Open mike 02/04/2023

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, April 2nd, 2023 - 199 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

199 comments on “Open mike 02/04/2023 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Shanreagh 1
    2 April 2023 at 11:35 am

    Another thoughtful piece again from a NZ commentator, Dane Giraud.

    https://plainsight.nz/what-is-keeping-men-out-of-the-fight-for-womens-rights/

    And from Laura Lopez in the same publication.

    https://plainsight.nz/women-deserve-the-right-to-speak/

    I linked to a piece from Damian Grant in OM of 1/4.

    Comment:Open mike 01/04/2023

    • Visubversa 1.1
      2 April 2023 at 1:02 pm

      And there is this one also. We need to listen to the voices of young people who have been failed by our systems.

      https://plainsight.nz/young-new-zealanders-are-being-rushed-into-medical-gender-transition/?fbclid=IwAR3up8c8YYk6Vcmy5591PW-9YSKa8ymlOYE4eBeq6V_yBoo7cK_miLc2xVA

      • Charlotte Rust 1.1.1
        2 April 2023 at 1:17 pm

        If only it was as easy to get HRT if peri or menopausal..

      • Molly 1.1.2
        2 April 2023 at 1:37 pm

        Laura López’s research is comprehensive, and her articles about the evidence for – and impacts of – affirming healthcare are worth the read.

        Not least because they are NZ specific.

    • Molly 1.2
      2 April 2023 at 1:59 pm

      Thanks for those links.

      I had read the second, but not Dane Giraud's and it was a good article, clearly identifying the important issues, and summing up well:

      That internal monologue I mentioned, convincing you that the abuse you see is somehow earned – that women wanting to voice concerns about their rights are asking for violence and intimidation – Well, you can start by canceling that transmission.

      • Robert Guyton 1.2.1
        2 April 2023 at 3:01 pm

        I don't believe the violence was "earned", but I believe it was easily foreseen.

        No one, it seems, is pointing the finger at PP for the fractured skull, in the way fingers were pointed at the forestry industry for the slash-destruction.

        • Molly 1.2.1.1
          2 April 2023 at 3:07 pm

          Are you pointing the finger at PP for the fractured skull?

          Simon Anderson is still retrieving and posting videos from his 360 recording:

          https://twitter.com/SimonRAnderson1/status/1642275035808415745?s=20

          • Robert Guyton 1.2.1.1.1
            2 April 2023 at 3:13 pm

            Do you think I am?
            Was Ces Blazey in part responsible for the physical harm experienced by protesters of the Springbok tour?

            • Molly 1.2.1.1.1.1
              2 April 2023 at 3:36 pm

              "Do you think I am?"

              Don't know, that's why I asked.

              Anything else?

            • Shanreagh 1.2.1.1.1.2
              2 April 2023 at 4:48 pm

              NZ Govt was the one primarily at fault for allowing sport to dictate politics. We should have boycotted South Africa including with sport. Ces Blazey was the figurehead of the NZRFU that actually should have known better. NZ at large was at fault because of the notion that sport overrode good sense.

              NZ Govt is primarily at fault here too for introducing this divisive Self ID/No Debate duo. Not allowing women to be heard, enacting possibly threatening to women measures.

              ‘That internal monologue I mentioned, convincing you that the abuse you see is somehow earned – that women wanting to voice concerns about their rights are asking for violence and intimidation – Well, you can start by canceling that transmission.”
              Dane Giraud (link above)

              • The Al1en …
                2 April 2023 at 4:59 pm

                Unanimously passed

                • Visubversa …
                  2 April 2023 at 5:16 pm

                  Yes, because both self ID and the "Gay Conversion" legislation was draped in so many rainbow flags that everybody overlooked the additions of "gender" and "gender identity" which rendered them useful only to the gender ideologists.

                  • The Al1en …
                    2 April 2023 at 5:24 pm

                    "everybody overlooked the additions of "gender" and "gender identity" which rendered them useful only to the gender ideologists."

                    Any links for that blanket statement?

                • Molly …
                  2 April 2023 at 7:22 pm

                  Unanimously passed – despite negative feedback from the public.

                  Speak Up For Women went through all the submissions.

                  https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FSpeakUp4WomenNZ%2Fposts%2F1210846262756868&show_text=true&width=500&quot

                  Of the 6,609 submissions, 73% are against the changes with just 25% supportive of them!
                  The remaining 2% represent duplicated/ supplemental/ unclear submissions.
                  Of the 73% of submissions that are against the changes, 20% are either stated to support SUFW or appear to have been created using our submission builder.

                  • The Al1en …
                    2 April 2023 at 7:51 pm

                    Like a lot of laws then.

                    • Molly …
                      2 April 2023 at 8:01 pm

                      Perhaps.

                      However, it does suggest the unanimous vote could've been the result of political capture, rather than reflective of public support.

              • Robert Guyton …
                2 April 2023 at 5:37 pm

                "Ces Blazey was the figurehead of the NZRFU that actually should have known better."

                Indeed.

                "Figureheads" have a responsibility to know better than to create situations that will cause harm to good people.

                • MichaelP …
                  4 April 2023 at 7:59 am

                  So Robert does that mean that we simply can't have events such as Let Women Speak because the organisers should be aware there will be violence?

                  Maybe organisers could expect people not to be violent ? Maybe the organisers could also expect appropriate police action to prevent violence from occurring

                  At the end of the day, the only person responsible for punching an elderly woman in the face is the person who punched her, but what you're suggesting sounds like you're getting a little bit close towards some form of victim blaming?

                  Based on your logic (or the point you seem to be alluding to) it would be hard to see how we could have any public events which are about issues affecting society because these days it's pretty much a given that some idiotic, pathetic, weak, cowardly people will always show up looking for a little bullying action.

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    4 April 2023 at 8:51 am

                    You are projecting your view into my words, MichaelP, and finding "victim blaming" where there is none. If I meant to claim that, I would have said, "It was her own fault!", which is not what I've said at all; don't feel bad though; several other commenters here have done exactly the same thing, one even suggesting that I claimed "she was asking for it", citing a short-skirt-wearing rape victim meme in her reply. This assumptive debating is making the issue very challenging for anyone other than the "pro-PP faction" to comment on the issue. I'd be wise to have not engaged at all, or at least to stop now, but feel there's a need for some poor fool, scapegoat person, to at least have a go at it 🙂

                    You say, "Based on your logic (or the point you seem to be alluding to)"

                    and therein lies the problem Incognito outlined yesterday; the keen-ness to attribute intention where there is none.

                    "Maybe organisers could expect people not to be violent ?"

                    Maybe. Organisers of public events where controversial figures are intending to speak "could" take extra care in the protection of vulnerable people, especially elderly people.

                    Try this thought experiment, MichaelP:

                    You are the sole organiser of a second PP event; same venue. You have seen what happened at the first. You understand the anxieties held by one particular community around PP. Do you give the event the go-ahead, welcoming all, including the vulnerable and the abusive, or do you tailor the event to the circumstances? Do you simply "expect people not to be violent"? and take no steps to ensure that is the case, for the sake of anyone vulnerable to harm?

                    Not victim blaming; wise event management, imo.

                    Look for potential problems; avoid them.

        • Liberty Belle 1.2.1.2
          2 April 2023 at 4:14 pm

          "…but I believe it was easily foreseen."

          Why? Because at least one Green Party MP incited it? Or because trans activists can't any longer be trusted to engage in this conversation peacefully? Or both?

          • Robert Guyton 1.2.1.2.1
            2 April 2023 at 5:38 pm

            One Green Party MP incited "it"?

            Ah! It's her fault then!

            • Liberty Belle 1.2.1.2.1.1
              2 April 2023 at 8:49 pm

              You're the one who claimed you believe 'it was easily foreseen'. So tell me why you think that. Do you not trust trans activists to respond within the law? Or do you expect that a tweet by a prominent MP that she is 'so ready to fight Nazi's' might just have the effect of rarking people up?

              • Robert Guyton …
                2 April 2023 at 9:03 pm

                Was there tension/upset at the meeting prior to this one?

                Was there no signalling from the trans community here as to their feelings and intentions?

                You are kidding me, right?

                • Liberty Belle …
                  2 April 2023 at 9:50 pm

                  There was no meeting in NZ prior to this one.

                  The trans community can signal all the feelings they like. That doesn't give them the right to suppress others freedom of speech.

                  You are enabling, supporting, the thugs veto.

                • Shanreagh …
                  2 April 2023 at 10:28 pm

                  So might is always right is that what you are saying?

                  So the women wanting to hear their own speaker were doubly jeopardised by

                  – the topic of the meeting not being flavour of the month (I mean women's rights, women's issues and free speech are so boring)

                  – not being able to defend their right to free speech by violence.

                  The meeting before this one was in Australia. NZ is not in Australia. We had an expectation that the Policing would be adequate and competent as it had been before at other protests in NZ.

        • A.Ziffel 1.2.1.3
          2 April 2023 at 4:38 pm

          That reads like a veiled reference to the ole "She should've kept her trap shut".

          • Robert Guyton 1.2.1.3.1
            2 April 2023 at 5:40 pm

            Not "trap shut" but calling in to an insecure venue, knowing there was the potential for trouble … her call!

            • A.Ziffel 1.2.1.3.1.1
              2 April 2023 at 6:16 pm

              Re: "her call!"

              As good as "She asked for it".

              Have you seen the video of the elderly woman being punched repeatedly in the face by a 20something man?

              Or does your relentless apologism prevent you?

            • Liberty Belle 1.2.1.3.1.2
              2 April 2023 at 8:51 pm

              Ah, it's her fault then.

              • Robert Guyton …
                2 April 2023 at 9:05 pm

                Whose fault?

                I don't believe any one person was at fault, but some people didn't read the tealeaves, didn't act responsibly in the knowledge that strong protest was likely.

                • Belladonna …
                  2 April 2023 at 9:28 pm

                  I don't believe any one person was at fault,

                  So the TRA protester who assaulted the elderly lady wasn't at fault then?

                  Really, what excuse can you possibly make for them?

                  Having seen the footage, it's clearly a deliberate assault, not an accident or a case of mistaken identity.

                • Liberty Belle …
                  2 April 2023 at 9:54 pm

                  'Some people'.

