Well I fail to see how that kind of estimate could have accurately been made at the time. I would not dream of suggesting that the overwhelming majority of those killed had secular beliefs. Lots did, but since young MB etc supporters also tended to form a part of the front lines during various battles, I cannot make claims about overwhelming majorities. I also have to factor in the fact that due to language barriers we were more likely to hear first-hand reports in english from those on the secular and liberal side of things.
You think that the Brotherhood don't have qualified professionals who've studied in Europe or have learned English, constantly pumping their line outwards?
What on earth is this factoring? If there were many Brotherhood activists killed by police during the anti-Mubarak protests the Brotherhood would have gone against those responsible to sustain its base - to stop any cleavage.
They didn't, because they saw the secular protestors as from the wrong historical tradition unsuited to these parts of the world.
You have certainly hit the nail on the head when you mention conservatives (especially if we mean social conservatives). But much of the reason why I made my posts in the first place is that the conservative nature of many people in Egypt and elsewhere in the region cannot be brushed aside.
I am not brushing the conservatism aside, I am aware of it. I don't think it's nature though there's a specific economic and social nature to it. If you're a young woman growing up in a rural village, with a tribal system, or with a mosque appendage school, going against conservatism is difficult and offers no benefits apart from being killed and your death recorded as a suicide.
I am a secularist and I am not a conservative. But I cannot allow this fact and my ideals to distort the likely reality of what great swathes of the population in countries like Egypt believe. I cannot use it to make assumptions, or to make claims about what percentage of the population of Egypt share such beliefs. I would like to see people struggle for such things, for even if they do not succeed it would at least enable us to get a better sense of how much support such ideas have.
In the meantime, I continue to strongly dispute the idea that we have seen convincing evidence about levels of support.
I have made no claims about overall levels of support, my claim was about the 25 January protests (which excluded no one, given the Christians defending the Square as Muslim people did pray etc) and their composition.
Following on from my last point, I would actually like to see this struggle waged at all times. My main point has been to suggest that many those Egyptians who feel strongly about such things have failed to put this struggle at the heart of their message at any point, before, during or after the MB were in power.
You're right it hasn't featured heavily enough, in part for fear of being marked by conservative forces as foreign-inspired, as Western stooges, as people who want to end personal religion.
I suggest that this may mean they share my pessimism about how much support such things have. I am irrelevant to Egypt, they are not, and I cannot help but point out the difference between what they say and what you claim.
I have no idea what you think I'm claiming here, the point was about the original protests and the Brotherhood joining in only when the light of the resignation of Mubarak's could be seen. (Similar to how the military responded in fact. There were no military instances of coded support - of not spilling blood by trying clear people from their constitutional rights to protest until around 5 Feb 2011.)
claimed what you seem to think I have.
The secular side is not good at defending its rights, at organising to disrupt the Brotherhood's ca
It is possible, but under the current circumstances? They seem incapable of properly opposing the military and associated elements of the old regime, for obvious and depressing reasons. And the dangerous splits between masses of people at the moment make it even less likely that many will risk bringing another divisive issue to the centre of the stage right now.
As for female equality, one of the most depressing phenomenon in Egypt since the early days has been the sexual abuse of female protesters in Tahrir and elsewhere. We did see people trying to protect women and make a visible point of doing so.
The fresh assaults on women in Tahrir can no longer be blamed on the MB, but old regime supports can be blamed due to the counter-revolutionary elements that now make up a proportion of the protesters there, taking the place of 'Mubarak thugs infiltrating the square' in this narrative of denial.
Which fresh assaults do you mean? The recorders of sexual violence recorded around fifty cases of sexual violence in the anti-Morsi protests which were massive and went across large parts of cities featuring in some cases whole apartment blocks.
There was a gang rape of a Dutch journalist by five men outside of Tahrir Square - no one knows as yet who they were - they got away with it. I am not sure what the point is you're making.
But we also saw the usual blame game & denials, with 'regime thugs' and 'MB supports' sometimes blamed for the abuses instead of a more honest appraisal of attitudes towards women in Egypt across a greater swathe of the population.
Where did we see this "usual blame game and denials" of sexual assault from protestors? Seeing as you want evidence from me for my perceptions from the outside, where is your evidence?
I would agree that the Morsi
regime has been terrible about the sexual violence, eg-
In November 2012, as demonstrations against Morsi’s constitutional declaration swelled, several documented gang rapes took place amid weak and disregarded condemnations.
...
The complicity and negligence of the state, evident in its outright public dismissal and failure to investigate or prosecute, allowed for an expanded scope of such crimes during the demonstrations that marked the second anniversary of the revolution two months later.
And the army is little better.
In conclusion, I doubt that my beliefs about what should happen differ greatly from yours, but what certainly differs is our respective appraisals of the levels of support for such ideas, how much they are actually trumpeted by opposition groups, and the reasons why they have not made these themes the centre of their messages.
If you want my feeling on the reasons for secularism in a nutshell: secularism and socialism are the losers, because the liberals give/gave leeway to both the Islamists and military. The military certainly do not want a struggle for secularism - now or ever (unless pushed) - and the liberals don't want that struggle against the military, they want to secure their position in the new order.
What unity was there in the first place that's been lost? In what way were the Brotherhood ever united (with who?) as part of the revolution? 
