Should misogyny be gender neutral

[Imnobody4]

Disturbing post about the Domestic Violence Bill going through the HoLs on Monday
sex-matters.org/posts/single-sex-services/stonewalling-the-domestic-violence-bill-why-make-misogyny-gender-neutral/

An amendment to include misogyny as a hate crime is proposed. This is what Stella Creasey was consulting with Stonewall about.

The campaign to make misogyny a hate crime returns to the House of Lords next week as parliamentarians seek to ensure all police forces record the violence and harassment women face.

But the amendment doesn’t mention women at all, justpersons who “are of a particular sex or gender”

It doesn’t talk about counting crimes against women, but about crimes where sex-or-gender based hostility or prejudice is perceived by the victim or any other person. And it says the secretary of State must issue guidance “based on sex or gender” (remember, the guidance is the only place where the predominance of male perpetrators and female victims will be addressed).

Rather than telling the police to track crimes against women — or indeed male violence against women and their children– (which ought to be simple enough if you have a clear definition and a reliable data field for the sex of victims and perpetratrors) it instead makes misogyny “gender neutral” and perception based, and adds “and gender” wherever sex is mentioned.

What is the point of an amendment on misogyny that doesn’t mention women?

Why have Lord Cashman and Baroness Brinton put themselves down to speak on Monday?

[midgedude]

Not sure I understand why it's a problem to say hate or crime motivated by a persons sex or gender .., why should it be only if that sex is female? I appreciate that is the common case , but what is gained by narrowing the scope?

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

Why have Lord Cashman and Baroness Brinton put themselves down to speak on Monday?

It's a mystery.

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

It doesn't need to involve "gender" as transgender identity is already covered.

[TheRabbitOfCaerbannog]

Baroness Nicholson mentioned this on her timeline, said she wouldn't have an opportunity to speak - Claire Fox said she'd raise her concerns...

[PamDenick]

After the terrible events of this week and the outpouring of recognition of how biological women feel, I think Stonewall should be hanging their head in shame as to how women currently feel - partially through their ideology…

[EdinburghFeminist]

Have they misunderstood the definition of misogyny? I mean it’s literal translation from the original Ancient Greek is hatred of women - and the ‘gyn’ is the same as the ‘gyn’ in gynaecology.

[Olderstyle1]

Given the repeated attempts by Stonewall and co to substitute 'gender/gender identity' for 'sex' and their desire to erase sex-based language and sex-based exemptions, I'm now suspicious of any move they make. SexMatters accept the gender-neutrality of the bill in principle but point out that adding a gender-neutral version of misogyny to the DV bill will:
Make tracking crimes against women and their children harder
Make talking about male violence harder
Add the language of “gender” to subsequent guidance and policy on domestic abuse thereby neutralising the words women and female (and male).
Encourage the exclusion of gender critical voices from roles with the National Domestic Abuse Commissioner and on local Domestic Abuse Partnership Boards (concerned with the commissioning of services)
Undermine the ability to run, commission and protect female only services for survivors of domestic abuse
Cut “transwidows” and other family members of abusive transitioners off from sources of support and potentially even criminalise them.

I don't trust Stonewall or Fawcett or Creasy as far as I can throw them. The women behind SexMatters, however, are total sheros. If they are telling me to beware, bewared I will be.

[Olderstyle1]

And the England/Wales version of the appalling Hate Crime bill is on its way. If 'misogyny' becomes a 'sex & gender' matter as opposed to a sex-based oppression, our pathetically inadequate protections will be watered down further. In fact women who state biological facts about transwomen could be accused of misogynistic hate crime.

Each time I think we are at the bottom of the rabbit hole we plunge down further.

[Imnobody4]

It's about smuggling gender into legislation. Gender is not the same category as sex. It sets the stage for silencing GC women defending single sex spaces.