                  Which people? The thugs who turned up and hit the elderly lady? The thugs who grabbed a woman and hurled her to the ground? The thugs who punched an elderly man? Those people?

                • Liberty Belle …
                  2 April 2023 at 9:56 pm

                  "Whose fault?"

                  You know exactly what you said.

                  "calling in to an insecure venue, knowing there was the potential for trouble … her call!"

                  You're victim blaming, pure and simple.

            • mikesh 1.2.1.3.1.3
              2 April 2023 at 9:05 pm

              There were police present.

            • Anker 1.2.1.3.1.4
              18 April 2023 at 2:29 pm

              Posie holds her engagements outside, because when she held them in indoor venues, they were often cancelled at short notice.

              So yes an on goal by cancel culture.

              Honestly the victim blamming by the trans rights activists is unbelievable.

              things like "she shouldn't have held the protest outside because she knew there would be trouble"

              This is the sort of thing women have put up with for years. "why was she walking alone at night etc"

              The tras mob were violent and shut down free speech. Own it

        • Shanreagh 1.2.1.4
          2 April 2023 at 4:41 pm

          This reads like victim blaming. Women in the past have had to out up with this along with terms such as 'witch' and 'crone'.

          The person with the fractured skull was exercising her right to stand waiting to attend an event with PP. This event was more or less gate crashed by the protestors who chanted, pulled the barricades down and then charged aggressively at the band rotunda.

          The Let Women Speak event was not the interloper here. The interloper was the large number of protestors who felt that violence was justified so people, mainly women, could not exercise free speech. The fault clearly lies with this ill controlled crowd not PP or the Let Women Speak crowd.

          You seem to be running a very odd narrative.

        • Cricklewood 1.2.1.5
          2 April 2023 at 7:14 pm

          That's well beneath you Robert. Flat out victim blaming there.

          • Robert Guyton 1.2.1.5.1
            2 April 2023 at 8:43 pm

            I've not blamed anyone, Cricklewood, certainly not the victim (the elderly woman who was hurt).

            I'm puzzled by your comment.

            • mikesh 1.2.1.5.1.1
              2 April 2023 at 9:14 pm

              certainly not the victim (the elderly woman who was hurt).

              A little disingenuous, wouldn't you say.

            • Shanreagh 1.2.1.5.1.2
              2 April 2023 at 10:17 pm

              This is naive Robert.

              You know you being puzzled is odd when you have been given so much information & references to access more plus comments by all sorts of people.

              Why are you doing this?

              • Belladonna …
                3 April 2023 at 7:54 am

                At this point, I think the puzzled non-comprehension, has turned into downright trolling.

                Have yet to see Robert put up a decent argument and be prepared to debate it.

                Long responses, taking him seriously, are ignored.

            • Cricklewood 1.2.1.5.1.3
              3 April 2023 at 7:26 am

              Your comments are no different to those that happily use the 'she was asking for it' or 'she brought in on herself' defense.

              An all to familiar trope that's often wheeled out when a young woman is harassed or worse.

              • Robert Guyton …
                3 April 2023 at 7:50 am

                That's not the case, Cricklewood but I can see you believe it is.

                Pro-Posse commenters here seem to hold very un-charitable, unkind views toward transgender people. Some of the language used has been violent, imo ("chop of his penis" etc.)

                If I was a transgender person, or the parent of one, I'd feel anxious reading these threads. I can see why the community could have felt the same way on hearing of PP's impending visit.

                • Belladonna …
                  3 April 2023 at 8:00 am

                  Pro-Posse commenters here seem to hold very un-charitable, unkind views toward transgender people. Some of the language used has been violent, imo ("chop of his penis" etc.)

                  If your second sentence is linked to your first one (that the violent language has been used on TS) – then I'd really like you to link to this – so I can condemn it.

                  I don't recall this at all.

                  If it is not, then this is really, really misleading – and you should apologize.

                  I am charitably assuming that your reference to Posie is a typo.

                • Cricklewood …
                  3 April 2023 at 8:09 am

                  I've not seen anything like that, care to provide a link to the comment/s you are refering to?

                  "Pro-Posse commenters here seem to hold very un-charitable, unkind views toward transgender people. Some of the language used has been violent, imo ("chop of his penis" etc.)"

                • weka …
                  3 April 2023 at 8:11 am

                  Robert, please link to where someone on TS has said "chop off his penis",

                  If you can't, please rewrite your comment and provide examples of the language used on TS that has been violent.

                  I’m asking this as a moderator.

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    3 April 2023 at 9:23 am

                    weka – I read this today, perhaps in a link. I'm happy to sit in moderation till I get a chance to find it (still filming, the crew arrived just now and are planning today's programme of filming.).

                    weka, it's clear that my time here on TS is up; there's no way I can rise above the atmosphere that's developed here. Others have fled the coup, I suspect, and I can't see a way to extricate myself from the mess of pottage. Not that I want to either. The focus has become exclusionary. It puzzles me greatly, the change that has come over the team here. Where before, teasing out issues was acceptable, with this issue, only complete agreement with the (now) dominant narrative seems allowable. Despite believing that I am able to understand issues such as this one well, I am being repeatedly told that I am unable to see the truth and am in fact, inflaming the situation. I am so acutely reminded of The Stroppery and this is not a good memory for me 🙂

                    • weka …
                      3 April 2023 at 9:45 am

                      I haven't read all the comments in the past day, was doing other things yesterday. Which is unfortunate because you did bring something concrete yesterday with Frank's post and I have been wanting to respond but haven't had the time.

                      The impression I have is that you've been doing your usual commenting of asking questions and making statements to tease things out but not making clear arguments with back up. Many people here are have a lot of experience with this issue and a great deal of knowledge and will argue hard from that because of what is at stake especially for women. I suspect you haven't had this kind of push back here before and it can be intense.

                      The easiest way to deal with that ime, is to bring arguments that are thought through and that have clear back up at the time. People here respect that even where they disagree, because it gives them something to think about and respond to.

                      Sometimes it works just to take a break for a while. You will be welcome to come back if you do take a break. There are other things to be talked about too, the election, how the Greens are going, where the good cultural shifts are happening (and where they are blocked).

                      Hope all goes well with the filming, looking forward to that!

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    3 April 2023 at 9:28 am

                    Perhaps, weka, you might post a retraction from me, saying, I may well be mistaken about that and read that comment in a link from here. I don't wish to assign violent language to any TS commenter.

                    Thanks

                    • weka …
                      3 April 2023 at 9:36 am

                      thanks Robert, that’s all that’s needed 👍 What we find is that when people make controversial claims about what others on TS are saying, without linking, everything gets more agitated then it already was. You can understand that at this time, accuracy matters.

                      Fwiw, I can’t find that phrase in recent TS history (past few months)

                    • Cricklewood []
                      3 April 2023 at 10:03 am

                      https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-02-04-2023/#comment-1943311

                      I belive this is what Robert is referring to…

                    • weka []
                      3 April 2023 at 10:08 am

                      thanks.

                    • weka []
                      3 April 2023 at 10:15 am

                      It’s very crude, and very Germaine Greer. I don’t consider it violence against trans women who have surgery. In terms of TS I think about it alongside the arguments we’ve had here where men have said they have a right to have sex with a woman while she is asleep even after it’s been pointed out to them that it’s against the law. It’s finding that balance between robust debate and making the space good enough for more people to take part in that. I have no doubt that trans women avoid TS, but I know that women do as well.

                      Likewise I understand why many trans people felt anxious about KJK coming to NZ. And I understand the range of feelings that many women have in watching the mob attacking her and other women, and stopping NZ women from speaking at Let Women Speak.

                      None of this is going to go away, so we may we as well push on through and see if we can hash out the issues and come to something better.

                    • MichaelP []
                      4 April 2023 at 9:15 am

                      I saw the words "have a right to have sex…" and thought oh here we go, some dickheads whining about not getting sex and giving men a bad name. Then I carried on reading to see that Men on here have stated it's ok or their right to have sex with a woman who is asleep??? OMFG!

                      Wow I missed that discussion. Unbelievable. That is trying to defend or justify rape for goodness sake.

                      Despicable viewpoints aside, how could anyone possibly enjoy having sex with someone who is asleep, assuming that the more obvious enjoyment your partner is having means the more enjoyment you're having??

                      Or am I just showing my age again….sigh.

                      Anyway, sorry to carry on an obviously older and by the sounds of it pretty offensive discussion I just saw the words and bristled…

                    • weka []
                      4 April 2023 at 9:44 am

                      it used to come up in the Assange debates, because some people were so keen to not have him charged they denied there were any problems with how he behaved to the two women.

                      Not that I want bring all that up again, but the salient point is that men objecting to rude, crude or harsh language about trans people in one of the biggest political debates in a generation need to understand the wider TS context for robust debate. If we’re arguing about sensitivity and who might be put off commenting. And, most of the GC comments about trans people specifically (rather than ideology) aren’t rude, crude or harsh.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 April 2023 at 11:45 am

                      Thank you, Cricklewood. I was a little rattled by the response and couldn't backtrack to find it.

                      "Good old Germaine Greer." was the lead in. I followed the suggestion. Wish I hadn't.

                    • Cricklewood []
                      3 April 2023 at 1:00 pm

                      It's a very difficult subject, I'm pretty much a full on libertarian when it comes to social issues but can understand why biological woman feel threatened when it comes to spaces like bathrooms etc a woman feeling that way doesn't make them a fascist, nazi or a terf.

                      Sadly the rhetoric has become increasingly heated to the point where seemingly some feel physical violence is justified based loosely on the its ok to punch a nazi.

                      Imo our media and politicians added to that with the language used in the lead up to the event.

                      I'm not sure how this ever gets resolved but the path things are going down now it seems resolution becomes increasingly difficult.

                • Anne …
                  3 April 2023 at 9:36 am

                  Thank-you Robert for your herculean effort to redress the balance over this vexed issue. It has been pretty one sided and most have chosen to stay well away from the subject. I don't blame them one little bit. It has not been a pleasant experience.

                  I recall a reference to the “chop off his penis” but it might have been within a link and not a direct quote from a commenter. Whatever, no-one should have even linked to anything containing language like that.

                  • weka …
                    3 April 2023 at 10:29 am

                    why not?

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 April 2023 at 12:17 pm

                      This "incomprehension/poor comprehension" meme that's thriving here is regrettable, imo.

