The previous post got so de-railed by gender right and wrongs (some of it little better than the Jeremy Kyle Show) that the basic message gets lost. The Cunningham Amendment, as a healing contribution to the aftermath of the London Book fair, sponsored four provincial Book Fairs. Our reasoning was that recovery lay in small provincial events whereby earlier disasters could be avoided. The more local events, organised by more groups, the better. Book Fairs, hard thankless projects in themselves, are faced, often at the last minute, from people with demands for inclusion, critiques of the organisers, complaints about lack of publicity and the suitability of the venue. Groups invading an event always demand to enter into "dialogue" and are thus, successful in further disruptions of time and space. Truth is that securing city-centre venues is not easy and can come with particular T&C's. If these get breached (as happened at the Peoples History event in Manchester) the venue gets lost. As long as we see the movement as a mass movement we leave ourselves open to informers, spycops and a variety of groups content to score points by destroying the event. As was witnessed last Saturday, an otherwise positive event, was disrespected and undermined. Disruption is a virus present at all open events and there is a need to set up protective responses.