain people to abuse women, & if a woman stands up for her self she’s a TERF.
I'm a stroppy feminist from the 1970s/80s and I am reserving judgement on whther to go tomorrow in Wellington.
I will make a decision on going once I see how the Police handle the protestors today. If they expose me to violence for my wish to listen to women I will not be going.
In the meantime please read this clear eyed exposition on the issues on Kiwiblog called
Guest Post: Posie Parker and the Week the Media Lost Its Collective Mind
Thankyou for providing this space for people to talk. Long time reader but a little reticent to comment as I don't have the debating skills to clearly put across my views which I worry will trip me up.
I think I have a fairly clear position on this as a cis woman that the TRA debate is very much still of a patriarchal structure in that the majority of transpeople (talked about or given airtime at least) are men to women and trans men remain in the minority. Also that a lot of the support is from cis men, queer or straight, and I find it deeply frustrating that men have such a strong position on what women's genitals ought to or ought not consist of and what should be done with them. Very Victorian and not very liberal I would have thought. Personally I deeply believe people can present how they want and not be marginalised for it but this also means that individuals views should be respected and not shut down and for nasty name calling to ensue. Obviously some people take this to a vile extreme but I hope they are in the minority.
It's a lovely idea that we are all the same, and capable of thinking that no ill will come of letting trans women into women's spaces but for a millennia men have been taking advantage of women and often well meaning women go along with it wanting to be seen as accepting and doing the right thing, not causing a fuss. I think the onus is on men recognising that they are still the ones doing the majority of damage to women and trans women physically and mentally, instead of forcing women to open themselves to accepting that the fate of trans women is in their hands and to the detriment of cis women's sex based rights.
I'd also like to posit the question to cis men – are trans men men? This is put to women again and again but I hear very little of this counter question. I did see someone on another thread adamantly state that trans men are not men with very good scientific reason but they were not questioned, slurred or put down as women are for saying exactly the same thing.
I am not a misandrist, I'm not a particularly active feminist either, in fact other would suit me fine. But I was born with the physical attributes of a female and have endured the travails of a female bodied person so I stand for women's opinions to be heard and respected and not mansplained or put down for being bigoted.
thank-you Charlotte, you expressed that beautifully.
Your post and Milt's highlight just how strong the male narrative is and the inherent sexism in the gender ideology movements.
Yeah some young gay men seem to have an issue with young straight women having their say. I’ve seen it in my family, and within the team I manage at work. As a parent I need to guide my children from teenage to adulthood, and this is difficult enough, but in the workplace it can be a minefield. Especially when you have the LGBTXYZ community looking for an opportunity to crucify a straight white dude or young woman. Most young women now just put their pronouns and pride symbol on their email signature to avoid trouble.
Well Charlotte, as a lesbian I have very strong opinions on what a woman's genitals should consist of. Also that what is between a persons ears is just as important as what is between their legs. I love women's minds, women's voices and women's bodies.
Also as a lesbian, I have a right to be same sex attracted and not to be told that I should be attracted to male bodied people who have had decades of male socialisation and male privilege. No matter what special identity they are claiming to possess.
I see that as homophobic and contributing to rape culture. Also as a form of "conversion therapy".
I absolutely agree with you
I'm a cis man, and so not really part of this debate, but since you've asked the question:
For me, the answer to your question is yes. Trans men are men. If someone tells me they're a man, I'll believe them. Likewise if someone tells me they're a woman, I'll believe them. I've never met anyone who lies about that question. My personal experience with trans men is limited to a couple that I have met during my work and really, in an office, everyone's gender is pretty irrelevant.
I'm a man and am assuming that I'm what you would call a cis man although that is something I've never identified as and I'm not 100% sure what it means to be honest. (Then again, I've never actually 'identified' as a man either).
In answer to your question, I don't believe trans men are men, they are women who choose to present and / or identify as men. In saying that, from my perspective they (and anyone else) can do as they please as long as they aren't harming anyone else or trying to impose their beliefs upon anyone. I'm happy to treat them as though they were biological men and to refer to them however they wish simply as a matter of being polite and kind. However this stance would change immediately if anyone (eg the government) tried to force me to into using certain language, or into denying biological facts, etc.
Also, I agree with all the points you put forward so well in your post I just hope that most people will read the parts of your post (and many other posts on this topic) that refer to "men" and know that a lot of the time it is in reference to a very small minority of men. (In my opinion)
I would suggest that a large majority of men couldn't care less if trans men want to use men's toilets, etc and that's because men (in general) don't have to and have never had to, worry about being physically assaulted by a woman (biological) using the men's loos, etc. I would also suggest that a large majority of men, certainly all of the men I know very much believe that biological men shouldn't be allowed to use women's spaces such as toilets, rape crisis centres, etc and are completely baffled as to how anybody could think otherwise. This is of course my opinion, I have no data to back that up.
Just one little pushback, the onus here I think has to be on society as a whole to come up with solutions that allow trans women to have safe spaces, etc but at the same time not allowing women's rights to their own sex based spaces to be eroded. The onus can't be just on men to resolve this issue as you have suggested, as the chances are they might get a few things wrong, not because they are bad or uncaring, but because they are not women.
Gender identity stuff is just one aspect of a wider philosophical shift in western (post Christian) culture.
Christianity held centre stage for around 1500 years as the source of "Truth" and shared narrative of the middle ages. Then came the Renaissance, Reformation and Enlightenment rationalism, where the human spirit was elevated and we recognised the value of each person as an individual. The locus of Truth shifted away from the Church and the Self took prominence.
However, rationalism and science do not satisfy the human soul. The Romantics felt that emotion was just as important and allowed their philosophy to be shaped by feelings.
We have inherited that assumption that our feelings are our guide (thanks Star Wars!). Even more with postmodernism, we (especially in the humanities; less so in science) are suspicious of *all* truth claims and assume there are hidden motives and power plays at work in any literature that purports to describe "reality".
So now the children of postmodernism think definitive claims to reality like KJK's "adult human female" is an attempt to impose some kind of patriarchal tyranny. Nobody is allowed to say they have "the truth". Everyone lives their own truth.
And then you layer queer theory on top of that. It's a project to undermine and challenge *all* norms of society.
There is definitely merit in challenging authority per postmodernism. But actively demolishing all social norms? No, that is just being a destructive, transgressive arsehole.
As I said to Jan Logie before she blocked me:
Chesterton’s Fence: A Lesson in Second Order Thinking (fs.blog)
Drag story hour: the delivery system for queer theory | Human Events
Allan de Botton on Romanticism in the intro to "The School of Life" (he's written much more deeply on this topic, here he sums it up in 150 words)
We have disagreed on quite a few things, but on this I will give full credit for a sound and thoughtful contribution. Sadly it does not align with the required purity tests however …
Thanks RL. Your comments are consistently thoughtful and intelligent, if sometimes hard to agree with.
You both probably read Douglas Murray.
You would be familiar with his works then?
Only a little, but it would seem you two have commonalities consistent with his world view.
A little is good – more would be even better
Let women speak. Also, if we are letting women speak, make sure we aren’t just letting women from a particular perspective speak.
We also need to let trans and non binary people speak. Not all trans people were born men, so members of the trans community fall under the definition used in this article. Listen to them.
Everyone had a right freedom of speech. We don’t defeat right wing and reactionary politics by getting the state to silence them or stopping people with certain views entering the country. We change peoples minds through patiently engaging and winning them over.
The NZ police just let the protestors not only shut down KJK and the women who were to speak, but do so as a mob. That was incredibly frightening and there are reports of assault. Eventually the police turned up and got KJK out of the mob and into a police car. This isn't changing people's minds through engagement and making a case for one's position.
Let Women Speak is an event for women (biological females). This means that anyone who is female can speak. Trans men and NB females included.
I've seen women from across the political spectrum speak at these events.
The existence of the events doesn't stop trans women and other men from also speaking in their own spaces.
"We change peoples minds through patiently engaging and winning them over."
How well do you think that went today?
I'd like to see an example of this patient engagement that has happened in NZ, do you have one?
Remember that crowd "All Lives Matter"? Can't help but think of them when I see a post like this, even though I know it's in the best of intentions. I'm going to start here:
Nick, I think that you will find that the T section of LGBT… gets to be heard long and loud, and nobody dare interrupt.
However, I have certainly noticed that if a woman speaks up on these issues, she is shouted down, unless she defers to and agrees with the T community. Unfortunately this has been all to common throughout history, it’s been shut up and get into the kitchen.
This is so incredibly naive Nick Kelly. Is there a large rock you have been hiding under so women's voices don't reach you?
The women I know are not anti trans at all. They would not agree with stopping giving rights to trans people, we are women who as women in our fights for rights have faced exclusionary tactics.
All we wanted was to speak to each other, to testify to each other, at let women speak.
All we want going forward is our safe spaces, the rights of women to determine that in some cases it is unsafe and regressive to let men into our spaces. Yes I know I am supposed to believe the mantra but I don't.
I don't believe that transwomen are women.
I do believe that no one by their sexual orientation should be denied human rights and acceptance in a fair & just society.
Yes but they didn't let women speak did they.
Well, the violence not limited to words in Auckland:
Well done, everyone at displaying NZ in all its smug viciousness
Caption: man is very pleased with himself that he was able to prevent women speaking.
David Seymours & ACT’s new friend. Not that he knows it yet, but he’s giving ACT plenty of ammunition
Gender Minorities – a well funded support and training organisation had this merchandise for sale:
"Out of Spoons – Only Knives Left Classic T-Shirt"
Fits in nicely with the rest of the history. Years of violent threats.
The funniest thing is that it comes in “male” or “female” sizes!
male and female sizes 😂
Our politicians, media, and chattering classes, have all brought shame upon Aotearoa today.
Shame upon the politicians and media who carelessly repeated hateful lies about KJK because they thought it would enhance their own popularity. By allowing lies to fester, and indeed making them worse, they endorsed this ugly mob.
Shame also upon the Auckland Council and the Police for failing to plan for this event, for failing to manage a huge crowd, for putting KJK in danger.
Shame upon the TRA mob and their unacceptable, off the wall behaviour. The self-styled 'organisers' of the TRA protest hang your heads in shame. You told people to be non violent and peaceful. But at the same time said the most hateful things about KJK.
Won't be surprised if the backlash overturns this government. How is the MSM gonna spin this? It's pretty much their fault for feeding the dark fantasies of mentally unwell losers with nothing better to do than abuse women.
Chernobyl (2019) (HBO) – How does an RBMK reactor explodes? Lies ! Vichnaya Pamyat – Episode 5 – YouTube
Women turning up to speak did so anyway, despite the media whip-up, and knowledge of the threats made directly and indirectly by the #DoNotLetWomenSpeak crowd.
Such bravery that goes unnoticed and unremarked.
"Shame also upon the Auckland Council and the Police for failing to plan for this event, "
No it went exactly as planned for the police.. Police was only there when Posie Parker stepped into a police car, after being moved away by the security men, to protect the police car.