                      It doesn't pay to imply that some people are stupid. It's useful to question whether believing the other guy is stupid is a heads-up to check ones own bias/blinkers, especially where some of those who appear to "one" as failing to comprehend have previously provided intelligent commentary on other issues.

                    • weka []
                      3 April 2023 at 2:12 pm

                      Sorry Robert, I have read your comment a few times and I don’t know what you mean. Where is the incomprehension meme? Are you saying that I am implying that someone is stupid?

                      I was interested in why Anne thought that no-one should ever link to language like Greer used.

                  • Shanreagh …
                    3 April 2023 at 10:49 am

                    @ Crcicklewood with the link to GG. Mine in fact.

                    This does not say chop off his penis.

                    What it does say is that if you are a man and you chop off your penis it does not make you a women any more than the wolf dressing up & lying in Grandma's bed makes it Grandma.

                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Red_Riding_Hood

                    I am finding the level of incomprehension worrying.

                    Distilled down to its starkest in this access to safe spaces for women it says:

                    Women don't have penises.

                    The clip from GG is very clearly written and typical GG. I loved her analogy about the long ears, liver spots and long brown coat and the spaniel. And having been exposed to GG for many years there will be a hint of self deprecation there as ageing females (and males) often have still growing longer ears and liver spots. It was laugh out loud to me. Laugh out loud because it is ridiculous.

                    And yet sadly this is the level of woo that women are supposed to believe uncritically.

                    It also is a sad commentary on the lengths that people will go, with bodily dysphoria issues. The administration of chemicals, often lifelong leading to sterility etc and the surgical moves that can lead to the after effects of surgery as well as from the procedures themselves.

                    • Anne …
                      3 April 2023 at 12:04 pm

                      "I am finding the level of incomprehension worrying."

                      Get a grip!

                      Pretty obvious I only recalled seeing the words with no recollection of where or the context. I merely confirmed to Robert I had seen it too because it was being questioned.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      3 April 2023 at 1:12 pm

                      @ Anne. If you look at the clip I linked to it does not mention cut off his dick, in fact all the potentially naughty words are marked by ******.

                      Neither does the clip encourage anyone to cut off their penis.

                      I am wondering if the link RG saw was in fact the GG one.

                      The clip merely states GG belief system, that should be uncontroversial, that cutting one’s penis off does not make one a female.

                      This was the poor comprehension I am talking about, is when people do not understand this uncontroversial biological fact.

                      If a man has a cancerous tumour on his penis and has a penectomy does that make him a woman? I mean he has had his penis cut off.

                      Answer: no it makes him a man without a penis.

                  • Shanreagh …
                    3 April 2023 at 1:02 pm

                    @ Robert Guyton.

                    Well if you know GG, who has been around commenting on Women's Issues since the 1970s.

                    (she was the author of the Female Eunuch in 1970s)

                    then you will remember she has always called a spade a spade.

                    All she said was that a man cutting off his penis does not make him a woman. She did not say 'cut off yr dick or penis" She commented on her belief system and that is that despite such surgery it does not make him a woman.

                    I find this to be biologically correct and uncontroversial.

                    Do you believe otherwise?

                    If so why?

                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germaine_Greer

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 April 2023 at 2:33 pm

                      I don't have an issue with your explanation, but fear you have missed the point entirely.

                      I won't claim you have reading comprehension problems 🙂 but perhaps you might consider the possibility that for some "communities", similar in concept to the community of women being steadfastly defended/promoted/championed here, the community of men (there are still, I believe, men reading TS) who find the choice of phrase/words used by GG and repeated over and over here, disturbing. You women may not, some of us men, do.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      3 April 2023 at 3:23 pm

                      What is the phrase Robert, you do not give it so how can I moderate the use if need be if I don't know the phrase you are offended by?

                      In the GG link the phrase & others is illustrated by ******.

                      I don't think I have ever seen an agreement from you that men cannot some how turn into women ie recognition of biology.

                      Your continuing silence means for me that I have to think that you imagine that this can be done, some how.

                      I usually use this word below unless another word or ***** is in a quote. I did briefly toy with the idea of 'no dicks in dunnies' as a slogan but man, woman, penis, vagina seem quite able to do the 'lifting' here.

                      Are these offensive? Which one/s should I not be using and what word/s should I replace them by…happy to use male gentitalia and female genitalia if that would be better than penis or vagina?

                      To be frank I am baffled by you seemingly not getting the issue. Not getting an issue of biology seems to me an issue of comprehension.

                      Have you read some of the posts by Tsmithfield or RedLogix. Were they helpful?

        • Belladonna 1.2.1.6
          2 April 2023 at 9:01 pm

          No one, it seems, is pointing the finger at PP for the fractured skull, in the way fingers were pointed at the forestry industry for the slash-destruction.

          That seems to me a remarkably silly analogy.

          The proximate cause of the slash destruction was a weather event (or a series of weather events). No one can expect the rain to exercise discretion.

          The proximate cause of the fractured skull of the assaulted woman was one (or more) violent protester, egged on by a supporting group – and validated by supporters in positions of authority. All of whom should have known better, and are criminally liable. One can certainly expect protesters to act with human agency and refrain from outright violence.

          This was not an 'accident' (someone pushed over in the crush, or tripping and falling) – it was outright deliberate assault.

          I condemn those who engaged in violence, those who encouraged violence, and those who have continued to refrain from condemning the violent actions.

          Do you?

          • Robert Guyton 1.2.1.6.1
            2 April 2023 at 9:10 pm

            I don't support violence.

            If those involved in organising the event knew that a vulnerable person might get seriously hurt, are they, in part, responsible for that outcome?

            • Belladonna 1.2.1.6.1.1
              2 April 2023 at 9:15 pm

              That is pure victim blaming. If you can't see it, then you should have a hard look at your own biases.

              If a woman wears a short skirt and is raped – was she, in part "responsible for that outcome" /sarc/

              The victim is not responsible for the criminal actions of the assailant.

              I'm glad you don't support violence. Can you bring yourself to say that you condemn the violent actions of the TRA activists at the PP event?

              Because, just about every comment you make is trying to blame someone else.

            • mikesh 1.2.1.6.1.2
              2 April 2023 at 9:18 pm

              It would be reasonable to expect any protest to be peaceful. One would not expect protesters to behave like a bunch of uncivilized yahoos.

              • Shanreagh …
                2 April 2023 at 10:05 pm

                That has been my experience though I was not involved in frontline of the Springbok clashes though but I've been to sufficient to know that these were often rowdy affairs & marches up Queen St and along Lambton Quay would have had a fair few booing.

                • MichaelP …
                  4 April 2023 at 10:24 am

                  I was around in -81 Both sides in that episode of our history knew that there would be violence (knew there would be, not just thought there might be)

                  The protesters had their 'battle tactics' as did the police and pro tour supporters. Nobody was under any illusion which is why the frontlines of both sides wore helmets, body armour and carried weapons.

                  That's a whole different world away from holding an event called Let Women Speak and expecting protesters to be loud but not violent (a perfectly reasonable expectation IMO)

                  I don't know obviously but would guess that many of the women who were subjected to the violence at LWS all probably wouldn't have gone if they knew beforehand that there was going to be violence. Of course I could be wrong on that.

                  I guess some may have thought there would probably be violence and may have not ever been in a real life violent confrontation so may not have known quite how terrifying and unlike TV / the movies it actually is but that would be a small minority in my opinion.

                  Regardless of any of that the fault lies almost entirely with the perpetrators and I believe the police have to bare some responsibility also. If anything in New Zealand, anybody should e able to go to a protest with the assumption it will be peaceful.

                  What makes this really sinister (violence toward women aside) from my viewpoint is firstly that the violence seemed to probably be deliberate and targeted with a certain amount of pre planning or certainly forethought

                  Also the actions or lack thereof of the nz police which looks (again from my viewpoint) suspiciously like active or deliberate non engagement. What was the point of police even being there if they weren't going to do any policing?

                  Either that or the police were too scared to get involved (scared for their own physical safety and / or scared of possible public or ministerial backlash if they were to get physical) which if true would be disturbing in it's own right.

              • Robert Guyton …
                3 April 2023 at 12:10 pm

                Why? They did, therefore it was something one might expect.

                It's not the first time protesters have behaved "like a bunch of uncivilized yahoos."

        • Belladonna 1.2.1.7
          2 April 2023 at 9:11 pm

          I don't believe the violence was "earned", but I believe it was easily foreseen.

          Did you forsee it, Robert?

          Perhaps you can link to your comments prior to the PP event/ TRA riot – telling us all that it would end in violence.

          I certainly didn't.

          I expected that there would be shouting and chanting, banner waving, and speeches, a counter protest (as we've seen many times in the past). An active, noisy, protest, making their point clear.

          I expected that the Police would have a firm line between the two groups (also as we've seen in the past). And that there would be degree of pushing at the police line – but that common sense (on all sides) would prevail.

          I expected that there would be lots of media coverage – of greater and less bias. And that some politicians, with natural constituencies in the TRA group, would be in attendance.

          I did not expect that there would be virtually no police presence, and that when protesters breached the light barricades, they would then go on to violently assault people on the other side. And, I did not expect (though perhaps I should) that senior politicians would refrain from condemning this violence.

          • Shanreagh 1.2.1.7.1
            2 April 2023 at 9:58 pm

            Good points Belladonna.

            My expectation too. But we have a new style of policing now that we didn't know of beforehand.

            I did not expect that there would be virtually no police presence, and that when protesters breached the light barricades, they would then go on to violently assault people on the other side. And, I did not expect (though perhaps I should) that senior politicians would refrain from condemning this violence.

            And now we have people who would blame those who thought this was going to be protest of old, that 'we' should have known that there would be no police, that the protestors felt egged on and a moral right to be violent. Many protestors still would think they have/had the moral right to be violent I guess.

            There has been no specific condemnation of the violence against KJM & those waiting to speak. Just some non specific wiffle waffle, everyones's a winner ooops protestor type stuff from PM Hipkins & complete disregard from Marama Davidson.

            • Robert Guyton 1.2.1.7.1.1
              3 April 2023 at 8:21 am

              Shanreagh – you expected a significant police presence but didn't suspect there might be the potential for pushing and shoving, tomato sauce and worse?

              That seems contradictory.