This amendmentshouldbe rejected because it will :

Make tracking crimes against women and their children harder
Make talking about male violence harderAdd the language of “gender” to subsequent guidance and policy on domestic abuse thereby neutralising the words women and female (and male).
Encourage the exclusion of gender critical voices from roles with the National Domestic Abuse Commissioner and on local Domestic Abuse Partnership Boards (concerned with the commissioning of services)
Undermine the ability to run, commission and protect female only services for survivors of domestic abuseCut“transwidows”and other family members of abusive transitioners off from sources of support and potentially even criminalise them.

This is how Stonewall has been queering the Equality Act by linking sex and gender.

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

If 'misogyny' becomes a 'sex & gender' matter as opposed to a sex-based oppression, our pathetically inadequate protections will be watered down further.

Yes I completely agree. Cashman and Brinton have zero interest in protections for women. Why are they speaking, as a pp said? I've been wary of this since Creasy first tried to do a web chat here about this a couple of years ago.

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

MTF trans people mostly do not face misogyny. The only way they would is if someone genuinely mistook them for a woman and abused them on that basis.

[OvaHere]

The sex matters article is really good. I don't trust this amendment in th slightest considering the people and groups pushing hard for it. They don't care about women they just want yet another opportunity to dilute the basis of sex. This will be bad for women in the long term, I hope some of the people in the HoL understand this.

[midgedude]

See not sex and gender since as said above gender is already covered , yip

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

They don't require extra hate crime protection, as trans identity is already covered. So this is IMO a Trojan horse, aimed at getting the legal language around women and girls to include MTF trans people.

[OvaHere]

It's very telling that Stonewall is behind this partnership with Creasy but has magically disappeared from the literature in recent times. I suspect because they know what a red flag they are for women. I've no doubt they are still very much involved.

[TheRabbitOfCaerbannog]

Trying to make self ID inevitable long term? Jaysus, organisations like Fawcett have been asleep on the job.

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

From the SexMatters piece:

What is the point of an amendment on misogyny that doesn’t mention women?
The proposal is to insert this amendment before clause 73; directly before the single, solitary instance of the word “female” in the Bill, which sets out the requirement for statutory guidance (which will be periodically updated). 
It is an amendment designed to achieve precisely the opposite of what it says on the tin: to muddy the waters on violence against women, to queer-the-guidance, to make sure that female people – women – as a class cannot be discussed, and to make sure police don’t measure and report clear data on violence against women. 

[tilder]

Misogyny means hatred of women. It is about sex. Gender has nothing to do with it.

[WarriorN]

@EdinburghFeminist

Have they misunderstood the definition of misogyny? I mean it’s literal translation from the original Ancient Greek is hatred of women - and the ‘gyn’ is the same as the ‘gyn’ in gynaecology.

This

[UppityPuppity]

If Stella Creasy, Michael Cashman and Sal Brinton want it to be gender neutral - then we know it’s bad news. Sex would be more than sufficient if their motives were credible for women and girls.

Agree - Stonewall is behind this and they went to the shadows because their optics are so toxic.

If we use gender - will that exclude transmen? Sex is trans inclusive - females.

[Thelnebriati]

I'm very concerned about this, I no longer trust that the individuals and organizations pushing it are well meaning but misinformed. They've had long enough to educate themselves.

[LizzieSiddal]

This onslaught against women is just fucking relentless!

How can they stand up and talk about “gender neutral” misogyny?!

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

If we use gender - will that exclude transmen? Sex is trans inclusive - females.

I firmly believe that they won't include FTM trans people as it would go against the ideology that they are men.

[tilder]

Women are killed primarily because of their sex. Whether by a stranger or an ex partner or a member of the family or some other vile individual.

It isn't about being kind or inclusive. That won't protect women and girls. The best way to protect women and girls long term is cultural. Making sure we are equal to men by all. Equal respect. Equal value.

Bringing gender into it makes that harder to do. It's really not helpful.

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

Bump as it's today