The police have already indicated they will be no protection for anyone in Wellington. Another reason it has been cancelled. Police are completely captured by the ideology
A dark day for women in NZ
TBH, the message given by the anti-KJK riot – is that Women will not be allowed to speak in NZ (unless their message is pre-approved by the male radical left).
If the protesters think they have convinced anyone, who doesn't already agree with them, they should think again.
I find it hard to understand the thinking at times. I suspect it's that fascism is the worst wrong, she's GC *and works with the far right, so must be a fascist, therefore all behaviours are justified.
But that still leaves the issue you point to. Many people outside of the political clique will watch what happened and be going wtf? And they will start listening to GC more now.
My best guess about that is that genderist activists believe that liberals can force people to think like them 🤷♀️ Despite the evidence.
"… I suspect it's that fascism is the worst wrong, she's GC *and works with the far right…"
This is my view fascism – and the grifting – (but I don't agree with the last part of your sentence – some behaviours can never be justified). In an attempt to explain my thinking –
I cannot support an event where Posie Parker is the star of the show. I absolutely disagree that she is on the side of leftist women and will further their rights. I believe the opposite. In fact it shocks me to see any support for her at all from the left. I also believe transpeople are can be allies (clear exception being TRA fundamentalists). And that the conservative, religious right make the rules and if I have to choose a focus with would be to set my sights on their power to do that. Hanging out with people who support them is detrimental to women. I think TRA has created a tipping point, but it's the base of the patriarchal, capitalist structure that needs dismantling. Julie Bindel says it better:
Feminism's dangerous new allies – UnHerd
Who is saying that KJK is on the side of leftist women?
LWS is more than KJK.
Can you please say that in a different way, I don't understand your meaning.
Also, the bit you selectively quoted is from a larger paragraph where I am attempting to demonstrate how TAs think. I'm not saying all behaviours are justified, I'm saying they are acting as if that is true.
"Who is saying that KJK is on the side of leftist women?"
– No-one afaik, I'm saying exactly the opposite – I don't understand why leftist women would support KJK.
"LWS is more than KJK."
– Yes. But if I were them, I would not be associated with KJK – although she's anti-trans, she is pretty far to the conservative right, and harms other sex-based rights like reproductive rights.
"…this is my view fascism…"
I was agreeing with your supposition that you suspected people who had a problem with KJK "that fascism is the worst wrong". For me, fascism is definitely the worst wrong.
"Can you please say that in a different way, I don't understand your meaning."
-[if its the fascism] you wrote "therefore all behaviours are justified."
I disagree that "therefore all behaviours are justified." e.g. I totally disagree with the 'punch a nazi' meme, and any other justification for violence when people are expressing their views in a non-violent way.
"Also, the bit you selectively quoted is from a larger paragraph where I am attempting to demonstrate how TAs think…"
Nope, I only quoted from the Julie Bindel article that I provided the link for.
You quoted me at the start of your original comment.
Sorry it it read badly, – I thought I'd addressed the parts of what you said in separate clauses – bad style not bad faith.
👍 I was just a bit confused as to what we were talking about.
Lots of leftist women have been critiquing KJK. Some outright distance themselves from her, some critique but would still go to LWS. I'm in the latter in that I put up this post.
The thing that I understand is that women are being asked to choose between their own rights and activism that will remove their rights. So the motivation to work with or accept KJK is very strong. Also because of the dearth of strong lw feminism here.
KJK attacks the left and feminism when she’s feeling attacked. But she provides a space for all women to speak and that includes lw women.
I understand your view. It's difficult when there's a clash of rights – especially around safety. I still believe we can get this right for all, but right now change to the detriment of women and trans people is happening while women are looking towards the trans-activists rather than the capitalists, investors and business people who are using this "debate" as a reason to reduce the volume and quality of women's spaces.
I can see the motivation to work with KJK is strong. That she provides an opportunity for vocalising issues that many women feel they're not able to talk about. Julie Bindel also talks about how the left has let women down, I think there's a lot of truth in that – especially working class women.
Despite that, I can't stand with KJK. It crosses a line for me.
Of course the irony is if I wrote those first two paragraphs on another site, I'd be taken apart for not being a trans ally as well (I have been before).
Such is life.
I've been thinking about KJK's personality, and I have an idea about the value her bolshiness brings to giving courage to others. I watch the women standing up, shaking in front of a crowd calling for them to shut up, and think they do gain courage to stand up themselves after watching her speak so unapologetically.
I know that if I got up to speak, I'd be clear, concise, accurate and completely uninspiring.
Here's a link to Melbourne, split into each woman's speech:
KJK provides the platform. But women are the stars.
I think that's a big part of it. She is leading and showing women how to do it.
I know what she means. You should see how my my hands scared I am writing what I'm thinking. I'd NEVER be able to get up and say what I thought in front of her, or transactivists – positions are so entrenched I don't feel there is much space to say "I see your point, but…"
(so thank you weka and all for this space)
What radical left?
The one which has just shut down the Let Women Speak event.
So no one in the msm or parliament?
One of the things happening here is that many liberals believe strongly that it is ok to punch Nazis. In that believe system, GC people are Nazis a priori. The NZ media ran tha narrative all week as well. Therefore assaulting women at a Let Women Speak event is righteous and to be celebrated.
I don't think there were any scissors, please don't share this until there is evidence that there was.
OK. It looked like it came from a steward, so can you remove or caveat it?
I've deleted it, thanks.
Thank you. I've deleted plain retweet, and left a message on the tweet online asking for confirmation or evidence.
Unable to see what the instrument is – as you point out – but the threat remains immediate for the person with something unknown at their throat, and when unknown liquids or substances are thrown.
The object is the phone of one of the women helping KJK get away. I think the hand is from someone also holding KJK to help her through the crowd. Anyone passing these images around on SM could go rewatch the livestream and some of the media footage to establish what has happened.
That photo is not evidence, it's propaganda.
I agree it is wrongly interpreted by the poster.
However, can you leave both up so people can see both the original tweet and the clarification.
I agree with Max Tweedle that it looks a phone. Have posted below but also here so that the rebuttal is joined to my comment here as well:
Conclusive evidence that Max Tweedle has the correct take:
I told you it wasn't evidenced. I've just spent half an hour going through the livestream and RNZ's video because there are GC people sharing this thoughtlessly on twitter, including the tweep having a go at me that you tagged me to.
Please stop and think about what you did here. There was zero evidence of scissors or any weapon or any threat. Until there is evidence, don't share rumours.
I've left your links as links rather than embeds, but I'm sick of that manipulative image of a scared women among violence being in my face.
Rightly called out, weka. I apologise.
I will take time to post the best evidence (the video) whenever I see that image to counter-act the harm. I have done that on my own Twitter account.
I appreciate you leaving it all up, because I think removing the dialogue and counter dialogue does not give the full picture, and people can go away now having seen all.
thanks Molly. I agree about leaving the trail up
I could feel a bit less loathing for the left-wing authoritarians who say it's OK to punch Nazis if they didn't also claim that everyone they don't like is a Nazi. They need to face up to the fact that they're just a different flavour of hateful thug from actual Nazis, not fundamentally different.
Everyone's a terf eventually, so I guess we're all Nazis now too.
Sometimes it's necessary to punch actual Nazis at times but we shouldn't glorify in that.
I'd never have thought it possible that people would be able to make the word 'Nazi' lose all meaning and impact, but they're well on the way there. I've been called a Nazi multiple times the last couple of weeks for saying women have a right to speak. It's now a shoulder-shrugging 'so what' accusation – doesn't mean anything serious.
While agreeing with your point PM, I maintain it is not OK to punch anyone for any reason. The entire basis of civilisation is the individual cedes their right to administer violence in favour of our institutions, lawmakers, police, prisons and courts.
Of course institutions are not perfect and will from time to time make terrible errors. But individuals who believe they know best, fast degenerate into mobs and will get it wrong almost all the time.
(I just realised how sad and embarrassing it is to type out something quite so obvious.)
Yes, the whole "But it's OK to punch these guys" narrative that goes with this gives me the shits.
I'm really disappointed to see this here, with the words 'biological woman' so preferenced.
Oh yes, Mandy. That's where the condemnation belongs today…
Freedom of thought and speech is a dangerous act. As you know, we need whistleblowers and truth-tellers, even if they are obnoxious and rude.
It's true that the word 'biological' is superfluous there, but unfortunately, men who want access to women-only spaces have made it a useful adjective.
Disappointed in anything else?
Weka has rightly pointed out the the poster may be mistaken about the scissors.
But the threat remains real for the person being grabbed around the neck with something unknown at their throat. Same applies to having substances thrown at you that could be corrosive.
She attended despite having a written threat delivered to her hotel this morning (end of livestream).
I don't know what the reality is, but posting both perspectives:
Does look like a phone. Don’t know whose.
Video confirming Max Tweedle's tweet:
@ Mandy Hager
Many of us support trans rights implicitly but we don't need to say they are women when they are not, to do it.
This is a common philosophical place for people to be, and you just force people away from any rights if you try to force people to disbelieve the evidence of their eyes.
Sorry to be so old fashioned but I actually have been sticking up for the rights of women since the 1970s.
We won't get anywhere for women or trans people either by denying women's rights
This is a voice from a loud and proud feminist who was utterly ashamed at what happened today.
Looking at some of the overseas twitter feeds I am seeing 'I didn't realise NZ was such a violent place', 'NZ was on my bucket list but I'm not sure about going, will I be safe? '
I feel you may believe that you have won the battle against a small, blonde person with a point of view but you may have just lost the war.
Report from daughter who just arrived home:
Around 150-200 turned up to listen to #LetWomenSpeak.
Police notable in their absence.
As soon as KJK arrived the barricades were breached and these women (and men) were surrounded by a baying mob. KJK had liquid and spaghetti thrown at her. Total chaos. They lost sight of KJK although they stayed until they knew she had left.
useful first hand account thanks.
Could they see the police at all? eg on the perimeter?
Not at all at the rotunda.
When leaving they saw a group of four standing together, watching but not intervening in any way.
The #LetWomenSpeak group were kettled, and then they were pushed further and further inwards.
Not so much kettling as the police losing control of the perimeter (as the border fence between the two groups went down) between the two groups.
It seems police left personal security in the inner area to the private group and saw their role of keeping the two groups apart (but with too few to prevent the perimeter fence going down).
They needed a more effective barrier, or to be at the fence facing the counter -protest and using pepper spray and or water hosing capacity to keep them back.
I know someone else who was at the rotunda, they say there were no police in sight.
They would not have seen any from there, as the group there to listen was between them and the police who were in the counter-protest area (but did not stop the two groups merging when the fences/barrier went down). The police were then on the outside as the two groups began to merge.
That left them to go to where the private security were herding KJK from the rotunda area towards her car.
Were you there SPC? Are you saying that the police were between LWS and the protestors? How many?
they were on the rotunda not on the ground and afaik could see.