              • Belladonna …
                3 April 2023 at 8:40 am

                No more than the dozens of other protests which have had a police presence. It used to be routine that, if there was a counter protest signalled (as it very clearly was in this instance), police would firmly keep the two groups apart.

                Here’s an example:
                https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/brian-tamaki-led-protests-end-after-unsuccessful-attempts-to-access-auckland-motorway/3NCLOZ35ZOE4XZJTJZTL7QQU5Y/

                Nothing contradictory about that.

                And, please stop minimizing the violence.

                You've been repeatedly called on this.

                We are not talking about pushing and shoving, or even juvenile stunts like throwing sauce. We're talking about deliberate and targeted violent assault.

                • Robert Guyton …
                  3 April 2023 at 8:59 am

                  So, not the sauce.

                  Okay.

                  The assault was terrible. The atmosphere was very heated.

                  Could that heat have been predicted?

                  I believe so, given the circumstances.

                  Do you believe otherwise?

                  • weka …
                    3 April 2023 at 9:05 am

                    Robert, can you please respond to this before commenting further https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-02-04-2023/#comment-1943341

                    I've popped you in premod in the meantime.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      4 April 2023 at 9:34 am

                      So Robert you actually have not found this. Someone found the Germaine Greer post I had put up but she does not espouse what you said she did. So you were incorrect.

                  • Belladonna …
                    3 April 2023 at 9:55 am

                    Did you predict it?

                    I've asked this before, and you've refused to answer.

                    .https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-02-04-2023/#comment-1943310

                    If you didn't predict that there would be outright violence – how can you expect that others would?

                    It seems to me that you're attempting to be wise retrospectively – we all have 20/20 vision in the rear-view mirror.

                    And again with the minimizing: "the atmosphere was very heated"

                    This is coming across, yet again, as a minimization of the deliberate violent assault that occurred.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 April 2023 at 12:03 pm

                      Did I predict it (proof demanded).

                      Was it predictable: that's my point. I believe many people predicted there would be heated behaviour at the event. Why you didn't think so, I can't say. If I'd been in an advisory position (I wasn't), I'd tell a frail person to stay away or at least, keep their distance. People in heated situations can act in unexpected ways, especially when inflamed by the words and actions of others, as well as expectations formed as the result of previous situations of the same sort (earlier rallies, events on the same grounds, meetings of "the same crew"

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 April 2023 at 4:41 pm

                      Ha! I never refuse to answer 🙂

                  • Belladonna …
                    3 April 2023 at 12:53 pm

                    So, no you didn't predict it – but seem to now expect that 'others' should have done so.

                    Rather a double standard, don't you think?

                    Can you link to explict threats of violence from the TRA protestors made in advance of the PP event? Something that would have led ‘others’ to believe that the counter-protest would descend into violence?

                    • Incognito …
                      3 April 2023 at 1:09 pm

                      Does it really matter where or how [the] violence started? The issue (i.e. Robert’s issue) is that it could, not should, be foreseen. In fact, there was a challenge in Court the day before the event that centred on the likely prospect of violence erupting.

                      A rainbow advocacy group says a self-styled women’s rights campaigner could push society over the precipice and incite transphobic violence if she is allowed entry into New Zealand.

                      https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/486623/posie-parker-brings-anti-trans-violence-threat-says-advocate-as-high-court-decision-looms

                    • weka []
                      3 April 2023 at 5:14 pm

                      The two main things I can see that affect whether the event should have been cancelled ahead of time or not are that 1) did KJK and the organisers reasonably expect the police to keep the peace and 2) the original security team pulled out at the last minute, was the replacement team up to speed?

                      1) yes
                      2) don’t know.

                      What happened in Hobart suggested that similar would happen here. There was discussion about this in feminist circles. I didn’t see anyone predicting the dangerous mobbing of KJK and her team, nor the violence of the kind witnessed (the punching of the elderly woman). The tomato juicing was predictable and within protest norms, the mobbing and elder assault wasn’t. It was shocking, a watershed moment for NZ and it wasn’t in any way KJK or her team’s fault or responsbility.

                      KJK says things in very strong terms, and much like Germaine Greer she says things in ways that shock some people. Has anyone yet explained why Greer’s or KJK’s speech should be suppressed by making an argument against specific speech beyond ‘I don’t like that, it’s offensive’?

                      There is an order of magnitude difference between what they say and do and what Nazis say and do.

                    • weka []
                      3 April 2023 at 5:15 pm

                      and, I don’t think the court action beforehand was anything to do with TRA protestor actions. It was about whether KJK’s speech would incite violence against trans people. Not women.

                    • Incognito []
                      3 April 2023 at 9:28 pm

                      I’m not even talking about whether it should have been cancelled or not – I would not assume to be able to judge this and neither did the actual High Court Judge. It is a moot point, anyway.

                      What I do feel more confident about is that the risk of political violence has increased in NZ in recent years, which is deplorable but not entirely surprising. One could point to certain events and/or developments, here or overseas, but nothing changes the fact. I’ve linked to this before: https://www.newsroom.co.nz/risk-of-political-violence-this-election-still-high-shaw. This is the context, the backdrop, which is highly relevant.

                      If one insists on talking specifically about the event that took place in Albert Park, I note that the one person who probably knew best what to expect of what could happen was also best prepared.

                      The bigger picture seems to be missed when and while people focus on a much much smaller picture even though they may consider it as some kind of symbolic or watershed moment – we seem to have those more frequently nowadays, just like record-breaking weather events …

                      Let’s hope this is not the new ‘normal’ but the signs are not good and it serves to take heed of [the] warnings.

                    • Nic the NZer …
                      3 April 2023 at 1:22 pm

                      Really? Your saying the rainbow advocacy groups advocate turned up in court and said if this goes ahead we will likely react violently?

                    • Incognito []
                      3 April 2023 at 1:36 pm

                      Really? Your [sic] not stupid, so try not act stupid. Violence was signalled as a likely scenario in the Court case. Make of this what you will but don’t put words in other people’s mouths.

                    • Nic the NZer …
                      3 April 2023 at 2:17 pm

                      I'm pretty sure that the argument was that KJK was going to say some things and then poof (because supposed hate speech has magic powers) violence would manifest against members of the community. Now I think that's pretty ridiculous, obviously, but your talking about an argument made by someone asking she not be allowed into the country, to protect a community he's advocating for.

                      I really don't think he was making a prediction of what actually happened where most of the violence and intimidation was metered out by the counter protest.

                  • Belladonna …
                    3 April 2023 at 1:35 pm

                    We've reached the end of the 'reply' function.

                    This one is to @Incognito

                    Robert's argument was that the violence at the protest could have been predicted. And, therefore (paraphrasing) the PP event should not have gone ahead and/or 'vulnerable people' (cf the elderly lady assaulted') should have known not to attend.

                    I don't agree:

                    a) That there were specific threats of violence from the TRA against PP supporters (indeed, your own link shows their fears were the other way around; and were in general, rather than being specifically related to the PP event).

                    b) That there was a heightened degree of unpredictable violence which was unable to be managed by an (inexplicably absent) standard police presence. We are not talking here about the level of protest which resulted in the parliamentary occupation. This was a standard rally/counter-rally situation. The police are well-used to dealing with the security aspects of them. The most important being to keep the two sides apart.

                    c) That the threat of violence should ever shut down a legal rally and/or protest. Where is our freedom of speech if we accept 'thugs veto'? That is the slippery slope that I see all too many on the left sliding down.

                    • Incognito …
                      3 April 2023 at 1:47 pm

                      In a style that has become typical of this pseudo-debate, you are reading way too much in a simple straightforward comment. Consequently, and consistently, you make unjustified assumptions and extrapolations and use these to steer the ‘debate’. And of course, you “don’t agree”, that goes without saying – trying to understand where others are coming from and meeting them somewhere in the middle of the debate has been discarded to make way for polarising arguing by polarised people that fuels further polarisation. Anybody who has not (yet) grazed some skin in this ongoing ‘debate’ can see this clearly.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      3 April 2023 at 1:50 pm

                      Quite agree Belladonna.

                      Quite funny (if you like that kind of humour) that the push for truth is now call polarising.

                      See above

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 April 2023 at 3:17 pm

                      Thank you, Incognito, for your reasoned and balanced response. The incidence of people "re-phrasing" the words of another then responding in accordance with their own interpretation, is disturbing and has, I'll bet, caused many commenters to steer clear of the topic. There's a Gish gallop, gaslight atmosphere around this joint at the present time. Others, I believe, feel this also.

              • Shanreagh …
                3 April 2023 at 10:53 am

                Not at all.

                That used to be what the Police were there for.

                To keep the pushing and shoving in check. To be on the alert for breaches of the peace that would disrupt a group of people who were lawfully exercising their rights to gather in a park to listen and share issues do with women's rights and issues.

                • Robert Guyton …
                  3 April 2023 at 12:07 pm

                  And identify more subtle threats; inflammatory speeches, the arrival of opposing factions, unexpected events. They also have to bear in mind the influence of their own presence on some crowds. Keeping a low profile can be a strategy to maintain order, in some cases.

                  *I have no view about the police in this particular instance

                  • Shanreagh …
                    3 April 2023 at 1:45 pm

                    Robert, the Police were conspicuous by their absence.

                    There have been complaints to the IPCA about this.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 April 2023 at 3:08 pm

                      So I read.

                      Not sheeting that to the protesters though, are we?

                    • Shanreagh …
                      3 April 2023 at 3:29 pm

                      The transactivists you mean? They were the ones protesting.

                      Most of those I respect/read have been condemning the violence used by the transactivists. I do too. The Police, belatedly, are looking at the issue and they hopefully will charge the ones breaching laws.

                      That is not the function of the IPCA.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 April 2023 at 4:31 pm

                      The protesters, I mean.

                      How many protesters, Shanreagh, do you believe, used violence at the event?

                      And are those who did, representative of the pro-trans community?

                • Shanreagh …
                  3 April 2023 at 1:40 pm

                  @ Incognito & Nic the Nzer

                  So if transactivists say that violence will occur, are they saying that it would be the PP event attending demographic that will be causing it? because looking at the demographic in Hobart, they would have been pushing it. Some quite old, in years, looking people attending and some speakers the same. Some of the supporters who filled in for the lacking police behind the women, were at least my age.

                  So where was this violence going to come from?

