... to think women need protection from hate?

[LisaTheMug]

All police forces have made a specific list of specific social sub groups, who must not be offended, insulted or verbally abused. Doing so constitutes a "hate crime".

The protected groups are:

disability
race or ethnicity
religion or belief
sexual orientation
transgender identity

As you see, women are not included.

Surrey Police has made the decision to include alternative subcultures, for example "Goth" "Emo", "Punk". But even they still exclude women.

I don't know about you, but since childhood I have experienced rather a lot of offensive, derogatory, insulting and indeed threatening comments made to me purely because I am a woman.

And yet it's like the police are saying that's OK.

Do you think women should start a campaign to be included on the list?

BTW OP YANBU.

It never ceases to amaze how little people care about women, how their struggles are brushed aside. It's terrifying

I've suffered from abuse because I'm a woman. I think most women have. Far too many men think they have a right to curb crawl or to shout revolting things. Or whisper them, which is even worse.

I'd say a lot of street harassment is motivated by misogyny and it would be helpful if it was categorised as a hate crime rather than just something women should put up with.

Are men ever abused driving, Pemba?

All people should be protected from hate. It's absurd to suggest that women should get extra special protections just for being women.

bananaToffo

You wrote: "OP...you seem to be of the opinion that it's perfectly OK currently for men to be shouting abuse at women (or anyone) in the street. It's actually not."

Goodness knows how you got that so horribly wrong. You've got my OP all arse about tit, mate!

You also wrote "It's already a criminal offense to make threatening remarks to someone."

Well in that case why are the police making lists, and only including certain groups who can report hate crimes?

The minute they make a list, it means excluding anyone whose group isn't listed!

I personally think they should abolish the entire notion that there are special groups against whom a crime or incident is worse than against others.

For example, it must be just as hurtful to receive shouted verbal abuse for being fat as it is for being gay.

But if they are going to list, then women should be on that list.

I'm quite shocked people are saying it's a bad idea. 1 in 5 crimes committed in this country are violent crimes against women (96% of the time by men). That absolutely needs addressing, women are a vulnerable group

Domestic violence
Rape
Sexual assault

All crimes where the perpetrators are overwhelmingly men and the victims women - and they are victims of these crimes because they are women.

So yes, absolutely women should be more protected than we are. But currently the government seem hell bent on reducing our ability to define our sex and therefore continue campaigning to protect it.

I personally think they should abolish the entire notion that there are special groups against whom a crime or incident is worse than against others

I think the reason behind the crime / incident is important.

You could get verbally abused because the person doing it thinks it's ok to verbally abuse anyone.

I do think that if a crime is motivated by hate towards any group, then that should be taken account.

No one should be targeted purely because they belong to a group that someone hates.

And how are you going to prove that you would not have received the "abuse" were it not for the fact that you were a woman?

I imagine the same way black people can tell racism - by the language used, such as the N word. No one ever calls a man a slag or a whore to incite hatred or fear do they?

I am sure men do get verbally abused whilst driving on occasion, Banana, and that's unpleasant for them - everyone should treat everyone else civilly. But it's not because they're men. Have you bothered to look at that thread? The extra specially unpleasantness, often with sexual slurs, comes about because the particular man doing it hates women, even though his initial motivation is probably because he is, rightly or wrongly, annoyed by a driving manoeuvre the woman has just made. Then there are men that think it's OK to call out sexual remarks to women, or even female children, on the street.

It happens all the time and it's not OK. It's called misogyny. A bit weird that you apparently can't see that.

All people should be protected from hate. It's absurd to suggest that women should get extra special protections just for being women.

Would you say that black people shouldn't get protection just because they're black? If not why not?

Violent acts of racism are a problem. Violent acts of misogyny are also a problem. So why treat the two differently?

Pemba "Are people really oblivious to this sort of thing, or somehow think it's not a problem?"

I'm sooo tempted to give a mini-lecture here on how women are the "scapegoat" and the "whipping boy" for everything men do to them.

But I won't. It's OT.

Pemba ~ yes, always with the sexist slurs.

No problem with someone shouting, "Oy look where you are going, you bloody idiot, you are a rubbish driver", but they always bring sexist slurs into it - bitch, whore, bimbo, etc - sex-specific words they would not have shouted had the driver been male.

Hello everyone.

I have now sent my email to the Sussex Police. If you would like to copy and paste my text to your local force, I can let you have it.

Sorry, should have said, you would have to change the links I have put to their site to links to your own police force's site.

But you can have the text I wrote.

this is the official blurb from the CPS on hate crime
The police and the CPS have agreed the following definition for identifying and flagging hate crimes:

"Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice, based on a person's disability or perceived disability; race or perceived race; or religion or perceived religion; or sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation or transgender identity or perceived transgender identity."

There is no legal definition of hostility so we use the everyday understanding of the word which includes ill-will, spite, contempt, prejudice, unfriendliness, antagonism, resentment and dislike.

this is bordering on the ridiculous and smacks of 1984
so if someone calls me a silly old hag or bitch and pushes in front of ne is not a hate crime but if I was black - it would be. Talk about double standards.
why is age not listed, why is sex not listed, maybe the 'victim' of the dislike is not disliked because of the characteristic but because they were behaving in an unacceptable manner.
How can a crime or action be classed as a 'hate crime' on such woolly definitions.

There is some misinformation on this thread that I think is unhelpful generally to this debate.

It is a crime to abuse women, verbally or physically. It always has been. Women are protected under the law from abuse and violence.

The list in the OP refers to recording incidents as hate crimes for the purposes of monitoring and recording levels of hate crime. It isn't an added layer of protection (although it can lead to longer sentences for perpetrators). It is a categorisation to assist the police and government in identifying trends and patterns.

There have been calls from many politicians to have crimes against women be recorded as hate crimes. Many police forces (such as Durham and Nottingham) have already started to do this, and the police are now deciding whether to make this a national requirement. Given the generally positive response so far, it's extremely likely that they will.

So yes - women should be protected against violence. They currently are, in terms of legal protection. And yes, there are good arguments in favour of recording hate crimes against women. And that change is now in the process of happening.

notlive my post was not misinformation - I was quoting the CPS!
there is a particular motivation - largely politically driven to flag up[ hate incidents/crimes for their own ends.