The police were not on the rotunda, the private security were (this was why it was them helping her on her way from the rotunda towards her car).
The police decided to be beyond the barrier used to separate the two groups (and leave it to KJK’s personal security team to guard her in the rotunda area).
By the time KJK arrived the counter-protesters had merged with the LWS crowd (after they took the barriers down).
Thus police could not be seen from the rotunda (which is why KJK said “where are the police”).
The KJK video shows it from her perspective.
This the NZ Herald video
I watched the livestream at the time. I've watched a fair bit of shorter video from various views since. That NZH vid doesn't appear to have any police in it.
yes, the police weren't there between LWS and the barriers/protestors. Or there were a small handful. I can't see how this equates to them seeing their role of keeping the two groups apart. They easily had time to see how many protestors there were, assess the energy of the crowd, and get more cops onsite. If they thought it was too dangerous for them to do that, they could have stopped KJK going to the rotunda.
I don't think any of that happened. They either were utterly incompetent in assessing the situation, or they didn't think it was their job to keep the peace. Or both.
2. They had organised a separation of the two groups.
3. Yes, the numbers were too small to stop some of the counter-protest group from taking the barriers (not fit for purpose) down and going into the LWS group area.
The police enabled the opportunity for a free speech event with "hecklers/noise" from the back.
But that was now gone. And she would have been on her way to the event. Police would have reported in that the event might not go ahead.
But is it for police to tell her not to go there, or to block her arrival at the rotunda?
4. Yes, given the noise and then the proximity of the counter-protestors to the rotunda by the time KJK arrived, she had cause to consider whether to go ahead. And eventually decided to leave.
The person I know who was on the rotunda rang 111 because they could see how bad it had gotten. My guess is they weren’t the only one that did that. I also saw a tweet from onsite asking people to phone 111. Why the small number of police who were there hadn’t intervened earlier in some way is also a question.
Her security obviously thought it was unsafe to stay and decided to get out before the police arrived. I don’t know if that was a wise decision or not. The police met them after they had been struggling through the mob.
Obviously the barriers were set up for this purpose and people had been directed into the two areas (either side of).
However once some of the counter-protest group took down the barriers police numbers were then no longer sufficient. They would not have had the capacity to do any more than remain where they were as a deterrent presence.
It would appear police left security in the rotunda area and her going to and from this area to her team. Which is why they were only there at the latter stage of her leaving.
some confusion here.
The idea is that the LWS women were kettled by the protestors. Because the police were largely absent.
We have one account that there were 4 police there, another from up on the rotunda that there were none.
You are saying there were police there, among the protestors. Let’s assume that’s a small handful.
The police were unable to do any crowd control because they were vastly outnumbered and ill prepared.
Sure the LWS group and those on the rotunda were kettled.
Once this happened police could not get to the rotunda without forcing their way through. So they waited on the roadway to her car to help escort her out (once her security team had got her that far).
The police strategy for the event was dependent on people keeping on their side of the barrier.
you’re second parapgraph is a very generous interpretation of the police action. They did in fact come up the path and had to rescue her and her team, because they hadn’t done their job earlier.
If that is true, they are incredibly naive and stupid.
The policing would have been based on two things
1. The right of both groups to be there.
2. It was not an easy location to prevent crowd merging/kettling of the rotunda area (if the counter-protest was larger than the LWS group).
Yes, they did – because there was no crowd on the path to block them.
I’m not yet convinced by your general argument here. There is footage of the police helping KJK out of the crowd, they (the police and KJK) are surrounded. Not as badly as KJK and her security and marshalls were, but they didn’t just walk in and out. Just before 28m on the livestream.
Yes, they did – because there was no crowd on the path to block them.
This refers to the ability to get to them by that way up the path to assist them back down it (once the security team had got the m that far).
The moment when someone pours liquid on KJK's head
Disgraceful show of cancel culture. What an appalling look this is for New Zealand.
This mob was more frenzied and hate filled, and fixated on misogynistic lies, than the feral Parliament protests in Wellington.
How have we got to this? How have we got to a point where a woman speaking out to defend woman's spaces is assaulted in a public park?
A self reinforcing cult mentality has gripped Gen Z. They are all celebrating as if they have done something heroic. They are running a completely upside down narrative in their addled little heads.
Dostoyevski (and JBP) warn of this dark side to human nature. But these blank slate ideologues have such an deluded, high opinion of themselves, and their nasty little victimhood mentality, along with dehumanising Nazi rhetoric, that they think it's OK to enact their violent revenge fantasies
A bit of wisdom from a leading NZ legal scholar (sadly unheeded).
I've lost respect for many on the left whom I formerly admired as advocates for left wing liberal values, for enabling and celebrating a shitty debacle where a woman was assaulted by violent gimps, and they think it's a victory for human rights.
Today is a stain on NZ democracy
I reached this point some years ago. To add to your comment above, I find it quite striking how the traditional left/right economic and inequality argument has almost faded from view. To be replaced by a far more dangerous schism between authoritarianism and freedom, not just in the expressly political domain – but shot through the public and social discourse.
Extremist radicals – regardless of label – all share one core characteristic, the imperative to hobble the individual's right to seek truth on their own terms, while imposing their own narrow, collective belief systems everywhere.
Thanks (again) for expressing what accords with ny reckons but far more articulantly.
What does being left mean nowadays?
politics, values and ethics that favour a collective responsibility to people and the planet.
Class based analysis (sex, socioeconomics, race).
If people truly don't sit within that any more, then they need to find a replacement I guess. But for those that do still have those politics, let's not cede the left. It still matters, more than ever.
Good answer, I suppose it is how indiciduals see the path to upholding those principals. That addage about the right looking for converts and the left looking for traitors has been well demonstrated lately.
Workers rights and conditions used to be a mainstay of the left but that has been massively undermined in recent times.
As an example (and not wanting to relitigate the whole affair..), the largely silent response to lots of folk being mandated out of their livelihoods. It is possible to go along with the state's Covid response and express misgivings about the repercussions.
People nowadays are very binary (no pun intended) in their thinking. Fundamentalist almost.
Well done in yr efforts, weka, in keeping a dialogue possible in what is obviously a very fraught time for y'all.
Yes, for sure there are liberals and leftists who now have a neoliberal view of the left. That's not all of us, while I am supportive of solidarity politics, it's a consequence of collective response not a replacement.
I agree about the mandates and people's jobs. That was done by Labour, who are a centre left government. I wouldn't call them classically left, although there are obviously left wing people in Labour still.
The support for the mandates against people's jobs was neoliberal and to some extent authoritarian. Those are positions that have given up on the left. We shouldn't abandon left culture and politics, but rather argue for left wing principles to remain. I don't think it's possible to retain the left and leave it at the same time.
"A self reinforcing cult mentality has gripped Gen Z. "
Interesting you say that, because a close friend who attended described the protestors as 'young, mainly university students'. W also described them as 'well organised' and 'considerably hyped up'. There was a hate group at Albert Park today, and it wasn't supporters of Posie Parker.
Bye bye The Standard. I've enjoyed my short time here, learnt lots of new things, been stimulated to go looking for stuff, and really enjoyed posts not on this topic by most of you posting on this page. You're a smart, informed bunch. But.
I don't consider the content on this page is discourse, but a self-justifying echo chamber.
If we replace the word 'women' in many posts over the past few days with the word 'us whites', 'TW' with 'them blacks', the word 'autogynephile' with 'nigger' or 'dirty maaorie' and the phrase 'left-wing men who fail to support us' with 'damn pinko commies', or 'race traitors', how does the content of your posts stand up, ladies?
Take a good hard look at yourselves, for goodness sake. It makes me cry.
If you replace so many words, what you will end up with is nonsense.
To make perfectly clear, this page does not mean this site.
Yep – you could replace TWiggle with TWaddle.
It's a zeitgeist thing, we will find something else to complain about next week
'If you were to replace words in the OP with different words, it would have a different meaning.'
Er, yes. Yes it would. Your point?
Weka, from talking to my wife and other females I interact with, I think that most average women would likely agree and support your position in this post.
I get the impression it is the more radical elements that tend to make a fuss over all this. They make the most noise, but I doubt they represent the majority.
thanks for that, this is what I believe too, that most NZ women don't yet know what the issues are, but as they become aware of them they're not on the side of the TAs.
I'm curious what the women you know think about what happened at the event today.
What happened today in Albert Park was a disgrace, was the opposite of feminism and progressivism, and nobody in that mob has any reason to be proud.
A mob literally assaulted a woman who wanted to express an opinion about her rights.
Thanks for creating this thread. This week it has felt like the left has completely lost the plot. I have already had to walk away from my decade-long support of the Green Party because of their toxic, ideological and anti-science approach to these issues. So it is good to see some thoughtful and constructive discussion happening from all perspectives on a left wing blog.
So who to vote for ?
Finding it ever harder to have any confidence in the greens or labour,despite still being a paid up member of the greens
If I thought the greens had any competence to further climate change goals I'd hold my nose and stick with them,despite their authoritarianism when it comes to womens rights.Too many weasel words,not enough action
I've just observed a stroppy woman being assaulted and gagged,to the unbridled applause of so called progressives.
And the rainbow greens think this woman is a threat to public order? And should not have been allowed to enter NZ
Who was doing the assaulting here?
I'm beyond disgusted
I cannot in all conscience vote green if they think that gives them a mandate for pushing anti women policies
Anybody else suspect this whole thing is a way to disrupt/splinter the left and fuck up moves to counter climate change?
The Occupy movement was also infiltrated and splintered
I decided not to vote Greens this time as they are the group, I understand that made the concept of No Debate an issue for joining the Coalition.
I'm still debating about Labour, who are teetering on a knife edge for me, after seeing the wilfully small number of police that were mobilised. Yes yes I know the Gove cannot interveen on operational matters but the Police can read the room just as we all can.
They know we are only a bunch of women, no-one cares what we think and they have heard what the real people say like Michael Wood & Grant Robertson have to say.
Let Women Speak!
Once again People were far too close to the rotunda. Where were the Police?
As a gay male, who growing up was only accepted, defended and protected by women, I find it unacceptable that at an event called let women speak, women were just being screamed at by left and right wing men.
Its an outrage to me that despite not agreeing with the speaker of this event that she wasn't able to speak. Women should be able to talk about their concerns on gender and sex based laws without being screamed down, gas lit, called bigots or worse.
Women who disagree with this event have every right to but to just shut other women down for airing their concerns is not any kind of feminism I've ever heard of …
Its an outrage that women attending this event are expected to condemn men who tried to coopt the womens event be they Brian Tamaki or the Nazi looking dudes, why should they have to condemn these people? It was let women speak not let christians speak or let Nazis speak.
Ive never had to condemn effigies of politicians being hung, genuinely antisemitic nutters, tankies and conspiracy theorists who attended left wing protests I attended because they were unwelcome coopters, I don't see why women are expected to
With free speech people are allowed to protest events though, what we saw today wasn't a protest it was an angry violent mob not interested in anything silencing someone they disagree with, that it not free speech.