                  If not the PP people then from the transactivists?

                  So the argument is that it is Ok to threaten the ability of women to gather & to speak because some parts of our society do not want them to? or was it a recognition that the transactivists may have lost control of those who might be attending?

                  So in either case women miss out because others cannot control their own violence.

                  Odd view

                  Again it seems wrapped up in the view that because 'we' cannot control ourselves you should not do this or that

                  That seems very like the excuses for rape or domestic violence that were responses we often heard until we started listening/thinking about the meaning of them & whether they were victim blaming.

                  • Incognito …
                    3 April 2023 at 1:57 pm

                    So if …?

                    So where …?

                    If not …?

                    So …?

                    So …

                    Odd view

                    Again it seems …

                    That seems …

                    Nothing but a series of assumptive questions and conditional hypotheticals leading to an odd conclusion followed by, of course, more assumptions that are inaccurate, at best.

                    The so-called debate in a nutshell. Jesus wept.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 April 2023 at 3:23 pm

                      You've expressed exactly what I've been feeling, Incognito.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      3 April 2023 at 3:35 pm

                      Ok I have been amazed that PP non attendance has let women see, in plain sight, those who have women's rights and women's issues tightly bound to their hearts and minds.

                      Don't you think that left wing women would also like left wing men to get it? After all this time, after all our thoughts and trying to carefully explain to get the points across over several years .

                      As you say

                      'Jesus wept'.

                    • Incognito []
                      3 April 2023 at 9:49 pm

                      In this community, or micro-cosmos, that we call TS, I’d like to see building bridges and not burning bridges. One would think this would be easier (!) between politically like-minded people but almost the opposite seemed to be happening. Sometimes it helps to take a step back, a deep breath or two, and a good look at what’s happening and what we’re doing and ask ourselves if this is what we want. If the answer is “No” then we need to change and become the change we want to see here and/or elsewhere (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefigurative_politics) – we should not and cannot wait for others to act first. The choice is simple, the task/journey is not …

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 April 2023 at 4:26 pm

                      Plunket plunked!

                      “It wasn’t me who whipped up hysteria about Nazis … given the crowing from the anti-women brigade [online] I’m presuming they complained,” he said."

                      "Crowing" "Anti-women"

                      Got any supporters here, has Plunket??

                      https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/300845946/broadcaster-sean-plunket-suspended-from-twitter

                    • Anne …
                      3 April 2023 at 5:55 pm

                      Thankyou Incognito.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      3 April 2023 at 11:23 pm

                      How are we to build bridges when our own Govt has brought in legislation that will allow males to have access to women's safe spaces? And our own PM does not know what a women is? (Thank you Sean Plunket)

                      Where does the bridge come from?

                      To me, a user, and sometimes a frightened user in any kind of toilet especially that is open to the public ie std public toilet, the line for me is males should not be in the safe spaces I am using. I am less uneasy in female only spaces in areas such as dept stores or picture theatres. I am most reluctant to use any unisex labelled spaces after experiencing these in two workplaces.

                      I reflected tonight that come June I will be required to share the female toilets at the Embassy theatre with males. How do I know they are trans if they look, sound and dress like males?

                      I class males as anyone with a penis, or whatever word is acceptable to RG, if penis is too harsh.

                      This may be all good with males. It is not all good with females and I shudder to think what elderly women with walkers or younger ones with children will feel. We just should not do these things to people.

                    • Incognito []
                      4 April 2023 at 9:30 pm

                      Where does the bridge come from?

                      The context of my comment was TS. The bridge comes from the people, the people who build bridges, not the ones that burn them (https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/487306/spike-in-online-hate-toward-trans-community-after-posie-parker-visit-researchers), i.e., from people like you and me. Then you, we all keep on building, and maintaining, and repairing. It requires constant work and vigil. But I might as well talk about the Fairies in Utopia instead of the good people in Eutopia …

                    • Shanreagh …
                      4 April 2023 at 9:53 pm

                      @ Incognito

                      4 April 2023 at 9:30 pm

                      Fairies are good

                      Utopia is good

                      Aspirations are good.

                    • Incognito []
                      4 April 2023 at 10:03 pm

                      Fairies are not real.

                      Utopia is not real.

                      Aspirations are not real unless they lead to actions that have tangible outcomes.

                      Utopians have to use coercion to attain cooperation. Eutopians attain cooperation through voluntary actions that yield mutual advantage.

                      https://fee.org/articles/utopia-versus-eutopia/

                    • Shanreagh …
                      4 April 2023 at 10:14 pm

                      @ Incognito

                      Dreaming/letting the mind wonder/often used in the corporate context by mind mapping to link disparate concepts is good.

                      Aspirations or the desired end state first then the plan to get there.

                      I also think that the desired state in society can be legislated for ahead of time, is that coercive? Sort of benign coerciveness?

                      Then we wait for society to catch up. I feel we did that in the Human Rights legislation.

                      I shall read the Utopia/Eutopia carefully my limited googling seemed to say they were synonyms. But clearly they are not.

                    • Incognito []
                      4 April 2023 at 10:25 pm

                      Aspirations and intentions (good or bad), for example, are like that bloody tree in the forest. There is no proof of them, ever. No brain surgeon ever opened a skull and exclaimed ‘WTF! I found an aspiration!’

                      I used that Utopia/Eutopia quote for the second part; I should have emphasised it. Please don’t read anything [else] into it, because that was not my intention at all. You have to trust me on this because I cannot prove it to you 😉

                      That said, it is a fairly interesting article for a random find.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      4 April 2023 at 10:33 pm

                      @incognito. I was not going to launch into new wave Eutopia etc…..but interesting.

                      Thank you.

                      Ps Just had a thought though, although a post mortem won’t find an intention or aspiration if you consider that a human being exists by their word/work outside their body you might find an aspiration there.
                      Actually I am an embroiderer/quilter/textile artist and the aspirations/intentions are often called UFOs or unfinished objects.
                      That wasn’t where i actually started out to go and may have blown my argument about aspirations being found extrinsically.

                  • Shanreagh …
                    3 April 2023 at 5:05 pm

                    @ Robert Guyton.

                    is this really important?

                    What is important is that the anti women's rights protesters breached the barricades, surged forward and caused mayhem.

                    This the concept behind what my Dad used to say when he realised that I was not going to sit back but protest

                    look right

                    look left

                    and if you don't like what you see leave.

                    I am sure that some would have seen the danger that this was not an ordinary peaceful protest and left. And so proud of them

                    The ones remaining were complicit to varying degrees in the violence that followed.

                    • Shanreagh …
                      3 April 2023 at 5:25 pm

                      I should have deleted the above 5.05pm but missed the deadline. Not a good faith question and I wasted my time/brain power answering.

                      Sorry

                      As you were Robert, someone will answer.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      3 April 2023 at 6:13 pm

                      "I am sure that some would have seen the danger that this was not an ordinary peaceful protest and left."

                      That's what I'm saying.

                      It was not impossible/difficult to see that trouble was brewing.

              • MichaelP …
                4 April 2023 at 10:46 am

                Robert I apologise in advance as I'm not Shanreagh and you addressed your comment to Shanreagh. (Hmm it's almost as if I deliberately avoided using a pronoun there)

                But…. I have to add my 2 cents worth. I would expect a big police presence at any public event especially where a protest is involved. This doesn't automatically assume violence.

                Surely for society / the public square to function at least somewhat well there has to be an assumption of being able to hold a public event whether controversial or not without including violence to be expected as part of that assumption?

    • Robert Guyton 1.3
      2 April 2023 at 2:57 pm

      Dane’s piece was good.

      • Shanreagh 1.3.1
        3 April 2023 at 11:15 pm

        @ Robert Guyton The trouble is you seem to be thinking that it is the women who wanted to listen to PP who should have left or not gone.

        Those who should have left, once they had seen that there was violence afoot are those I called the transactivists. There were people from this group who were assaulting women making their way through the crowd or trying to find PP.

        I don't think anyone from the transactivists group could have been unaware that the plan by some was to disrupt PP. Not just shout from a polite distance etc. And so with not policing around the band rotunda and at the barricades they took this opportunity.

        • Robert Guyton 1.3.1.1
          4 April 2023 at 8:04 am

          Another "seem to be thinking": "The trouble is you seem to be thinking that it is the women who wanted to listen to PP who should have left or not gone."

          People involved in the event; supportive attendees, antagonistic attendees, curious bystanders, political figures, controversial figures, organisers, police, security personnel, could have made all manner of choices. It was up to them. Many decisions made were poor, imo. I'm betting many women (such as yourself, I seem to recall) will have mulled over attending and decided not to go. Many people from the general public who are not women will have chosen to stay home. I wish, for the sake of her wellbeing, the woman who was hurt, had stayed home and again, for the sake of the woman who was hurt, PP had chosen a different way to convey her message.

          • Shanreagh 1.3.1.1.1
            4 April 2023 at 9:19 am

            The reason I was wavering/opting not to go, ie have my rights to free speech curtailed was because of the threats of violence and the hunch that police were going to ineffectively stand back as they did in Hobart. (I wrote/spoke to SUFW immediately after the Hobart episode to see what the Police had been saying.

            I was wavering all the while between why the heck should a bunch of people who bear me & other women ill will try to stop me and then acceptance that there were people there bearing us ill will, I could not run as fast as in my youth etc.

            What was also swaying me was, as I said, somehow I was still getting tweets from those involved in the parliamentary protest, many were involved in banners, food preparation, organising of loud noise-makers. I had been looking at these tweets all the way through the PP (it helped dispel 'the happy just making a point' protestors myth)

            Some of the anti women comments were bordering on unhinged

            I had also witnessed the demonstration against the Springbok tour outside the Parliament Gates in Molesworth st. A work colleague & I (waiting for our buses) saw police, bottling the protestors up against a hard police line at the intersection of Hill & Molesworth sts while guiding them away from Lambton Quay. Civic Square where PP was to speak although a wonderful town square space was ideal for protestors /police to bottle us up into an increasingly smaller space.

            By Saturday morning I had resolved to look at the PP events in Auckland and make my mind up after that.

            Again victim blaming Robert.

            I wish, for the sake of her wellbeing, the woman who was hurt, had stayed home and again, for the sake of the woman who was hurt, PP had chosen a different way to convey her message.

