Extreme misogyny will be classed as terrorism !

Not a tiktok user so dont see posts apparently "men hating". But I see plenty of posts about men being jerks because there are a lot of male jerks. Cant imagine there are many posts threatening violence to men though because physically women are the weaker sex. There are plenty of posts from men threatening women.

Are women killing men at a rate of 2-3 per week?

Can we not have one fucking day of some hope that the government will take the harassment, rape and murder of women and girls seriously without thinking 'what about the men'?

Yep this can only be a sensible thing really. Needs to be nipped in the bud, but I'd also suggest they treat misandry the same too if we want equality. I see a lot of men hating posts especially on tiktok. If anything I see more men hating posts than woman hating posts. Maybe they already routinely take down woman hating posts but leave the men hating posts. Dunno.

@TempestTost Killing people who you view as infidels is definitely terrorism, what are you talking about. Killing civilians to push an ideology is the definition of terrorism. Most of the terrorists on the governments terror watchlist are Islamists who target infidels.

The thing is misogyny is a dangerous ideology so specifically targeting women and girls to kill SHOULD be classed as terrorism, I think that’s what will happen.

I do not understand how anyone can be skeptical for making misogyny a hate crime when that is so desperately needed. The violence against women and girls in this country is on the rise. Due to the internet young boys are being manipulated to hate women and girls, their views are getting more extreme than ever. There is no point just reacting to the violence, that’s the symptom and not the cause. If we make misogyny a crime like racism is it won’t be socially acceptable to be misogynist, people will be too ashamed to publicly say something misogynistic, eventually.

As for people saying men will use it against us, some might try but I don’t see them being able to do that. Misandry is a word they have made up to make themselves the victims. Now I can’t see the government making misandry a hate crime as it doesn’t bloody exist. It’s just a word to deflect blame onto women.

The Southport stabber was 17 so I doubt he was known to authorities for domestic violence at that age. That’s why misogyny as an ideology needs to be tackled or people like him will slip through the net.

FFS

Link to thread with times article detailing plans

The Times: Worst domestic abusers to be monitored like terrorists www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/5145289-the-times-worst-domestic-abusers-to-be-monitored-like-terrorists

I'm confused re Joan Smith who I don't know much about, as @ArabellaScott has just posted on another thread regarding the plans to treat the men who are deemed the most violent towards women as terrorists (hope you don't mind the quote Arabella)

Re the 'terrorism' classification, Joan Smith has written on the links between dv and terrorism- 'Home Grown' - virtually every convicted terrorist has a history of dv, so the link may well be sound.

Hang on, he's not First Minister any more. And the SNP aren't in control in Scotland any more.
Fake news.

Well there you have it, men can also seek to use this legislation therefore making it useless for actual women.

I think Incel culture is a combination of the isolation of young men and societal misogny.

Killing people because you think they are infidels isn't terrorism.

Killing or threatening non-military targets to create fear in the public which will pressure the state to create certain kinds of political policy is terrorism - especially if it's as part of some politically oriented group.

I share your caution @ResisterOfTwaddleRex - and that's why I'm also sceptical of including misogyny in the hate crime legislation. I can see how men would use it against women they want to silence or harass.

OTOH, there's pretty solid research data by feminist academic sociologists & criminologists that many terrorists (the obvious kind - bombers, knife wielders, shooters) are domestic abusers before they become terrorists.

First the Southport stabbings and then the 11 year old girl in London.

It was strange how the attack on the young girl in the middle of London didn't attract more media attention.

Southport was beyond horrible, but the idea that a mother and daughter on a day out in central london would be randomly attacked is terrifying.

Misogyny isn’t freedom of speech, it is inciting hatred towards women and inciting hatred will lead to violence. It should have the same legal implications as racism and shouldn’t be allowed at all.

I completely agree @Millie1501.👏👏👏

I do think it is a coincidence this has been proposed right after little girls have been stabbed in the uk. First the Southport stabbings and then the 11 year old girl in London. I think it is safe to assume that the government know the motives of these stabbers by now and I strongly suspected from the beginning misogyny was a big part of the motive for these targeted attacks. Let’s be clear, misogyny SHOULD be illegal, period. It has been illegal for many years to incite hatred to a specific group but for some reason misogyny is allowed.
Misogyny isn’t freedom of speech, it is inciting hatred towards women and inciting hatred will lead to violence. It should have the same legal implications as racism and shouldn’t be allowed at all. How many more women and little girls need to die before people realise it’s a dangerous ideology. Also can we please stop allowing religious groups to have a free pass with inciting hatred, hiding behind religion can’t be tolerated anymore either.

The only time they "listened"🙄 to women was when it furthered their own misogynist agenda
Rubbish. They had the sense to halt reforms to the GRA, when Labour still pushed for rhem

Yes it would be nice to blame the Tory party but in fact it was lobbying form women's groups, and individualists like Joan Smith, who said it would make it harder to convict men of violence against women. Or some such nonsense.