After the left did this to those nobodies Lauren and Steffen, they became famous and act went from 0.5% to 7% to now 10-14% what will act be polling after this mobs bullshit.
I'm sorry for the rant, I've been listening to women in my life who defended me as a gay all my life , these women love trans people but have some concerns about sex based rights but feel they'll be destroyed and wrongly labeled a bigot if they voice those opinions.
I also know many trans people who support women's right to have a nuanced debate about sex based rights but that TRAs would silence trans people who disagree, many believe this current form of activism is creating enemies out of people who supported trans people and will end up undoing progress on trans rights by alienating the general public.
Again sorry for the rant and feel free to delete this , I think women have every right to have conversations about their concerns on sex based rights and safe places and should not be called a bigot for doing so, I think as long as the conversation is respectful and doesn't devolve into attacking trans people there should be no issue, but too often reasonable concerns get labeled as attacking trans people when it's not.
It's crazy world we live in. Everyone male or female biologically or otherwise, deserves to live free of violence, with dignity in a warm dry home with plenty of food, water, opportunities to thrive and can be respectful of our differences and speak freely. One day we'll get there… I genuinely believe it.
Just read our local MP, Labour arselicker Shannon Halbert has praised and is " so proud " of the protest thugs. Three votes lost from our household ( not mine, he never had it, but the females in the house)
Green Party MP Marama Davidson:
There you have it loud and clear – the Greens no longer want the support of cis men or indeed anybody who regard cis men as equals. As a cis man who has voted for the Greens more often than not (including 2020) I am so done with the toxic crew currently in charge. Think it will be TOP for me in 2023. Sad for Chloe Swarbrick who I regard as one of the best politicians in the country. She will go down with the ship.
If this is really the political position of the GP – rather than a fairly stupid off-the-cuff comment from a leader-who-should-know-better – we have a lot to worry about if they are part of the government in November.
It’s not what she is saying that disturbs me, although her breathless take down of cis white males is spectacular- cis white women she is coming for you next, it’s more that I expect our politicians to be above rabble rousing and hold some modicum of decorum. Maybe this is a little conservative of me. I would normally vote greens but I’m extremely polarised by recent events. I would like to vote on climate issues, fair taxation and good housing for all, not for a bourgeois debate on identity politics with Grey Lynn and inner city Wellington liberal elites. I’m not sure the working class of south Auckland have the luxury of worrying about this sorry pantomime today. I will never vote RW so I’ll need to box this episode up and pop it aside and hope there are at least half of the Labour Party that have a less blinkered world view.
can you please pick one username and one email address and stick to it? I can edit the name on your previous comments if needed.
Sorry! Different device, different autofill. Thankyou!
I'll be having a serious look at TOP as an evidence-based progressive voice.
Yes – this is a fight and argument amongst elites – where I teach, the kids and families are too busy fighting their trauma and oppression to care about what words and thoughts are allowed and not allowed to be said
I have just watched all of this. She is nuts clip from Marama Davidson
Bye bye Greens for the next Election from me. Only one party vote but still…….it may be joined by others.
She is talking to Mrs Alp – white race identity New Zealandia. Perspective.
Yes I noted that and was wary but she still said it.
The only thing any serious politician should be saying to Mrs Alp is "No comment". Who was asking the question can't justify that unhinged rant.
She doesn't just condone the violence, she praises it. I'm definitely not voting for this party again until the misogynist gender loons have been driven out of it.
This is the conversation from Kiwiblog that should have been on The Standard as a thoughtful and sincere approach to the issues. How come right wing thinkers are able to see the concerns we have.
Week the Media Lost Its Collective Mind
[overlong quote deleted]
You know I have been out for the afternoon and had only just started watching the Posie parker Youtube
I just about cried when I heard her say
'Where are the Police?'
Poorly planned operation
Women cannot rely on them to help make us safe, if they cannot help a single woman in broad daylight how will they be able to help when it is daylight or dark and a male person appears in our changing room etc.
Why have you taken down the excellent article that I just put up.
The Standard should have been the ones to say these things.
Why are men on the left deserting us?
your other comment had a cut and paste in it so long it contained too many links and tripped the spam filter.
Why were the police not guarding the Band rotunda?
Crowd control 101 to have two lines, even I know that.
that is indeed the big question from today. SUFW are making a formal complaint.
Wow, that is such a good press release…….from SUFW. Yay.
I'm glad to hear that. The police need to account for their failure to even attempt to maintain public order.
There was something very very wrong about the police yesterday, I hope a complaint process will bring that out into the open. At the moment they are open to the perception that their actions were politically motivated.
I've now also made a complaint, will report back on what I get fobbed off with.
They enabled the onslaught of the mob against KJK
Indeed Shanreagh, some true colours displayed thats for sure.
Still, it sure helps knowing who not to vote for.
Would not have read this surprisingly accurate article if you had not posted.
Unless Labour and the Greens apologise for their inflamatory comments and denouince the mob I cannot vote for either of them. Democracy is too important I may have to hold my nose and vote National just to ensure the Greens are nowhere near power. It was terrifying today.
I couldn't bring myself to vote national or act, even holding my nose, so I have decided to vote for te parti Maori. I certainly could no longer vote for labour or the greens, they lost my vote when Elizabeth Kerekere (?spelling) and Deborah Russell behaved so badly in the select committee.
Unfortunately Te Pati Maori was in the mob and has put trans colours on their facebook page in a post supporting the counter protest. They are not an option either.
I’ve been a long time member of the Greens and contributed substantial financially.
This bulling and incitement of violence and all this anti white brigade rhetoric is what the extreme left has come to.
With Eugenie leaving there is really no reason for me to give them my tick for they don’t give a chick for a harmonious society.
I also can't vote for National or Act. At this stage I think I will be voting for TOP in the hopes of a left wing government not wagged by the Greens. Will probably end up a wasted vote, but that is where I am at.
I have decide to vote Te Pati Maori for my party vote.
What a shameful expose of NZ & its inability to keep women, or even just one small blonde one, safe.
Why would any one in their right minds have let the media so close to the band rotunda.
Am unsurprised at the action today.
Am surprised at the Polices lack of anticipation.
Am amused that the spokespeople for the protest appear to think they have silenced Posie Parker and her message and that they believe they have strengthened their cause.
Am wishing for good luck….we are going to need it in bucketloads.
This debacle today will give a bigger voice and audience to Posey Parker. And brings NZ into disrepute. Not a safe country for women.
Sad day for our country.
I was already going to find it difficult to vote for Greens this year, as I have repeatedly as they are the only ones who prioritise the environment (although that's secondary for many of them), but after the shambolic treatment of James Shaw earlier, and now this dead-headed tribal disgrace, I won't be again.
TOP looks like the only option for people who can actually think, and care about other people.
I voted for Marama to replace Metiria,back in the days when the greens believed that both men and women needed to be represented in leadership roles.
I dont want a bar of her now.
And the greens can get fucked.
My monthly donation will be better spent elsewhere,I no longer trust them
I'm looking at te pati Maori
Don’t bother. TPM encouraged their supporters to turn up to oppose PP.
where did you see that?
I have a screen shot from FB. How do I post it?
hmm, that's tricky. Was it TPM FB page?
Te Pāti Māori | Facebook
2 days ago.
thanks. For future, click on the date/time stamp of the specific post, it will change the URL and you can copy and paste that.
Thanks. There's another one.
Slightly oblique, but seems certain to be about Posie Parker.
Well that is me without a party now. I was going to give Te Pati Maori my party vote.
Another Labour MP has just posted in support of the counter protest (1) Facebook.
Yeah. I'd say that is Helen having a bob each way. Cruising past and commenting, rather than committing to anything. And throwing a pacifying bone to the Trans crowd in passing.
Probably good sound politics ATM – especially with a new seat.
The struggle is global.
But the Rainbow crowd aren't winning everywhere.
The Babylon Bee on Twitter: "Trans Community Feeling Unsafe Knowing There’s A Hockey Player Somewhere Out There Not Wearing A Pride Jersey https://t.co/mzRhUoMUPe" / Twitter
Love it Stuart!
The Babylon Bee is my go to place for humour when this stuff gets too tough
You might look at TOP. They don't mention women (or at least not that I can find), but they don't seem to have a position on the Trans debate either.
And, I'd think that their climate policies would be a happier fit for you (pardon my presumption), rather than ACT.
TVNZ news reporter actually spoke to some of the women who attended, now that was something new! Still referred to the mob violence as "emotions running high on both sides" though, as though there were two groups having an argument.
Here is an article by a 35 year old woman who was hoping to be a speaker today and who was trapped in the band rotunda.
What can we do?
I feel as physically and mentally trapped in NZ as I did at the time of the Springbok tour. Then I felt my country had left me.
I went overseas for a time in the mid90s. When I got back I wondered why I had come back.
The protestors seem to hate woman and older women even more so. Some of them feel no shame that one of them punched a 70 year old who was waiting to speak & gave her a black eye.
I have been watching the Twitter feed on KJM's You Tube and while some are in support some from overseas are wondering if NZ is a safe country as they thought they'd like to visit at some stage.
one thing I find helpful is to think about how many people in NZ will be horrified by what happened today, and how many are afraid to speak but this will change. Watching what has happened in the UK gives me hope. My bigger fear is that this will cost the left the election.
My local MP (who was proudly present supporting his trans mates), and posted this on the FB community page, has received significant negative commentary – until the mods turned off the comments.
It's a fairly middle of the road seat, politically – and swung for Labour in 2020 – with the Ardern bounce.
He's not exactly massively popular in the electorate (he's no Jim Anderton) – so he'd better be hoping for a winnable list placing.
Now, that may not matter – one electorate is neither here nor there – and it's list votes which win elections. But Labour and the Left had better get back in the driver's seat and start wheeling out significant policies – because if this kind of identity politics continues ruling the airwaves – they will not win re-election.
If this is supposed to be the climate-change election – then the parties need to start whipping their MPs into some kind of discipline and stay on message.
I really don't think that the far left have any idea just how unpopular their stance is with the majority of the electorate.
absolutely this. I just don't get it. It's not that hard to listen to people today who aren't TAs.
I am shocked that they are in this pathetic bubble and have lost touch. I hope your mp who was at the rally loses very badly. Serve him right. I have been a labour supporter often a member all my life I cant knock doors this election and ask people to vote Labour after this.
that's great that people are putting negative comments on MPs FB pages
@Weka et al.
Puzzled as to why you would care if the left lost the election.
Seems obvious to me that you are experiencing the butt end of the political realignment that has been under way for many years now in countries like ours. I’ve been politically homeless for a long time, after being a solid Labour voter all my adult life. I’m now a long-term abstainer – for personal reasons, I couldn’t bring myself to vote for National or ACT, but my rights aren’t being erased.
