Fears Labour’s Islamophobia definition could silence women’s rights campaigners - Baroness Falkner

I thought they may drop it as a survey came out as few months ago linking their adoption of any Islamophobia law with lost votes but they are so arrogant and lacking in any sense they're ploughing on regardless.

Yes this is exactly what's going on. They invited certain groups to have an input and refused to say who.
The consultation question were leaked on the internet shortly before the closing date. I completed it but there was no intention of a general consultation. I think they were a bit shocked at the response they received.
It has been handled so badly they obviously don't know what to do.
If they had any sense they'd drop the whole thing but I think they'll plough on regardless.

@OneGreySeal

‘Muslims are terrorists and violent’ - Islamophobia

‘Muslims are terrorists and violent’ is a claim of fact (that may be true or false depending on context, evidence, etc.).

It might be motivated by hate, or not.

’Men are oppressors and violent’, likewise.

The government should not be wading in to stifle robust expression of either view.

Government measures to restrict speech rarely protect the genuinely marginalised or stigmatised view. They follow politics and fashion.

As they're as much a union as the DPRK (North Korea) is a democray and a very partisan grift, "meh"

The discussion about FGM seems pretty irrelevant, though.

First, its not an Islamic practice.

Second, even it were an Islamic practice, there's no reason to think that a proposed definition of AMH would limit anyone's ability to criticize any Islamic practice.

In a hypothetical UK where it became illegal to criticize Islamic practices, and that was deemed to include FGM, that would render the Muslim Council of Britain (among others) "Islamophobic".

Anyway, back to the topic of the thread , I read this from the Free Speech Union today:

The working group on Islamophobia has been a stitch-up from the start.

Reports six weeks ago suggested the group had quietly submitted its recommendations to ministers — yet the Government still hasn’t published them.

Meanwhile, officials at MHCLG have invited hand-picked organisations to view and discuss the proposed definition.

The Free Speech Union — Britain’s leading free speech advocacy group — has been denied the same access.

The double standards from MHCLG are striking.

Any official definition of Islamophobia or anti-Muslim hatred risks stifling free speech. We cannot let the government revive Britain’s blasphemy laws.

They appear to be working on this behind closed doors. A bit like the trans activists did.

So if the imam wheels his wife out to say "I'm fine with FGM", you'd accept that? Or would you question whether she was able to speak freely about this?

Feminists are entitled to say that some practices are so wrong that women cannot consent to them, even if they claim to. That most British feminists are white and secular or Christian doesn't make this less true when the practice is one that disproportionately affects Muslim women. "White women, stay in your lane" is a tactic used by soi-disant leftists to enable Black patriarchists and other racial minority men to maintain control over the women in their communities by preventing white women from speaking out on the blatant misogyny found in those communities, examples being FGM and forced marriage. It's a divide-and-conquer tactic and a silencing tactic.

Well, I'll happily continue to take my line from Anti-FGM organizations who (as best I can tell) universally describe it as a cultural issue and not a religious one, and often warn that conflating it with Islam is both wrong and can be harmful.

On the "Islamophobia" issue more widely, I agree with a PP that there's a lot of manufactured outrage at play. The reason Labour have established a working group to craft a new definition is precisely because the APPG definiton (which they, and other parties, adopted only for internal party purposes) was too broad for adoption into law.

We still don't know what the exact proposal will be but the "drip drip" into the media has seemingly confirmed that the working group has shelved the idea of defining "Islamophobia" and instead has been working on a definition of "anti-Muslim hate", precisely because Islam, and practices associated with it should (of course) remain entirely free to critique.

The definition won't create a new offence, but will assist authorities in determining whether a hate crime has occurred. At the moment, the lack of a specific definition means that critique of Islam could be recorded as a hate crime.

A definition that makes clear that criticism of Islam as a faith - no matter how harsh or controversial - is not hateful, could well lead to a reduction in recorded hate crimes. Pending the definition actually being published, but based on the widespread reporting of the shift from "Islamophobia" to AMH, and the reasons for that shift, a reduction in the types of speech considered possible hate crimes is my expectation.

I’m sorry you’re having difficulty reading my posts and understanding. Please try again.

https://x.com/ukhomeoffice/status/1998411916251898241

Depends on the framing.

Sexpolitation of minors is a global phenomena that certainly isn't exclusive to Muslims. It tends to be more associated in areas where lawlessness occurs…cue Rotherham & Telford with their sub standard policing. The 'lover boy method' that was famously used by Andrew Tate is a universally used con that he claimed was easier to exploit in Romania where rape laws & policing weren't as strong. So attributing to a specific racial/ethnic/religious/cultural group is not only false because it occurs in many non muslim countries but we have no reliable recorded data on its demographic prevalence in the UK. The fact that it appears to be a phenomena in the UK as opposed to other western countries might point to it really being a 'British grooming gang' problem than a muslim one.