            You are continuing to miss the point that women should be free to attend such events and make our own judgements about the message. Women should not have to confine themselves to homes because of the fear of people exercising the thug's veto.

            You will recall that when the SUFW tried to hire a Manawatu venue to let women know about the No Debate issue that they were taken to court with a highly organised and funded group of people while SUFW figuratively scurried round organising cake stalls. SUFW won the court case. The group had tried to say SUFW were a hate group.

            https://www.franksogilvie.co.nz/news/case-brief-whitmore-v-palmerston-north-city-council

            Imagine this played out against the ACC & WCC councils.

            The venues were chosen as public spaces.

            • Robert Guyton 1.3.1.1.1.1
              4 April 2023 at 9:39 am

              "Again victim blaming Robert."

              I wish, for the sake of her wellbeing, the woman who was hurt, had stayed home and again, for the sake of the woman who was hurt, PP had chosen a different way to convey her message.

              "Victim blaming" must mean something very different to you than it does to me, Shanreagh.

              I'm NOT saying or implying that the victim of the violence at the PP meeting brought it on herself, which seems to be your interpretation. I'm saying I wish she hadn't been hurt at all. It's not her fault she was hurt. You believe, I think, that she should be free to go wherever she pleases, safely. So do I, but wise counsel can help prevent trouble. You did plenty of research before deciding not to attend. I wonder what you might have advised that woman, had she asked you beforehand?

              If, upon reading my explanation here, you still see victim blaming, I'll have to fold on the issue, as I respect your judgement and sincerity.

              • Shanreagh …
                4 April 2023 at 9:59 am

                Victim blaming is not being able to make the free choice to be there or if having made the free choice then something bad happens.

                I wear a skirt walking along a street to my car at night. Apparently I am 'silly, unwise' to have done this. That is victim blaming.

                I think we can safely say we disagree on what victim blaming is.

                I have found that people sometimes victim blame because they wrap up two concepts into one. Not sure I can fully explain but here goes.

                1 in the scheme of things should I be able to walk to my car along a street, being obviously female at night?

                of course

                2 facing the reality that it is an unequal world for women out there could I take some mitigation measure that might affect my risk?

                of course there is that possibility that some thing you might lessen your risk.

                3 Should these measures I take derogate from the premise that I should be able to walk freely in a street to my car at night without taking them

                Of course not.

                Re the woman. I am a competent researcher, I am retired and have time to research. I found the levle of agression mainly through fortuitous unexplored Twitter follows that I amassed before and during the parliamentary protest. She may not have had that available to her.
                In fact the thing that would have swayed me & maybe the woman was that the Police were not going to be there, as of old, policing against breaches of the peace.

                If they had been told it was going to be 10 security guards protecting the speaker and nobody else. people may have thought, I may not be able to protect myself against thugs if there is no policing.

                My view is that had the police advised they were not going to be there then many may have decided it was too dangerous to go.
                It would also been very explicit in showing how policing may work for some in crowds but not for all.

                • Robert Guyton …
                  4 April 2023 at 10:02 am

                  "Victim blaming is not being able to make the free choice to be there or if having made the free choice then something bad happens."

                  Apologies, Shanreagh, but that makes no sense to me.

                  • Shanreagh …
                    4 April 2023 at 10:42 am

                    Please just try.

                    If you 'should not go' in the words of those who say they know best and then you do go and do that scenario.

                    You do go, something bad happens to you, the 'should not goes' pile in and say 'oh but you should not have gone', that is victim blaming. That is not blaming the society we live in, the people who walk the street making others feel unsafe, the lack of policing etc. It totally blames the victim

                    She should have investigated, should have worked off a hunch that the police were going to be a no show should have…she should have, should have ……

                    That is victim blaming.

                    As I said before we do have a different concept of victim blaming.

                    You don't get to be my age to see how it is often used against women, though it is getting better.

                    So now we don't allow defence lawyers to bring evidence of a woman being sexually active in rape trials, so blamed as she brought it on herself, many look beyond the facile 'oh she shouldn't have been walking home or to the car or anywhere'

                    So accepting there was free will, the woman went to the event, she was beaten up. The victim blamers then say 'oh but she shouldn't have made a decision exercising her free will with the best knowledge she had because…..because…because. But she did go . 'Oh yes but she shouldn't have, why did she go? And on it goes.

                    PS Hopefully you are better able than PM Hipkins at identifying what a woman is. He’s made NZ a laughing stock around the world. In a week or so of continual laughter and OMG from overseas commentators. It is sad.

            • Shanreagh 1.3.1.1.1.2
              4 April 2023 at 9:46 am

              'Seem to be thinking'.

              Robert your questions, to me, are often fair from clear, you often don't respond when asked a question. I venture to suggest that the issue would have died down to a simmer had you not come along with your again, to me, opaque questions.

              As you are often a quirky, polished and competent poster on here many of us have persisted with your questions as we thought it was a way of sharing knowledge. I was mistaken. The knowledge we have passed on has not been used as a spring board. It has been ignored. Meanwhile we have been asked to grapple with victim blaming statements as if they were of equal merit to other comments.

              The Socratic type method only works when the questioner exhibits good faith and has a knowledge of the topic.

    • MichaelP 1.4
      4 April 2023 at 8:44 am

      Was discussing this with some friends and interesting things were said in regards to 'what is keeping men out of the fight for women's rights'.

      My two female friends were adamant as to their opinion on this matter and I pretty much feel the same They firmly believe that it is because in particular young men have grown up in an environment that doesn't encourage such action in any way, shape or form.

      Young men in the last couple of decades have been told to shut up when it comes to anything to do with women. They are being told that women don't need men to protect them and further don't need men full stop.

      They are told that to risk rejection and humiliation in trying to chat up a girl they fancy is akin to sexual assault. They are taught that masculinity is toxic and that women in our society are oppressed by males. They observe that nobody cares about how dangerously low boy's educational achievement is becoming as long as the girls are doing well….

      The list could go on and on but you get my point. I can easily see how a confused young man could be afraid to speak up for women because he may get told off for being sexist or that women don't need his help, etc

      Personally I can remember three specific occasions where I have stepped in to prevent violence against women the first time was in my teens (years ago…) at a party where I tried to prevent a girl being kicked and stomped on by a bunch of thugs I ended up being bottled and got a bit of a kicking but she was ok and was really appreciative of my help (no not like that get your mind out of the gutter) on the second occasion I stopped a guy beating up his girlfriend outside our local and spent a night in the cells for my troubles (but no charges were laid and I was released the next morning)

      On the third occasion the girl I was trying to help ended up jumping on me and started hitting me as well as her violent partner having a go at me ! I managed to escape fairly easily and left them to it.

      I found out later that this is bizarrely quite a common thing where the woman being attacked ends up attacking the guy harming her boyfriend. I'm guessing there's probably underlying psychological and / ot logical reasons for this maybe?

      Regardless, these bad experiences haven't deterred me and there have been a number of other episodes. I will still intercede if I see a man attacking or hitting a woman. That's how I was bought up and was the way my group of friends all thought as well. In fact I try and stop any violence from occurring nowadays whether the victim is a woman or a man. Funnily enough working on the door at a nightclub has also moulded this 'need' to become involved.

      I must emphasise that my involvement has always been with the intent to stop the violence or at least to protect the victim and I've become pretty good at it over the years finding that the majority of the time, people can be talked down as long as they haven't had really excessive amounts of alcohol.

      Anyway, I would assume also that fear will prevent many men from getting involved especially in modern times where men never learn nor are taught how to fight or how to project their physicality because 'toxic masculinity'. So when confronted with physical violence they are simply to fearful to do anything which is a perfectly normal reaction.

      Anyway, just a few thoughts on the topic. Nothing too dinosaur like I hope!

      • Shanreagh 1.4.1
        4 April 2023 at 10:10 am

        Good points Michael.

        We need physically support and we also need the support from the brains of good thinking men.

  2. Shanreagh 2
    2 April 2023 at 12:13 pm

    David Limbrick an Aussie MP talks to Sall Grover

    'About Sall Grover: Sall Grover is the founder & CEO of Giggle, a female-only social networking app. Prior to the launch of the platform, trans activists “cancelled” it, labelling it “transphobic” because it is only for biological women. Sall advocates for womens sex based rights to female spaces & sport, and highlights the conflicts between gender ideology and reality.'

    Some good comments as well.

  3. adam 3
    2 April 2023 at 12:26 pm

    Nice, well worth the watch.

  4. Sanctuary 4
    2 April 2023 at 1:47 pm

    Neil Oliver?

    Neil "Music is woke. Not being racist is woke. Genders are woke. Sprouts are woke. Football is woke. TV is woke. Wood is woke. Chips are woke. Woke is woke. WOKE, WOKE and more WOKE…" Oliver?

    The once respectable TV presenter who had a mid life crisis, re-emerging looking like a two dollar shop Charles Manson? That Neil Oliver?

    This unhinged fucking idiot Neil Oliver? Jesus spare me.

  6. georgecom 6
    2 April 2023 at 3:39 pm

    not much discussion I can find about the muppet show with special guest leader chris luxon, whoops, I mean the national partys policy announcement about electrifying the economy. It's certainly good to see them actually release some policy, even it's a continuation of "what the other guy said". And I guess it's good to see National actually having something to try and address climate change, rather than just "continue with what the last guy did but do nothing else". One wonders if they will have the gonads to face down the likes of ground swell and tell them no more kicking the can down the road, or whether we will see the same national party of the past 20 years. Accept He Waka Eke Noa and get on with implementing it, accepting that it is only a start and much more still remains to be done

    • Blade 6.1
      2 April 2023 at 4:19 pm

      Expect a National Party of old if they have their way. What'll be new is a huge purge of Labour Party policy and legislation. Usually an incoming National Party is a continuation of Labour initiatives with a few minor changes as you have pointed out.

      But it's not really about National. It's about ACT. ACT has promised it won't be business as usual for those pompous Tories if they are to enter into coalition. I believe them!

      As for the ''muppet show'', that moniker belongs to Labour. They have pissed away a massive come back after Jacinda had the good sense to bugger off and let Chippy take over. A few weeks ago Labour had parity with National. Regardless of what the polls show, and barring Luxon being arrested for drug trafficking, Labour are gone at the next election. Robbo has basically said there won't be any more personal goodies in the upcoming budget for supporters.