Why don’t you jump ship? From my perspective these days you all have more in common with the likes of Nicola Willis than you do with Deborah Russell or Marama Davidson. (That this sounds insane is really the point – it shows how far things have gone.)
Both Labour and the Greens have decided they won’t even support your right to publicly disagree with them, or at least they won’t stop people from physically attacking you for trying to exercise that right. Can you really say with a straight face that National are not the lesser evil? (An honest question.)
Yes, I can. One gender critical issues, I've not seen anything from National to suggest they would be better on this than Labour. But in the meantime, Nact are regressive on climate, environment, worker rights, housing, welfare, and pretty much everything. All those things I care about, and all those things impact on women.
I've made the argument elsewhere that we shouldn't be ceding the left, but instead retaining it. Others are making this argument too.
Fair comment. I'm deeply sceptical that you or anyone else can retain the left. Politics is realigning in a way that makes old labels less useful.
I saw that the Nats came out and said that they supported PP being admitted to the country and being allowed to speak. That's not great, but it is better than what the 'left' were offering – they wanted her barred from entry and seem happy that people used force to prevent her from speaking. Given that National is pretty meh (in the same way that Labour is pretty meh), it wouldn't surprise me if women jump.
I guess I would be less charitable than you. If a political faction refused to allow me to even make my case and tolerated force being used to stop me from doing so, I would be gone. At some point, political support has to be a quid pro quo for me (although my limits are likely less than yours). It looks to me like women, as a class, are being asked to sit at the back of the bus, again while others get to make decisions about them.
To me, allowing women as a class the freedom to make their case over matters that affect them as a class is a fundamental right. Same goes for transpeople, Māori, or pretty well any other group that has historically been given a hard time. If you don't have that right, then your freedom from further victimisation rests on the charity of the people who have power over you.
There's argument that GCF would have been served better if KJK had been banned.
It's easy enough for Nact to say let her in, that's meaningless about self-ID and women's sex based rights. It's simply a free speech issue for them.
Left isn't a label. I agree that politics has changed a lot and is still changing. But whatever we call it, we still need a politics of the collective.
Facebook account of someone who attended with their daughter:
Fuck Ms Ruby11 account is a horror story. The b….ds
The MSM (and police) should seek to verify such accounts.
The MSM – as journalists – SHOULD verify such statements of personal experience if they are going to publish them.
They SHOULD most definitely verify accusations of Nazism before promoting that accusation against a named individual, and yet they did not.
How would you like personal accounts to be verified? Nothing described is extreme, or unfamiliar. People will be using anonymous accounts for obvious reasons.
As an adult, you get to decide how much time and weight to give what is presented.
Some personal interviews with known persons in the media are related verbatim, with no regard to accuracy. We have seen the results of that approach.
(Why involve the police?)
there are people setting up false SM account to shit stir.
A link to the original FB account would be useful.
I agree it's nothing to do with the police.
Have asked the Twitter account that I've posted the link to for the original Facebook source.
Given that the things described are not implausible, in terms of the video footage we've seen, and the familiar actions that we've also seen at other events, I don't know why this level of authentification is necessary for an account of a personal experience that is not extreme in any way.
The link IS already provided to the Twitter account, and people can surely follow that link and determine for themselves how much weight to give it.
I'm aware that you wish to ensure no false information is given, so feel free to remove. But I am aware that some will not post under their names for obvious reasons, and verification will thus be impossible.
I agree it becomes more necessary to ensure veracity as claims become more extreme, but this does not appear to be an extreme claim.
However, as per yesterday when you rightly called out an inflammatory AND FALSE post, I acknowledge your assessment on this issue is more finely tuned than mine.
Please remove the post on that point, and if I receive the direct Facebook source from the Twitter user, I'll repost and add.
The story alleges a crime has occurred, police investigate crime.
I'd like to see this account verified. Do you have the original source?
How could you verify it? It's posted AFAICS without attribution.
the people sharing it get it from somewhere. Asking can sometimes prompt people to post the source.
My assumption, that it was Facebook.
The Twitter account has confirmed it is from the YouTube comments section from the livestream video:
Let Women Speak New Zealand – Auckland #LetWomenSpeakAuckland #LetWomenSpeakNZ
You have to scroll down quite a way to find the poster. At present there are 87 replies to the comment, some querying the veracity.
This is one such exchange. Wyn Williams is
With help from weka, have managed to get direct link to comment on YouTube.
This link will take you to the video and the comment is now the first one on the list under: Highlighted comment.
Doesn’t work with the autoplay on the comments so the link is here for cut and paste:
Just noticed the fullstops below before the links so it wouldn't autoplay.
That's a noticeable improvement on REMOVE——REMOVE
I will be voting Act.
seymour has condemned the actions of the tras protesters
i know he won’t look after the poor, but neither have labour (eg child poverty stats). At least Seymour isn’t pretending
I think ACT needs to screw National hard when the time comes for coalition talks.
The Right of politics was gifted a huge boost in POTENTIAL voters after this feral display of protesting from the Trans community and their supporters.
But…. but, we have Erica Stanford, a woman some say is destined for big things within National, castigating Michael Wood for his handling of the Posie Parker case.
National is meant to be the party of freedom and democracy. Yet here we have a National MP who in my opinion is giving the inference, should she have been the immigration minister, that she may have ruled differently and kept Parker out. Stanford also failed to condemn the protesters.
Meanwhile, Wellington may have dodged a bullet should the event have gone ahead. Mayor Tory Whanau would have been in attendance. She can be a little exuberant. No one knows what may have happened should she have become caught up in the emotional energy of the protest.
Here is Madeline Chapman's polemic on the anti-Parker protest (I say polemic, as there is no attempt at journalistic lack of bias in her reporting.)
She ends, unintentionally, ironically.
"All up, Keen-Minshull spent 24 minutes at her three-hour rally. She tried to speak but no one was listening."
Yes, Madeleine, no-one was listening. That's rather the point of the issue: Women being silenced by men and trans, and their allies – rather than listening to what they have to say.
You don't have to agree – but if you don't start by listening, then you will never find common ground.
Nailed it, as a current events interested average punter, I have no idea what posie was on about because the further left had silenced her and all I could hear was static.
National is rarely right but she has a voice ,let her talk so we the people can decide
Attended the event at Albert park. The protesters were geared with every noise device known to man/women/ other which included drums, whistles,pots,loudhailers,etc with the sole purpose of making sure no-one would hear Posie Parker. And they didnt. A victory for the supression of freedom of speech. A plunge back to medieval times where free speech was illegal.A victory for the patriarchy and a black eye for womenhood.A hate filled mob who were reminicient of Mao Tse-tungs Red Guard.!And in a supreme irony Albert Park was the venue of the Jumping Sundays where occured the struggle for Free Speech fifty years previous!
can you tell use about Jumping Sundays?!
It was an Auckland thing (or at least, as far as I know – I can't imagine it happening in Hamilton, for example) – during the 1960s.
Where a whole lot of counter-culture people got together with pot (and probably other stuff), anti-war speeches and live music (bongo drums and guitars, rather than stately om-pa-pa from the band rotunda).
I was there. The Jumping Sundays started in Upper Queen St in the bit of Western Park by the of YWCA. Several of the people who organised them lived in flats above the shops at 464 to 468 Queen St. We fed speakers out the windows from the flats initially but then people like Roger Fowler brought musical instruments.
After a few weeks we got moved on to Albert Park as we had outgrown where we were. There was a re-union in Albert Park a few years ago.
I have a book of photographs by the late Simon Buis called "The Brutus Festival" which recorded a lot of it.
Collated some of the different perspectives on this tweet:
"We speak directly to the Greens, who actively courted and promoted the violence that occurred today, including just this morning posting on social media that they were ready to “fight the Nazis”. And by Nazis they meant the 70 year-old woman who was punched in the head by the mob they instigated. The Green Party was founded by people who fought for free speech, including speech they found abhorrent, you should be ashamed of what you have turned the party into."
Media Release: When the “oppressed” becomes the oppressor (speakupforwomen.nz)
Meanwhile in other more civilised parts of the world.
It’s disturbing that a NZ govt minister thinks it reasonable to condemn woman-centred views as 'inflammatory, vile & incorrect', encouraging violent demonstrators. Whilst we uphold the right to protest there’s NO EXCUSE for violence against women. #WomensRights #LetWomenSpeak
Also some women in the UK are suggesting that the NZ High Commissioner be called to Whitehall to explain why there was no policing given to one of their citizens when it could reasonably be expected she would need it.
I am wondering that too!
did you mean to link to a specfic LWD tweet or their main account?
I'll get it up shortly.
Karl Du Fresne's column. Not sure about Far Right & Woke left but the points he is making strike a chord with me.
As predicted on this site, the real inciters of hate and disorder turned out to be not the so-called far Right but the woke Left – the same woke Left that tried to convince the High Court yesterday that they were the people who would be at risk if Parker was allowed into New Zealand.
Hypocrisy doesn’t begin to describe it. The English language doesn’t have a strong enough word.
In a perverse way, the trans rights activists have done us a favour by laying bare their hatred, their bigotry, their intolerance of dissenting opinion and their propensity for violence. The people of New Zealand can now see who the real thugs are and who represents the threat to public order.
p style=”text-align:start”>The people who profess to embrace inclusion and diversity are in fact pathologically hostile to anyone who challenges their world view. As they showed today, they don’t hesitate to use force, numbers and intimidation to silence their opponents."
Who said this?
Answer: James Shaw (A) and Ahi Wi-Hongi (B), after Marama Davidson was hit by a motorbike when crossing the road. They are talking about Brian Tamaki's gathering. The utter hypocrites.
Today's events have turned more people against the trans movement than Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull ever could. The absolute irony in that.
Violence is never okay, to see so many of my friends gloat and praise this behavior today, is frankly appalling.
Women have genuine concerns about trans-men in their spaces, especially in their sports and in their bathroom facilities. Why we simple won't allow these woman to voice their legitimate concerns and try to come up with a solution that works for all astounds me.
Today was a sad day for NZ. This has nothing to do with left or right. But it had everything to do with right and wrong. Shame on all of those who think todays behavior was acceptable. You've literally put your cause back 50 years.
I have to wonder why the trans rights protestors didn't pick a fight with Tamaki and his guys. Like cowards they chose women
This should not be framed as a battle between the left and right. There are people from both sides in both camps.
This is fundamentally about women's rights and trans right, we must be better than turning this into something it isn't.
I know people use the word rights, but I consider it both accurate and more amenable for discussion if we refer to it as maintenance of women's single-sex provisions.
It avoids the manufacture of the idea of conflict, and it makes people consider why those provisions exist, and the value they hold.
This is very useful way of framing it both as you say from pointing out the status quo & a way forward.
I have had some saying why I use (bio) in front of women. The reason is I don't believe that transwomen are women, biology prevents that.
Even noting that I find no need to deny transwomen the rights to live full, happy etc lives and if our country needs to make adjustment in the provison of public facilites to do then I have no objection.