The only time they "listened"🙄 to women was when it furthered their own misogynist agenda.

The last Tory government decided not to make misogyny a Hate Crime, probably because they were a very misogynist party

Yes it would be nice to blame the Tory party but in fact it was lobbying form women's groups, and individualists like Joan Smith, who said it would make it harder to convict men of violence against women. Or some such nonsense.

ie rather than see that having misogyny as a hate crime, mean an act of violence against a woman could incure extra penalties if seen as a hate crime, they thought women should just make do with somehow always being the victims of male violence as though it was "natural".

Beware the women who claim to speak for women. Not because they are themselves powerful, but because they give a misogynistic society plausible validity.

Secondly its just seem totaly hypocrasy. It was decided misogyny wouldn't be seen as hate speech, and now suddenly its so bad its going to be included in the Prevent programme?

The last Tory government decided not to make misogyny a Hate Crime, probably because they were a very misogynist party. We have a new government now. I hope they work for women and I see their recognition of misogyny for the extremism it is, as a good sign.

I'm also glad they've clarified that misgendering is not and will not be illegal and they're committed to restrictions on puberty blockers.

Exactly

It's very clear something needs to be done for women and girls

Absolutely but to jump to Prevent seems to not recognise the source of misogyny. ie our society.

If so, are daughters going to start reporting their fathers, sisters their brothers, stupid men on tv, or who think they are comedians.

Or men like Russel Brand who claim his problems started because his father left explicit porn lying round the house. Will be be able to claim the status of victim of extremism.

Incel culture doesn't spring out of nowhere. Its just an extreme representation of the messages society is sending.

There is a huge difference between an organised group with a set of beliefs trying to recruit new members, and open discussion (particularly SM) which then means some individuals take those ideas and often misuse them, because of their own personal issues (remember how many "terrorist" reports are characterised as "lone actors").

There is a category labelled MUU, mixed, unstable, unclear ideology. At one point in 2019 50% of referrals were under this category. Within it incel related things and school massacre fixations, (and many things that weren't appropriate for prevent) which the report describes as outwith the terminology of what terrorism is.

It's worth reading p 51-53 of this report. It makes it clear that it's very hard to describe incel culture as terrorist and the reasoning why. (But that may be based on current descriptions of terrorism.)

I feel uneasy about how this will translate into real world impact and what the unintended kick back could be. It's very clear something needs to be done for women and girls but there needs to be more clarity around how this will actually help.

I dont have high hopes, not because its Labour or any other angle, but because as a concept Prevent hasn't really worked.

There is a huge difference between an organised group with a set of beliefs trying to recruit new members, and open discussion (particularly SM) which then means some individuals take those ideas and often misuse them, because of their own personal issues (remember how many "terrorist" reports are characterised as "lone actors"). And also, if you feel alienated from society because of discrimination whether sexism, racism, and so on, and you start making loud declation saying how awful the state is, or the legal system or whatever, is that something that should be covered by Prevent. I can see, even without the trans agenda, many, many men saying that feminism is too extreme and anti men.

Secondly its just seem totaly hypocrasy. It was decided misogyny wouldn't be seen as hate speech, and now suddenly its so bad its going to be included in the Prevent programme?

What Prevent is, is basically an acknowledgement that society as a whole doesn't have the same influence on all people. So rather than looking at how society had failed, it says those who didn't respond are "bad" people and society will through Prevent re-educate them in a more hyper version that what transpires in a day to day way.

As suggested by PP, if misogyny is so awful why haven't politicians, the legal system, etc., done more to clamp down on it. Our whole culture is permeated by it, and if anything we live in a more sexist society. Have you ever seen a politician stand up and say anything about this. They can make emotional speeches about domestic violence, but never talk about why this happens. And at the same time they close women only services. NB this is NOT because of trans issues but because those taking the decision do a "cost benefit analysis" and because women have not value the analysis ignores their / our needs. (Its been in the news that yet another women's refuge that has been funded by the local council for decades will no longer be funded as it isn't a priority.) Dont ever forget the TRAs are partly as sucessful as they are because behind them are the for longer standing MRAs who now have an additional "legitimate" reason to say the sex class of women can be discriminated against.

Sorry that was a bit off topic, but to return to Prevent:

But its biggest flaw, as we know from the abuse of hate speech, organisations being Stonewalled, that it is based on people who are more than likely out of their depth to take decisions about how "bad" is this "bad" person.

Not saying this is the best analysis but article points out it is flawed from the start. If you substitute the word Muslim for gender critical women / girls it is a chilling idea. https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/fundamental/prevent/

Well I for one think it's welcome news. As for the details, we'll just have to see what is involved.