      My question is ''Why does National want to win the election? Have they a death wish? This country is in terminal decline and neither major party will be able to fix it. If I was Luxon l'd play golf and leave the hard stuff for Chippy. Unfortunately politics doesn't work that way. Everyone believes they have the answers

      https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/131559145/getting-the-basics-right-grant-robertson-on-the-budget-jam-and-what-keeps-him-up-at-night.

    • Charlotte Rust 6.2
      2 April 2023 at 4:54 pm

      There was a guest on RNZ The Panel on Friday – Professor Ralph Simms – who pretty much indicated most of the ideas in Nationals new policy especially re consents are already in process. So as per nothing new, mostly hot air.

      https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/thepanel/audio/2018884165/the-panel-with-jenni-giblin-and-allan-blackman-part-1

  7. Molly 7
    2 April 2023 at 3:57 pm

    Mana Wāhine Kōrero posted this livestream this afternoon:

    Waiheke Women Will Speak

    https://www.youtube.com/live/pgW3zQ–HSk?feature=share

  8. Stuart Munro 8
    2 April 2023 at 5:26 pm

    Here's an interesting local military technology that even NZ can afford – a good way to beat the entry costs of bringing our military up to speed with evolving drone warfare – Ozzie built cardboard drones.

    • mikesh 8.1
      2 April 2023 at 9:33 pm

      Did this news item emerge on April 1st.

      • Stuart Munro 8.1.1
        2 April 2023 at 9:45 pm

        Two days ago – so, no.

        Cardboard is quite a sensible material for finite use drones – light, robust, cheap, easy to fabricate.

        • Sanctuary 8.1.1.1
          3 April 2023 at 7:27 am

          The average lifespan of a reconnaissance drone in the Ukraine is apparently four sorties, so these cardboard drones – delivered in their hundreds in flat packs – make perfect sense. And of course, loitering munitions (AKA kamikaze drones) go on one way missions.

        • Robert Guyton 8.1.1.2
          3 April 2023 at 6:17 pm

          Of course! brilliant!

      • RedLogix 8.1.2
        2 April 2023 at 11:02 pm

        I was totally taken in by this one:

        • Shanreagh 8.1.2.1
          3 April 2023 at 11:03 am

          Reminiscent of the orange traffic cones that Fulton Hogan advised us about on 1/4/23?

          (As well as the sarcasm emoji we need a 'taps side of nose' emoji as well.)

          PS what a joy to hear the laughter though.

          PPS I have actually used that sticky black stuff. The remains of a tin was given to me by a plumber & I have been eking it out since..

        • Robert Guyton 8.1.2.2
          3 April 2023 at 6:16 pm

          Cotton caulking!

          That's what I'm talking about!

          • Stuart Munro 8.1.2.2.1
            3 April 2023 at 6:24 pm

            It ought to be oakum – oakum is a byproduct of a linen industry. Linen is harder wearing than cotton, and better for the soil.

          • RedLogix 8.1.2.2.2
            3 April 2023 at 7:36 pm

            I have followed this astonishing rebuild right form the outset about five years ago. What the team have done is a real insight into how our forefathers tackled work like this; how challenging it was and how smart and tough they were in dealing with the limitations of the materials they had to hand.

            While the prank is obvious in hindsight, they managed to lead many people deep into the hoax before the penny dropped. If they were like me they were sus that something wasn't right – but it was so well executed I have to say I was taken in.

            At least up to the point where the chainsaw came out.

            As for the calking – oakum was an option, but apparently cotton suits this purpose better. I’m not sure why. You should have seen them doing the hull – that was way more massive.

          • Shanreagh 8.1.2.2.3
            4 April 2023 at 8:44 am

            I was waiting for the door…….and the wait did not let me down.

  9. Shanreagh 9
    2 April 2023 at 9:13 pm

    Good old Germaine Greer.

    'She said: “Just because you lop off your d**k and then wear a dress doesn't make you a ******* woman. I’ve asked my doctor to give me long ears and liver spots and I’m going to wear a brown coat but that won’t turn me into a ******* cocker spaniel.\

    Yes right.

    In 2015

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/germaine-greer-defends-grossly-offensive-comments-about-transgender-women-just-because-you-lop-off-your-d-k-doesn-t-make-you-a-woman-a6709061.html

    • mikesh 9.1
      2 April 2023 at 9:40 pm

      I know a man who believes he's Jesus Christ implementing the long awaited '2nd coming'. He lives in a lunatic asylum.

      What is the difference between a man who thinks he's Jesus Christ, and a man who is convinced he's really woman?

      • Shanreagh 9.1.1
        2 April 2023 at 10:53 pm

        Well that is the really sad thing Mikesh.

        Many of the younger ones troubled by concerns over how they present to the world may not be adequately recognised or cared for under our current health or mental health initiatives. At this age group (teens) there is an almost over whelming peer preference for receiving information.

        What really worries me though is the pre teens, pre puberty where the sole access to information may be through Mum or Dad who might be concerned about their tomboy daughter or gentle souled arty boy. These are ghastly stereotypes….I can hardly bear to think that people would still be concerned by them.

        I have not read very much but there are concerns about the competency of some of the gate-keeping and consent-obtaining practices in organisations running transition clinics.

        As far as the other end is concerned Autogynephilia*, this has a later onset, apparently. Many of these paraphilias are non threatening to others. This one though to me has the potential to be a bit more than bothersome in the current climate when perhaps the apogee is to dress plus try to use female spaces…..much to the concern of the women there who can mostly usually tell that there is male present. Women have great concerns about any male being in these spaces.

        Perhaps those who push the boundaries (being a nuisance or sexually misbehaving) there may need psychiatric treatment.

        The point though is most women do not want all these experiments going on in their safe spaces, we don't need things to actually go wrong before we recognise that they are wrong.

        *is defined as a male's propensity to be sexually aroused by the thought of himself as a female. It is the paraphilia that is theorized to underlie transvestism and some forms of male-to-female (MtF) transsexualism.

        • Belladonna 9.1.1.1
          3 April 2023 at 8:17 am

          Really sad (well at least sad to me) story here – which may illustrate the pressures teens are under.

          I have a friend who has a 15-year-old daughter. Lovely kid. A bit quirky. Some neurodiversity.
          Badly bullied at school (difference is targeted like sharks after blood) – mostly by girls. [The unwillingness of schools to deal with bullying effectively has a heck of a lot to do with adolescent anxiety IMO]

          I'd say probably lesbian – but struggling with emerging sexuality (as many of us have in our teen years). [And, being sexually attracted to the people who are bullying you, is a deeply confusing experience]

          Highly supportive socially left-wing family.

          No support from the state system in or out of school. Bullying not dealt with. No mental health support. No counselling. Zip.

          Comes 'out' as transgender. New gender, new name, new identity. Suddenly, support is coming out of the woodwork! Bullying at school is firmly stamped on. Counselling is offered. Mental health is supported.

          Now, I'm not suggesting she's lying. But for a kid who is confused and experimenting with sexuality – transgender has offered a heck of a lot more social validation and psychological support, than lesbianism did.

          • Descendant Of Smith 9.1.1.1.1
            3 April 2023 at 4:52 pm

            Maybe it depends where you are and how panicked the school is.

            I have family working in this bullying/sexual preference/trans-gender space and frankly they have zero interest in differentiating between the differences or steering anyone in any direction.

            They just help try and resolve the bullying and make the place safe for the student or employee.

            Some schools and workplaces have no gay people at their school or workplace and therefore require no help – they are pretty quick to ask for help if someone is trans-gender – that is too difficult for them to cope with. It may not be that help wasn't available previously it may be that the school didn't see an issue (and I don't see why students should have to state their sexual preference to get help for bullying anyway – it isn't any of the schools damn business) but now it is panic britches.

            • Belladonna 9.1.1.1.1.1
              3 April 2023 at 5:29 pm

              In this case, the only thing that changed about the student and their needs, was the transgender element.

              The student and family had been begging the school for help with the bullying issue for at least 2 years. No action. When he becomes transgender, it's suddenly a priority for the school to deal with…..

              • Descendant Of Smith …
                3 April 2023 at 6:50 pm

                Exactly my point. It isn't that help was not available previously.

                • Belladonna …
                  3 April 2023 at 7:23 pm

                  Perhaps we're talking past each other – but the help wasn't available to her previously. Despite the desperate attempts of her parents.

                  It might have been in theory, but in practice, …. zip.

                  But now, he has:

                  • Bullying being addressed in school.
                  • Mental health appointments 'magically' becoming available through the public health system (and I *know* how much pressure those staff are under, and what the wait lists are like)
                  • Counselling services proffered

                  The list goes on.

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    3 April 2023 at 7:48 pm

                    You'll have read this?

                    https://politicalbytes.blog/2023/04/02/class-transphobia-and-street-democracy/
                    “I agree that Kelly-Jay Keen is not a fascist. But there are indications that she is nearly a fascist, and precisely the sort of person that good people would wish to shut up.”

                    “• Kelly-Jay Keen has fulminated against school-girls wearing burkas as “Not British”

                    • She has tried to whip up Islamophobia in Bradford, where fascism is rife.

                    • She has publicly praised Tommy Robinson, clearly an English fascist.

                    • And most recently when open fascists have supported her, Kelly-Jay Keen has refused to reject that support, for example at her Melbourne event.”
                    Curious claims, if true.

                    • Belladonna …
                      3 April 2023 at 8:05 pm

                      I'm failing to see what that has to do with the point we're discussing here. Nothing to do with KJK.

  10. Robert Guyton 10
    3 April 2023 at 8:00 pm

    This:

    "The argument for transgender women threatening women’s rights is difficult to comprehend. It appears to rest on threatening biological women in their space in public toilets. Now as a cis male (I don’t like that term) I’m unfamiliar with women’s toilets. However, I assume that they are the same as male toilets minus a urinal.

    That is, one enters, goes into a small cubicle, does one’s business, comes out, washes ones hands (hopefully) and then departs. The common toilet space is not designed to want users to stay. There is no market for a barista to be inside selling coffee. Unless I’m missing something, I’m struggling to see how these could be spaces providing opportunities for violation.