It is the pie in the sky, Alice in Wonderland view that forces me to believe the transwomen are women that puts me off.
TBH, it's probably the most accurate way of saying it. The use of "women's rights" as a refrain to this issue, is a natural response to someone saying "trans rights" means access to the single-sex spaces of the opposite sex.
But we have provisions for specific groups within society for established and valuable reasons. Eg.
Provisions for the disabled, provisions for teachers aides for kids with learning disabilities etc.
It allows people to consider WHY they are single-sex provisions in the first place, and whether that value remains, instead of dismantling it without regard because of "rights".
What did you think was going to happen? Of course there were some unruly and over zealous people among the counter protestors and their violence should be condemned. But the vast majority were there out of genuine concern for the vile hatred KJK has been spouting all over the place and to stand up in support of our trans community. Most are not “trans activists”. Many were there in peaceful groups, including Labour MP Shanan Halbert ; and are people like me who are bewildered about why it is necessary to spout hate and lies against one group of people, supposedly in support of another.
I did say some time ago KJK was best ignored. I got shouted down on that. You are right, she got all the attention today. If you think she advanced women’s rights one jot, then you are dreaming.
As for the police : why would they be there? They were hands off until the last minute at the Parliament protests; where there were effigies hung and fire burned down the children’s playground. That went on for months. Personally, I don’t want to see the cops turning up in droves to protests. That can go both ways.
And a note : I was there for “Jumping Sundays” too. There was a united purpose to those, not a protagonist from the UK who thinks she knows more about Aotearoa than we do.
"But the vast majority were there out of genuine concern for the vile hatred KJK has been spouting all over the place and to stand up in support of our trans community."
What vile hatred has KJK been spouting all over the place?
Do you know what the Auckland women were going to say also, because they were not given the opportunity to speak either.
Perhaps you can link to where the MPs involved (you've named Shanan Halbert, and it's clear that Marama Davidson was there) – have condemned the violence from the protestors.
Can you please make a public, clear condemnation of the violence against KJK and LWS women and men please? And if you won't do that, please think about why not.
Police routinely turn up to protests, especially when they know ahead of time that there are public safety issues. At the parliament occupation they were there from the start and on day three they tried and failed to evict the protestors.
The protest lasted three weeks. It should have been climate activists. Experienced activists know that engaging with the police is part of the process.
Police had time to turn up for this rally…with far fewer people.
Stop Co-Governance event in Ōrewa. (Source: Supplied)
Thanks. Can you link please. I want to see the context and date/time.
Link to picture 'stop co-governance’.
Can you link to where the good decent protesters pulled back the mob and stopped them knocking the barricades down and attacking the women. If they didnt they were complicit in this and the MPS that were there are unfit to be in government.
"why it is necessary to spout hate and lies against one group of people, supposedly in support of another."
Quote from Darien Fenton.
Can you please say what hate and lies have been spouted by KJK. I see this written so often, but people who write it never specify what they are referring to
Thanks Darien for standing up to some who are indulging in hysteria:
To suggest that women are being denied their rights to be heard is as absurd as claiming Donald Trump is a man of peace and goodwill. Sure there is still a way to go in a few areas but they are being addressed over time. You can't drag dinosaurs of all ages into the 21st century overnight.
As for the woman who I have determined (like Carmel Sepuloni) never to mention her name again:
You nevertheless know there is something wrong when she attracts the support of the ultra conservative alt-right and fascist groups wherever she goes like Destiny Church and Action Zealandia.
We may disagree – in large part – over this issue weka but this is a very good post. I congratulate you on the way you have worded it.
Men have surrendered the universities too. Where a lot of the thinking has come from.
And yet you haven't done that.
It's an event called "Let Women Speak." It does exactly that and it does only that. And you were out there protesting against it.
To keep a violent mob separated from its intended victims. In various places where these events have been held, police have done that, which ensured both that women got to speak and the people who object to them speaking got to make their protest. It's called preventing public disorder and it's the job of a police force.
Don't the organisers of the event have to carry responsibility as well for being under prepared for the event?
The 'barricades' I saw, where at best, a token gesture.
The organisers of an event have no authority to enforce public order, that's the police's job. Organisers of an event also shouldn't be subject to the threat of mob violence – again, it's the police's job to prevent the mob acting on those threats, and they didn't do either job.
I think you are shouting in the wind to the unconvinced DF.
Perhaps to move things on could you answer these questions please?
The Self ID comes into force on 15/6/23 I understand.
After that date will:
1 Counselling agencies who counsel (bio) women be able to advertise for, and select, a bio women to their staff so that a person requiring/wanting counselling services is able to choose?
2 Will counselling agencies be able to provided group counselling services and give bio women an ability to choose a group that does not have male bodied people as part of the group.
ie see the Brighton Rape Crisis Centre court case
3 Will Corrections be able to place (bio) women in prisons that that do not require them to be bunked or other close proximity around with male bodied people esp where male bodied people have convictions for violence or sexual assault against bio womne
(NB NZ has one of the highest rates of domestic violence against born women in the world and
the Isla Bryson case)
4 Will the providers of public changing facilities, toilet facilities be able to construct facilities for women by providing male, female. unisex facilities? Will there be funding for this & will the Govt work with architects/local authorities to encourage best practice that focusses on the safety of (bio) women
5 Will dating sites be empowered, or even allowed, to accept advertisements that specify that advertisers wish to meet lesbians ie that male bodied persons need not apply.
6 Will agencies offering advice to children (up to the age of 16) be empowered to look at applications from the point of view of the safeguarding of children when considering applications to transition?
7 Will the concept of the thug's veto, out in force on Saturday, be reviewed so that no matter where women choose to speak thier ability to do so will not be trammeled by legal cases preventing this?
This head in the clouds and 'we're all right Jack' attitude may be Ok for readers of 'Alice in Wonderland' or the 'Emperor's New Clothes' but these sentiments are not exactly suited for women in in the 21st century.
As an aside many women I have spoken to have been shaken to core by the lack of competent policing and overt denying of the rights of adult women.
Labour needs to work quickly to reassure us that is interested in us and our votes. As one who was around anti the Springbok tour I feel the same sense of desolation and loss as I felt then when my country deserted me.
Let Women Speak!
Speak Up for Women!
My understanding is that the BDMRR doesn't change women's sex based rights. So a Rape Crisis could still technically provide female only services and employ female staff. But, under pressure from TRAs, would they? And if they did, could that be challenged like Vancouver Rape Relief?
It's a grey area. Which is why I argue that self-ID is a sociopolitical change as well as a legal one. It's been happening for a while already. In the UK there are now court cases to resolve the conflicts in various legislation. NZ law seems to be to be in a mess, using gender and sex interchangeably, and there is some attempt to resolve this but sex is being replaced with sex characteristics.
That last bit, I don't know if the intention is to have that mean sex, or mean sex + fully transitioned. Lots of unknowns.
Lynn took everyone to task recently by laying down the challenge to demonstrate that women have sex based rights. I don't think he got it quite right, but the point that while exemptions to HR law allows provision of single sex spaces, that no-one is obliged to provide single sex spaces is important.
In the UK the latter is being challenged with RC, and hospital wards too I think. If women have traditionally had access to single sex spaces, what is just and fair if those are removed for essential services?
It's weird though, because the whole TRA argument is that such services should be provided for trans people.
I agree that the concern is not so much over the provision of women's spaces (which as you've pointed out can still be provided), but whether an individual organisation can define what is a 'woman' in the era of self-ID.
I suspect that there will be a significant amount of fear over legal challenges alleging discrimination (for which the organisations concerned have little budget to fight), and the trans complainants will be funded by the trans groups and/or legal aid.
We saw what happened over the recent situation with the Moana case – the complainants have literally nothing to lose by continuing appeal after appeal, all funded by the taxpayer – until the other party can no longer afford to fight.
I too would have liked to be in the Let Women Speak Crowd in Wellington today. Sitting in a peaceful group with some of my fellow feminists from way back. I would have liked to have had the chance to reflect that women must always make sure that the legislation protecting us and our rights is fit for purpose and that education is available.
Doing this I may have drawn on the fact that the lack of knowledge in higher echelons of the Public Service in the mid 1990s when i came back from the UK was abysmal. And yet we had had protections in HR & employment laws for some years then.
I was not given the chance to do this though.
SUFW had to face court cases right up to the Court of Appeal to assert their rights to have access to a WCC venue a few years ago.
That is one the reason for opting for public venues
If the legislation giving trans rights had been less focused on no debate then some or most of the issues concerning women could have been worked on throughout the SC process so that the end result was some thing that worked for all of us. Women were not given this ability.
Some submitters who appeared were treated with appalling rudeness and condescension.
"What do you think was going to happen".
Isn't that what victim blamers say? I'm not being glib, but I think it proves the point about what actually happened yesterday.
I thought it was obvious too – because what took place is very recognisable as the state of progressivism in the country.
Regardless of people, events, hatred and whose "side" your own… my view is that I still see one fundamental question at the heart of it;
Are there SOME spaces in which women have the right to ask trans women not to be in, just as they can for cis males?
My answer is (unequivocally) yes.
Like many, I had never heard of Posie Parker till a week ago either! And nothing has changed in my answer to the question. I know that some people have other views, all good by me. Has it helped raise the issue and maybe lead to more constructive korero? Too early for me to say.
Fwiw, mine too.
Four women speak in Aotearoa New Zealand:
Trust, misinformation and social in(ex)clusion [PDF]
Some sort of manipulation, no doubt.
I have no idea what you point is here. I know you put effort into using quotes to explain your thinking, but it's often just not clear. What does job done mean here?
Pro/anti-trans and gender-critical stances can separate/divide the left (a broad church of progressives and conservatives) and set it at its own throat. Deliberate? Doesn't matter. Positions haven't just hardened, they're set in concrete (me too).
The answer for gender ideologists is unequivically "no". Their belief system says that your "gendered soul" supersedes your biological reality and that all you have to do is to open your mouth and utter the magical incantation "I identify as" and that is it. Therefore, any man is entitled to enter any woman's space, claim any woman's rights or service as long as he claims the special identity.
Women have no rights to any sex based protections, whether it be in bathrooms, hospital wards, shelters, rape crisis centres, sexual abuse survivor services, the lot. Any attempt to keep men out of these services is met with the kind of violence we saw yesterday and is subject to defunding of any public or private $$$.
This has happened to the Vancouver Rape Crisis Centre which had dead rats nailed to its doors and lost much of its funding.
In the UK, there was a year long arguement after a woman was sexually assaulted in what was supposed to be a woman only hospital ward. She was lied to by the hospital authorities who told her there were no men in the ward. Lengthy investigations, CCTV etc and the assistance of an MP proved that the hospital was lying, there was a man in the woman's ward and an apology was extracted.
I could go on – the evidence is out there. The aim is the complete removal of any and all of the rights and protections woman thought they enjoyed. Women are required to give up all their boundaries and safeguards.