That's not to say we shouldn't investigate & discuss thoroughly all the threads that led to the abuse including the backgrounds of the individuals who perpetrated the abuse. For example, If they were immigrants were they thoroughly vetted before they were given residence or why British born police ignored the abuse for misogynistic reasons.

That's true but the reality is that it has been ignored in the past because of 'cultural relativism'. There are few countries if any where it is legal but it is still shockingly widespread. It's particularly high in Egypt an Islamic country. 87.2% of women aged 15-49 in Egypt although it is starting to decline.

In the UK, it is estimated that approximately 60,000 girls under the age of 15 are at risk of female genital mutilation.
The communities in the UK most at risk of FGM originate from countries including Somalia, Egypt, Sudan, Sierra Leone, Eritrea, Nigeria, Kenya, Yemen, Afghanistan, and Kurdistan.
The connection with Islamophobia is that the potential for being accused (as with grooming gangs) leads to a wilfull blindness among professionals.
Many of the African countries are majority Muslim. Nimco Ali for example is Somali.
We must be able to criticise and shame all cultural practices and religions whatever there source without being visited by the police.

FGM was an established cultural practice in certain regions of Africa before Islam or Christianity were introduced.

It is still practiced, in those regions, by a significant portion of those who practice traditional African religions, Islam and Christianity.

Rates are far more associated with ethnic group, rather than faith. There are some majority Christian ethnic groups who practice it at higher rates than some Muslim groups, for example - e.g. its rooted in the culture of the ethnic group, not their faith.

That's why anti-FGM groups (rightfully) frame it as a cultural practice, not a religious one.

The Catholic church has lost a lot of respect in Britain because of the failure to stop abuse, for their protection of abusers.

The BBC has lost a lot of respect because of their protection of Saville and other abusers, a lot of respect has gone and will never come back.

The Hollywood scandals caused a worldwide loss of respect, and justifiably so.

Islam has lost respect in Britain because of the same failures.

Getting angry about the loss of respect is a dead end because it doesn't come back.

It's telling us it's a tragedy for Britain. I genuinely don't care what you think about that, but ultimately this tragedy has changed Britain for the worse and nothing anyone can say will change that fact.

Culture.

If you ever interacted with anyone who avtially had or was at risk of FGM, you'd know yourself that it isn't only Muslims. But you don't so you dont know. You focus on Muslims because you don't actually care about the issue itself or the women it affects, you care about division.

I probably deliver ten or more babies a year from women that have FGM and that small number is only because I am not FT on LW. And especially now, they are certainly not all Muslim and with current situations around the world, the religious demographics of women with FGM will change even more.

This is the difference between living and working in these communities and reading the papers about them.

Yes it’s very bizarre. I mean, why have the government just announced a third inquiry into this very specific issue? If the cultural and religious practices of these men are totally irrelevant, it’s surely going to be a short inquiry?

And I can’t fathom the approach that repeatedly claims that posters are smearing all members of a certain group but when this is pre-empted and clarified, there is no acceptance, just more false claims.

In a normal world, if I was worried that an individual was making a negative generalisation about an entire group, I would ask for clarification and then when that clarification was clearly provided with explanation, I would stop repeating my claim. But that’s just me. ..

So that’s all you’ve got?

How are you differentiating between religion and cultural practices that are deeply established in people of that religion? Why are certain practices so high in certain groups that have the shared characteristic of following particular strands of Islam?

I note no answer to any of my questions. I’ll assume you have no answer because you haven’t really thought it through.

Do you think we should be able to call out unacceptable behaviour regardless of who is doing it? That is the essence of our discussion.

Please, at least do us the courtesy of reading the posts in this thread more carefully before you respond as you seem to be totally misunderstanding. You repeatedly imply that we are speaking against ALL Muslims but that hasn’t happened at all. If you are going to continue making this claim you will need to evidence it.

Of course. I would prefer it if the engagement was on the actual substance of the topic, rather than trying to dismiss or stifle discussion, but free speech does allow you to do that, yes.

I’m somewhat sceptical of people who claim not to understand this tbh.

It ain’t a “tiny number of men”. And like it or not, it will be discussed. Again, Baroness Falkner being proven right.

Of course not all grooming gangs are Muslim. But the issues arose because the Police and other authorities were derelict in their duty (in other words turned a blind eye) through fear of being labelled racist and causing community tensions. This is a fact and has been reported ad nauseam.

Why would you fixate on that tiny number of men compared to the massive number of men and boys involved in grooming overall?

Some might say you don't care about their victims who are substantially more in number than the victims of "Muslim" grooming gangs.

And Baroness Falkner just keeps on being proved right.

Absolutely fine. As I said, you have entirely missed the point of the thread.