    While this logic appears absurd, the underlying premise is horrible. That is, the dishonest, unsubstantiated and bigoted accusation that trans women are inherently aggressive. Hasn’t that been said about others before!"

    https://politicalbytes.blog/2023/04/02/class-transphobia-and-street-democracy/

    • weka 10.1
      3 April 2023 at 8:12 pm

      Oh boy.

    • Belladonna 10.2
      3 April 2023 at 8:27 pm

      Unless I’m missing something, I’m struggling to see how these could be spaces providing opportunities for violation.

      You're missing something (quite a bit actually, but start with this one)

      https://www.scotsman.com/regions/edinburgh-fife-and-lothians/female-spaces-need-better-protection-after-trans-woman-sex-assault-girl-say-campaigners-140883

      Remember, under self-ID law, trans-women need to simply declare they are women. This has thrown the door wide open to sexual predators (that is men who like to sexually assault women and girls) – to camouflage themselves as 'trans-women' in order to do so in spaces which used to be women only.

      There is case, after case, after case, in jurisdictions which have enacted the self-ID law.

    • weka 10.3
      3 April 2023 at 8:36 pm

      That quote is a really good reason for why men need to listen to women more, and in this case, gender critical women.

      Women are not men minus something. I know he didn't say that, but it was close. Women's toilets aren't the same as men's minus urinals. We have different bodies and different social experiences. That's the whole frigging point.

      A non-comprehensive list of things that women do in toilets which mean we require female only spaces.

      the usual peeing and pooing.

      managing menstruation: changing tampons or pads, cleaning a menstrual cup, washing clothing with blood on it, resting, waiting out pain, vomiting.

      miscarrying babies (yes, there's been whole twitter conversations about this where women have shared that the place they ended up having their miscarriage was a public toilet and how important it as to be in a female space).

      changing clothing.

      talking with other women.

      the energy of male free space.

      I get that many men won't understand why any of that matters, but support for women shouldn't be dependent upon that. We have a right to our own culture, spaces and rights simply because we exist.

      There are most definitely safety issues. From males, be they men or TW. Self ID means that any man can say they are a woman at any time and this is to be accepted and supported. There's no evidence to suggest that TIMs don't have the same patterns of male violence that other men do. No-one is saying that TW are inherently violent, any more than we are saying that men are inherently violence. Women cannot predict in advance which males will be violent or intrusive, hence we have female only spaces.

      There's a whole genre of porn based on women's toilets. There's an increase in the UK in men filming women in women's toilets and changing rooms. Teen girls are being harassed in gender neutral spaces. TIMs are masturbating in women's spaces and posting this online

      And there are dignity and privacy issues.

      • Shanreagh 10.3.1
        3 April 2023 at 11:53 pm

        Some more while with children or elderly women.

        Waiting with the door open, talking while a littlie goes wees or poos complete with the encouraging sounds we make or talk while said child goes to the toilet. On completion checking child, wiping child, arranging child's clothes, holding child, and semi closing the door while you yourself may go to the loo.

        Same with elderly women, they may have a walker, a prolapse, continence issues, they may be in a rush.

        So while they may go in a toilet with the door shut, often you are there outside, especially if continence pads or pants need changing. So helping them with these, helping to arrange clothes, may be outside of the confines of the cubicle.

        So if someone has a walker it can be awkward, my mother felt she did not want to go to the disabled toilet as she felt these needed to be kept free for those with a real need while we/she managed with grace, chat (with other women) etc in the regular women's toilets.

        Some women's toilets have the baby change table there. Some mothers do not want adult males there because of perving or surreptitious photographing of their babies. Some more spacious toilets/restrooms may have a separated lounge area (some department stores have these) where women may like to use the quiet space to breastfeed a baby. Again not an area they want males in.

        The whole area of female grooming. updating makeup. some I have seen doing a complete makeup and clothes change after work ready to go out. Right down to day time makeup removal, cleansing etc & then new makeup together with tweezers and eyelash curlers. Sometimes the clothes are changed out in the open ie not in a cubicle if these are crowded, women help others do up zips etc.

        • Shanreagh 10.3.1.1
          4 April 2023 at 12:19 am

          In my more regular socialising days I have been a guard to an unknown woman who had rushed to the loo to get away from a man. She described him and I scouted around outside to make sure he had gone before leaving with her to go back to the bar.

          I have been part of a group helping an unknown woman who had either had a drink spiked with vodka or drugs. She made a rush for the toilets. Women are can be at their most vulnerable to assaults when this happens to them. Several of us stayed with her, calmed her while others alerted the female bar staff. some stayed with her until she was past the worst of her drugged state.

          A female flatmate was assaulted in a public toilet, beaten by a man who was in there before she could get her wits about her and run away. Then, as it was before the days of assigning a victim support person she was called on at some excruciatingly early hour the next day by Policemen wanting to take her back to the place before she was properly dressed. She had to put a duffle coat on over her pyjamas. She knew he was not supposed to be there but now male looking, male clothes who knows.

          My solution is not to stop trans people using toilets but to look at the design of toilets so separate spaces are available. M.F, for people with a disability, unisex perhaps.

        • Shanreagh 10.3.1.2
          4 April 2023 at 8:42 am

          And another. Walking into a woman's toilet in a dept store.. A woman in her under clothes while her two friends flapped her outer clothes/their coats to try and cool her being in the the throes of a hot flush.

          As we knew this was a female only space we were able to help her preserve her dignity while recognising her distress. Lots of caring murmurs and a few wry comments.

          Would this happen in a mixed sex toilet where adult males went? I don't think so.

          Enforcing this ability for males to go to female toilets shrinks our female world immeasurably.

      • Kit 10.3.2
        4 April 2023 at 1:04 pm

        Just want to add another woman's voice to this issue.

        I am a cis-gendered woman, who has used women's bathrooms her entire life. The idea that trans women pose a real risk to other women in bathrooms is fantasy.

        "It appears, just as with the homophobia and racism that dictated who could access public spaces in the 20th century, that we are seeing a return to discrimination and control of public spaces dictated by fear that has its origins in prejudice and ignorance. That trans people’s access to their public spaces, and to use the bathroom, is up for ‘debate’ is a regressive step."

        Shanreagh and Weka – do you see any similarity between the reasons you give for why trans women should not be allowed in women's bathrooms, and those given in the 20th century for why women of colour should not share the same bathroom as white women?

        "This is not some abstract issue, it is a matter of immediate public safety for transgender people. All human beings need to be able to access public bathrooms, and those bathrooms need to be places of safety and security. Trans people by every measure are at the greatest risk of violence when made to use the wrong bathroom, and are the only group society considers it acceptable to deny the use of these public spaces at all."

        The quotes above are from this article written by another woman: – https://www.gendergp.com/transgender-bathrooms-discrimination-2022/

        • Nic the NZer 10.3.2.1
          4 April 2023 at 1:34 pm

          Probably some of the females present can better comment than me. I don't think the issue is trans women per say. Its the change in societal convention to self id. There are unfortunately a significant number of males who will take advantage of self id to violate previously female only spaces. I wouldn't say they are likely actually transgender but if the standard is self id then who is to say.

          There is not really a solution to this. Either you have some more preventative rules about how such people change how they are treated (like seeking permission from an employer to now use other bathrooms in a work place, which is how this presently works). Or if you go with self id then you need to accept that the transgender category includes all the male bad faith actors by construction.

        • Molly 10.3.2.2
          4 April 2023 at 2:21 pm

          ""It appears, just as with the homophobia and racism that dictated who could access public spaces in the 20th century, that we are seeing a return to discrimination and control of public spaces dictated by fear that has its origins in prejudice and ignorance. That trans people’s access to their public spaces, and to use the bathroom, is up for ‘debate’ is a regressive step.""

          Provision for women's single-sex spaces was not because of perceived differences in race, or sexual orientation. The discrimination applied to both race and sexual orientation was due to prejudice, not supported by data.

          Single-sex provisions are because there are material, practical, privacy, dignity, fairness and safety reasons that returns value to all for such categories.

          Safety is only one factor for the provision of single-sex spaces but since it is the one you focus on, let's address it:

          1. Safeguarding is based on risk assessment statistics. That evidence provides the criteria for the best broad stroke categories that will significantly reduce the likelihood of harm for all users. In cases where users are in various states of undress or vulnerable, the provision category that provides the best outcomes is that of sex.

          2. Therefore, the continuation of the benefit is reliant on maintaining single-sex spaces.

          3. A compelling argument supported by robust evidence is required before single-sex provisions should be relinquished.

          4. What kind of evidence should be part of the discussion?

          a. Are men who identify as women included in current safeguarding statistics? (Yes.)

          b. Is there evidence that men who identify as women pose a significantly lower risk than any other man? (No, statistically they hold the same risk factor. In fact, in terms of convictions, their risk for sexual offences is higher than men without gender identities)

          c. Are they are higher degrees of risk if they continue to use the single-sex provision that they belong to? (There has never been any evidence put forward that this is the case, it is often an assumption that other men are unable to cope with a non-conforming male.)

          d. If they are at higher degree or risk, is it higher than other vulnerable males? (ie. unaccompanied children, males with mobility issues, males impaired by substance abuse, homeless males, males with mental incapacity etc. I can think of many men who are vulnerable in ways that Alex Drummond from Stonewall is not, and they still respect the boundaries of single-sex provision)

          e. That vulnerability – when it is finally evidenced and defined – still must be of such statistical significance that it outweighs the benefits (in terms of safeguarding only) of division by sex.

          People within the transgender community are being treated equally to everyone else when they are expected to respect the social contract and boundaries of single-sex provisions.

          They are not excluded in any way, because they are included with all others of their sex, in those single-sex provisions.

          "All human beings need to be able to access public bathrooms, and those bathrooms need to be places of safety and security. "

          Yes. As mentioned provision divided by sex, delivers that to a high degree.

          Trans people by every measure are at the greatest risk of violence when made to use the wrong bathroom,

          This is rhetoric unless it is supported by robust and impartially collected statistical data. Have you got any?

          and are the only group society considers it acceptable to deny the use of these public spaces at all"

          Not true. They can use the public space of their sex category without impediment.

      • Robert Guyton 10.4.1
        4 April 2023 at 9:17 am

        You did recognise the the quotation marks indicate that the statement was not mine?

        • Liberty Belle 10.4.1.1
          4 April 2023 at 9:35 am

          You posted it Robert. Are you trying to suggest you didn't agree with it?