And we know who benefits from that.
It's worth people knowing that the Vancouver Rape Relief case and the Mitchfest situation both started in the 90s. And in both cases women tried to find compromises with trans women. Those compromises were rejected and both sets of women were subjected to abuse and harassment. The rejection of the compromises afaik were based in TWAAW and the insistence that women allow males into women's spaces when men demand it.
I remember reading about both in the 90s, pre internet. Am wondering if Broadsheet or Ms Magazine were covering them.
Thanks Gonzo. All very reasonable
I don't think that it's 'ask'. That implies that the person asked can ignore the request.
I believe that there are some women's only spaces which women have an absolute right to gatekeep against men (whether identifying as male, self-IDing as female, or fully trans)
This does not impact one iota on the rights of trans-women (and trans-men for that matter) advocating for their own spaces, and choosing to gatekeep and/or invite others in.
This is, of course, a continuum. There is a huge difference between a women's prison or a women's refuge or rape crisis centre – where the women concerned are hugely vulnerable, and the gatekeeping should rightly be very firm indeed. And something like a women's book group, where the members might decide to invite a specific trans-woman to join (or decide that they don't want to – both choices are equally valid).
David Farrier reveals his own preconceived bias, rank hypocrisy, and tribalism with these comments. Apparently a screaming mob assaulting KJK was good, but Marama Davidson encountering the normal shitty Auckland traffic is evidence that Nazis are everywhere.
No David, the intransigent attitude your side is showing towards sincere disagreement, and your irresponsible attitude, putting women's lives at risk for wanting their OWN SPACE FREE FROM THIS SHIT is not worthy of respect in a democratic society.
Farrier fails at liberalism, secular pluralism, or being an honest journalist.
We don't know exactly what happened on the crossing to Marama. If it was deliberate, I utterly condem it. I wish her a good recovery
That doesn't change my mind that she is unfit for political office particular as Minister of Domestic Violence prevention. Having failed to condem the violence against PP and the women who were there to speak, she should be fired.
We don't even know that it was on a pedestrian crossing. None of the (admittedly very blurry) photos I've seen show any zebra lines, or crossing signs.
Stepping out into the middle of the road in a deliberate attempt to halt traffic is a very foolhardy action.
Farrier, like most other authoritarians of the left, thinks that preventing other people speaking or drowning out what they're saying is "free speech." It's right up there with his thuggish pals who promote the totalitarian view "Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences."
Here's a good response to that moronic XKCD comic that everyone is sharing to justify their poor attitudes towards free-speech
RE: xkcd #1357 free speech | Sealed Abstract
Look like the reason there were no police at Albert Park was the cops were too busy racially profiling the attendees of the Destiny Church rally down on Aotea Square.
The cops thought the spoiled white uni students would behave lawfully, and that a group of Pasifika and Maori expressing their Christian beliefs were a danger to society.
This footage (no friend of Tamaki) shows cops everywhere and a march proceeding calmly despite intense provocation and sabotage attempts from TRAs
I wondered if that's where they were, but didn't think they could be that stupid.
I have to wonder why the trans rights protestors didn't pick a fight with Tamaki and his guys. Like cowards they chose women
It shows one police car, the others are not police.
so who is all for gender reassignment for children and removal of genitalia before puberty?
Gender Clinics are popping up like mushrooms. Thy are very profitable. Lifelong dependence, complex surgeries with high complication rates.
And of course, most of the adults who are pushing this treatment for kids will not be having it themselves. They change "gender" simply by saying so.
who is removing genitalia before puberty?
Perhaps a sideline to the topic but I'd be interested to know if trans women are willing to accept the more subtle privileges 'foisted' upon women by the patriarchy. I'm not trying to be deliberately obtuse but am genuinely interested in what people think. Throughout my lifetime I have been labelled a cold bitch when a male would likely have been called cool, aloof, mysterious. Have been spoken over in conversation constantly, hit on in bars when having a drink with friends and when having told the man politely that I'm enjoying catching up with my mate, vociferously abused. Paid less, opinion in professional matters not believed or respected and been passed over for a males view. Had to handle all the cleaning, cooking, domestic matters as well as the mental load when organising family events, holiday etc. Spent thousands on sanitary products, doctors. Endured conservative business owners in media complaining about women's problems effecting productivity. Not my experience but pregnancy and child care setting back careers and personal growth. Constantly labelled hysterical in conversations even if my mood has remained stable. I could go on and I am aware that trans have other issues of similar and other nature that are of concern but I'd like to address the subtle things women have had to deal with psychologically for decades.
Very thoughtful Charlotte
The anti female views expressed have remained normal over the many years I have been involved.
The one that really gets up my nose though is that women have no sense of humour. We are supposed to laugh like drains at male sexist jokes, or even at overt sexism that when we look dismayed at this, is countered with
oh don't you have a sense of humour…..
This has been deeply hurtful. Right now, I have two men commenting on my wall on behalf of women – one in his perennial anti Labour/Greens stuff and telling me I have thrown Labour women under the bus (saying “it won’t be forgotten Darien”) and the other defending Tucker Carlson. It has triggered all kinds of memories for me as an activist woman most of my adult life – some deeply personal – going back to when women didn't have contraception and those who got pregnant were sent off to naughty girls homes and had forced adoptions. Today my daughter by another mother told me her partner is transitioning. I am told by close friends this debate has also triggered their children who are in the process of transitioning to the point of suicide ideation. We talk about safe spaces to have the discussion. I don’t feel safe at all.
do you accept that many women don't feel safe because of gender ideology?
I would really encourage you to seek out the progressive GC people and talk with them. That's where we will find resolution. And we need to do it before too many GC are radicalised to the right.
I accept that women often feel unsafe for many reasons. I do communicate with progressives – all the time many of whom are long term friends disagree with me and me with them on the priority of the GC issue but we are still friends. Maybe I will never understand why this has divided women around an issue when after all women still have very big mountains to climb ; think Pay equity, Domestic Violence and the attitudes that still see women as a nuisance and mock the idea they should have representation or a voice. You never worked for a male dominated union primarily based in rural areas ; I did until quite recently. It reminded me how far we think we have come, but haven't really. As for being gay / lesbian and transgender people ….hush. For me, it is always about acceptance of difference, tolerance and love. I am sorry ; perhaps I am not sophisticated enough to understand. Judging by some of the comments here and elsewhere, it seems that way.
I'm glad you are keeping your friendships, I think this is one of the most important things we can do atm.
I am sorry Darien that you have so much stress going on.
My take on why this has become so very heated is because of the No Debate stance that the trans rights activists take. I have long been politically active and I have never experienced anything like it, i.e. the shutting down of the discussion. The Standard is one of the very few places where gender critical feminists can and do speak out.
I think as a woman and a feminist I am not willing to accept a definition of women that makes absolutely no sense to me. The idea that biological sex is a social construct is absurb to me. I am a woman an adult human female
Or 'radicalised' to the view of not being able to find a home anywhere and not voting. This would be an absolute tragedy.
Following the anarchical view perhaps of 'Don't Vote it Only Encourages Them!"
Also PJ O'Rourke
“Politicians show no signs of even knowing the difference between negative and positive rights. Blinded by the dazzle of anything that makes them popular, they honestly may not be able to tell.”
― P.J. O'Rourke, Don't Vote, it Just Encourages the Bastards
“If there’s something we want, politics shouldn’t be our first resort. Politics is all taking, no making. Whatever politics provides for us will be obtained from other people. Those people won’t love us.”
― P.J. O'Rourke, Don't Vote, it Just Encourages the Bastards
A couple of first hand accounts from the livestream YT comments posted after the event. Click on Watch on Youtube, and the first comment is the one referenced.
A woman and her 10 year old daughter
And an ex-cop and his ex-cop son
I have been told what the person says but haven't heard for myself what she says because people decided on their own that I was not allowed to hear what she says.
Media seems very supportive of that.
Exactly, and we have seen the thug's or hecklers veto in action and media seem very supportive of that as well.
I would have liked to hear what she had to say and the women as well. Some of the women's rights activists are getting on and won't be with us for ever.
As a cis-male, I try very hard to defer to women when it comes to issues of women's rights and feminism. Two cis-women have strongly influenced how I viewed this event.
The first is from Veronica Pitt, Executive Director of the New Zealand Psychological Society. As a student of psychology, she has quite a bit of power and influence over my education and future career. She is an accomplished person that I have a great deal of respect for. The statement from NZPS, which the executive director sent by email to all members, is here:
Media Statement NZPS
I'll note that it calls the discourse from KJKM "reductive", "outdated", and "colonial".
The second is from a news editor I enjoy reading, Anna Rawhiti-Connell. She disputes the narrative being presented of the "angry crowd".
An alternative view
Thanks for your interests!
The NZPS letter is dated Friday 24/3 ie before Saturday's violence.
I am also thinking that NZPS was against SUFW having the ability to meet women to discuss the No debate ideology or perhaps I have got this mixed up
The article by Anna Rawhiti-Connell seems to ignore the elephant in the room though.
While may have very jolly hockey sticks for the protestors that must have been after they had forcibly ejected PP. A viewing of the video footage shows very violent people pushing at barricades and rushing to the unprotected band rotunda. PP was escorted, close guarded, or whatever the name is, by her security staff through a barrage of pushing, people tipped water or something else on her as she left.
The people who actually came to listen to PP and perhaps to talk themselves and for whom the event was organised were not able to be happy as they had been silenced.
Yes, the NZPS letter is dated prior to her visit. Their stance was she should not have been allowed into the country to speak. The reason is exactly this:
"The people who actually came to listen to PP and perhaps to talk themselves and for whom the event was organised were not able to be happy as they had been silenced".
If you think that this event was organised for those people, you are mistaken. This event was organised with the specific intent to be anti-trans. I believe that the NZPS recognises this.
As for the article, it does not ignore the elephant in the room. It provides a different viewpoint than what's been projected in the mainstream media. If you listen to the media, the whole event was chaotic. Anna Rawhiti-Connell is disputing this narrative.
Those who continually refer to an event called "Speak up for Women" as "anti-trans" are telling on themselves. They admit there is an inherent conflict between women's specific interests in having their own spaces, and the desire of trans-identified males to invade those spaces.
I'm not a particular fan of PP's work but the principle is sound, women should have a safe space to talk about their issues and their lives as females.
The debacle of last weekend showed a stark contrast between the calm behaviour of women attempting to have a civil discussion, and the irrational rage of aggressive male coded behaviour.
Putting this here for later
I’m finding that all a bit hard to digest.
For a start they seem so obsessed with sex. Maybe things have changed (definitely!)since I was last in the dating pool but I think I can pretty confidently tell who is male with a penis and female with a vagina instinctively before getting to pants off stage. Apart from the obvious physical markers – hormones or pheromones maybe, I’m not sure what the science of attraction is. Are trans women and men quite hard to spot these days? I’m sure some unwitting men are definitely caught out. Women – not so sure.
I always say that women can work out s who is a male at a 1000 paces. Women as a general rule though often have more situational awareness/intuition/observation skills than men. Developed over centuries. There were several cases in NZ in the late 1800s where women were taken in by a transmale
I have come across men who have been taken in by transwomen unknowingly. Often when alcohol is involved and guards are down & commonsense has gone home for the night.
We have come across a group of men who have no intention of transitioning to female who have a disorder called
Autogynephilia the sexual arousal of a biological male in response to the image of themselves as female
They will be wanting to access female facilities in pursuit of this.
there's a few things going on.
One is that many people's experience of being trans is in the context of gender dysphoria. They have a very atypical relationship with their sexed bodies.
The other is that people saying genital preference is transphobic, appear to now understand that people are attracted to sexed bodies. Sure, genitals are part of that, but so is the whole body. You understand this well, we don't need to see someone's gear to know if we are attracted or not.
Maybe more people are bisexual than we knew, of course it's much easier for those people to argue genitals don't matter.
Then there are the AGPs (link below), for whom seeing themselves as a woman is a turn on. Needing other people to affirm this appears to matter, which is why they want to sleep with lesbians instead of het women.
There's a lot that's fucked up in that.
Gender ideology people say it never happens, which is why that twitter thread exists.
Maybe it is as simple as four generations of young people being progressively told that women should act like men, and men act like women.
Bound to be confusing.
Maybe it's a generation OK with identity diversity/difference from cisgender heterosexuality – as to how they present on the gender spectrum and or identify sexually.
That line of argument is so open ended it can justify almost anything.
When I started on this site in 2007 if anyone had suggested that in 15yrs time a large fraction of the bandwidth here would be taken up by this issue – it would have been rightly dismissed as an idiot, strawman argument. But here we are.
Once upon a time we were generally clear on the idea that FGM was an abomination – yet somehow the far greater mutilation of ‘transitioning’ has become something the left says should be state funded and available on demand.
So what is that we have to become "OK with" next? Just asking for a friend.
Young people don't really care what people of our generation think, nor should they.
Given globally the plastic pollution, let alone AGW and a failed UNSC UNHRC system. Locally declining homeownership, inadequate state housing, declining health and education system and growing inequality.
They will have to learn to play with others, rights and yet … . My guess a bit more non binary, a bit less transgender than now.
As for the wider society
aging feminist determination to keep places safe
more care in early medicalisation of youth (as risks become known)
a growing disregard for the self ID (xy) exhibitionists and also awareness of the influence of Q'd 4 chan incels in the white race man misogyny/entitlement.
I don't buy into this 'anything young people want must be pandered to' argument.
The next cab off the rank as I can see is going to be transhumanism. The attempt to fully decouple from our biological reality.
It has nothing to do with pandering, just not expecting them to conform to an ancien heterosexual cisgender regime.
Transhumanism has more to do with those of wealth and power creating a new political/economy (corporate) citizen – Chinese social credit control. First they offer free stuff to gather information, then they offer virtual reality and faster connection capability enhancements …
As I thought – no boundaries. See you in another 15yrs time.
A flippant response would be, meh the procreative bio-determinism of Paul confused with knowledge of God (he claimed that homosexuality was caused by idolatry, but his truth was false).
To be more pertinent, you presume to know what you can and do not (and I do not recall meeting you in 2008).
And what an individuals boundaries might be, they do not determine the course chosen by those of wealth and power (as to development and roll out of tech).
And transhumanism does not decouple humanity from biology.
Transhumanism is already here – we are augmented by phones and glasses and medical gizmos. Everyone is getting acclimatised to full spectrum surveillance. We are frogs in a pot.
I reckon the next stage down this path of self destruction will be to follow Canada's dystopian MAID policy (i.e. a license to kill Granny)
Meh, I suspect Elliot Page would do fine with bisexuals (male and female) and the non binary, rather than interest gay men – there were the two lesbian relationships as Ellen Page.
The trans gender women (transsexual) historically have a tradition (via sex work) with heterosexual men who would accept them.
But that transition is based on gender identity, not sexuality.
Some of these might partner with bisexuals and the non binary. As might some of the self ID crowd. There might be the occasional relationships of transgender/transsexual women with lesbian women, but the self ID crowd would be of little interest.
if Elliot Page is lesbian, why would they be interested in men?
I am referring to those who would go with EP, EP will choose.
I hope E. Page finds what they are looking for. Along with Jazz Jennings they seem to be some of the saddest people on Earth
You seem a bit obsessed with the intimate lives of well known people.
What is the point you are trying to make with these suppositions and what does it bring to the table in terms of these conversations?
Good overhead view of the intensity of the crush around KJK has been posted to YouTube:
Here is another thoughtful read about yesterdays event.
Another where I might not agree on other aspects of his blogging life but where he seem to have got a good take on the issues, some thing I have not seen from more left wing men.
Yet again the outside world see us differently for what happened on 25/3.
Australian commentator Story Box
This is what happens when trans activists who claim to be "peaceful" attack Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull 'Posie Parker's' Let Women Speak event. The level of insanity from the trans community to do this is just astounding. Kellie-Jay later said, "she feared for her life!" These people claim we are the violent ones. I beg to differ!
We seemed to have been living in a parallel universe away from reality and have swallowed the dead rat No Debate with a complaint.
Lorelei reviews women's experiences of abuse at TRA (trans rights activist) rallies, which are always soaked in male hostility.
Dane Giraud draws parallels between TRA radicals and the far right. IMHO this isn't fair to the far right, the TRAs have more in common with the Taleban. Religious fanatics who specifically hate women. But he is correct that the media and corporate apparatus is completely one sided and spreading falsehoods with no compunction.
Jeremy Shaw, MD evaluates the latest developments in gender medicine, suppressed by ideologically captured media
Maybe we should let an AI make these decisions. It seems more capable of assessing evidence and summarising complex issues than irrational humans.
Andrew Doyle speaks about the incident.
Note: The reference at 6:27 is suspected of being a troll account.
This is hopeless. Police don't care about upholding the law. They seem only to be interested in what is politically convenient.
There are rumours whipping around on Twitter that NZ Govt is being asked to apologise to women for Saturday's debacle
I actually don't want them to apologise now as it will obviously be insincere noting that the violence agasnt KJM was exacerbated by quite senior politicians from Greens/Labour Michael Wood, Grant Robertson and by several Green MPs plus a Minister from the Greens Marama Davidson, holding, ironically the portfolio Minster Prevention of Family and Sexual Violence.
1 What I would like is an apology to Kellie-Jae Keen Minshull, the 70 year old who was bashed in the eye, the 10year old, KJ security detail who had to work against a frothing, heaving crowd to get KJ to safety in the absence of Police.
2 I would like the Govt to ensure that none of thise who were injured has to pay any kind of part payment/co pay for the injuries they suffered plus access to taxi chits to take them to and from medical and hospital appts.
3 For the women of NZ I want the Govt to commit to an urgent review of the BDM legislation coming into force on 15/6.
This would be with a view to ensuring that the ability for women to insist om safe spaces is as tight as it can be and protected against opportunistic court cases that seek to weaken the provisions (perhaps by declaring such cases 'frivolous?).
This may mean legislation to put the ability for organisations to match staff to clientele so bio female may employ bio females to counsel or minister to the needs of their clients, or at least that enough bio women are employed so this can occur. There should be no expectation that a case simialr to that against the Brighton Rape crisis centre would ever be allowed in NZ.
5 That NZ Govt urgently fund a gathering of architects/local authorities and others working in the provision of facilities in public spaces accessible by the public to discuss the best practice around building of M/F/unisex toilets./changing rooms.
6 That Corrections be empowered to continue to ensure that the placement of trans women does not damage either physically or mentally bio women who are imprisoned. If this means that to do this more single cells are required then the Govt should urgently fund these.
7 That the legislation be reviewed to ensure that it does not permit the harassing of lesbians who wnat to advertise for same sex partners ie bio women advertising for bio women so those women do not have to accept male bodied persons.
8 That the govt immediately commend Lord Coe on the fairness to women approach his organisation has adopted and ask that NZ administrators match this fairness in the provision of access to bio females at all levels. If necessary Govt to fund, through Minister for Rec & Sport a meeting to work on statements appropriate for all sports. & all levels noting that some mixing may be appropriate at very junior levels or investigate how handicapping may work.
9 That NZ Govt fund gathering for women at the locations that were to be visited by KJM with a view to providing a forum for women to testify and work together for the good of their sex. Such gatherings to be barred from protestors and held at locations with appropriate security.
10 That the investigation of the person who left anti material in KJM in her room
Really excellent suggestions. I wonder if there's an MP who would advocate for these actions?
My goodness you have nailed it! Well done.
For those who are interested here's a link to a clip about the KJK protests in Auckland on the GB News Free Speech Show in the UK last night. Sadly as you would expect it paints NZ in a bad light. Is embarrassing to be portrayed so negatively in the UK media. Makes Newshub look like idiots. There's a discussion with Helen Joyce and Ella Whelan after the monologue.
Starts at 1:05:25
Sorry have just seen this is already posted by Molly.
Here's an example of the TRA in Auckland.
What a horrible man. And he seems to think he's a beautiful woman. Guess what, women don't generally get turned on by seeing other people in fear. Neither do the vast majority of men. This guy needs psychiatric help. I feel so sorry for his daughter.
There seems to be a suspicion this is a fake account.
Andrew Doyle’s programme was good otherwise.
I'm trying to take a step back because a vast majority seems to have got firmly on one side or the other and believes they are completely right so the other side is completely wrong. And the extreme opinions of a few people seem to be making usually rational people react rather than think.
The thing is who is winning when one marginal group (women) is brought into conflict with another marginal group (trans people backed by the lgbt community)? Neither women nor the lgbt community are winning.
The people who win are those in power, who gain greater freedom to do what they want while others are busy elsewhere or are scared into not speaking up.
Those in power win when those without power fight each other.
completely agree. Neoliberalism is winning, as are the climate mongers who don't care if we destroy the planet because they want money and power.
Great to see some vigorous debate and open discussion here.
Readers may be interested in my article which was published in Plain Sight over the weekend. I include the story of Caitlin, who was one of the women at the event and whom I've met personally. Dane Giraud's article in Plain Sight is also fantastic, very personal and well worth reading.
Women deserve to speak without fear of violence: At Let Women Speak, the Police utterly failed to protect women
As we were completely surrounded, we could not escape… There were no police as far as the eye could see, there were none on the way and I saw none when I finally did manage to get out. And the protesters knew it – you could tell. They knew they could act with impunity. You could tell they knew that they had the blessing of the media, the Government and now seemingly, the Police… I’ve never been so scared.
What is keeping men out of the fight for women’s rights?
Hi Laura! don't know why your comment got caught in the Spam filter, might be a change in your user name or email address from last time.
Thanks weka – good to hear from you. I've been trying to reach you – I've sent you an email.
replied now 👍