Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To let you know thought crime is now a thing

317 replies

CalliopeMeansMusic · 20/03/2019 09:41

Apologies for the odious DM link, but this has really chilled me.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6827459/Catholic-journalist-questioned-caution-police-misgendering-someones-daughter.html

A woman is being investigated by police and faces a two year jail sentence for allegedly misgendering Jackie Green during a tweet. What has the world become when we cannot state simple, biological facts without fear of prosecution? And why do the beliefs of the mother and daughter (that they are now living as a member of the opposite sex) trump the beliefs of Caroline Farrow? I am all for protecting vulnerable people from hate crimes, but this is not a hate crime, and makes a mockery of people facing real discrimination and fear.

On the plus side, I may move to Surrey; clearly its ridiculously safe if the police have all that time to investigate this!

OP posts:
sackrifice · 22/03/2019 00:10

Julia Long?

Dr Julia Long. So a woman needs to have behaved well in her whole life, before she is allowed to attend an event? Are all attendees having to pass this level of scrutiny, or just the lesbians?

LimeKiwi · 22/03/2019 00:15

Dr Julia Long.

Sorry, missed the title, Dr Julia Long. I'm assuming I have the right person then with you saying that.

So a woman needs to have behaved well in her whole life, before she is allowed to attend an event?

No Confused Didn't say that at all.

Are all attendees having to pass this level of scrutiny, or just the lesbians?

What's the fact she's a lesbian got to do with the price of bread? Confused

I didn't even know she was until you said.

sackrifice · 22/03/2019 00:19

I didn't even know she was until you said.

So you didn't watch as 7 police officers removed the lesbians from the inclusive event then? By picking up the chair and dragging her out? It was mentioned several times.

They don't want Dr Julia in as she asks questions relating to safeguarding and male violence against women that they cannot answer. So they remove her by force.

What a bitch eh?

PencilsInSpace · 22/03/2019 00:23

Well the stuff that gets pulled isn't easy to link to, is it?

Right, so let's cut to the chase.

I'll post the 4 tweets Caroline Farrow was reported to the police for over the next 4 posts, you explain why each of these specific tweets might have been unlawful.

I'm posting them separately because MN has its own talk guidelines (not to be confused with the actual law) and I can't be arsed to wrack my brains to work out whether what Caroline posted is in breach of those guidelines. If it is, they'll be deleted as soon as someone reports. In case that happens, let's call them A, B, C, D in the same order they were presented by Victoria Derbyshire on BBC TV. That way, even if deleted, we'll still both know exactly which tweets we are talking about.

Here goes ...

PencilsInSpace · 22/03/2019 00:23

Tweet A:

Susie Green is in breech of Samaritan policy on how suicide should be discussed and broached in media. What she did to her own son is illegal. She mutilated him by having him castrated and rendered sterile while still a child.

PencilsInSpace · 22/03/2019 00:24

Tweet B:

Susie Green may feel that giving her son off-label illegal medication aged 11 and drastic surgery was the path of least harm in her circumstances, but she shouldn’t project and impose it on other vulnerable kids as best practice.

PencilsInSpace · 22/03/2019 00:24

Tweet C:

But as Posie Parker found out when you criticise Susie Green for castrating her 16 year old son, she writes pages of cant describing her journey and reporting you to the police for hurting her feelings

PencilsInSpace · 22/03/2019 00:24

Tweet D

I think it’s time everyone called out Susie Green and Mermaids policy out for what it is. Child abuse.

LimeKiwi · 22/03/2019 00:26

So you didn't watch as 7 police officers removed the lesbians from the inclusive event then? By picking up the chair and dragging her out? It was mentioned several times.

I watched the police officers remove her, yes. Protests along the lines of "we're not doing anything"
There's uploaded videos of her harassing transwomen, and also storming rooms to confront people in America (again, think right person, correct if not)
I wonder why they thought she was there to stir shit when she started filming Confused

LimeKiwi · 22/03/2019 00:30

By picking up the chair and dragging her out? It was mentioned several times
Even if it was mentioned near the end, why would they bring that up? What has being a lesbian got to do with anything?

LimeKiwi · 22/03/2019 02:01

Tweet C - son. Assume that'll be the misgendering bit referred to then.
How long do you go on ignoring them? 15 years old or whatever, been telling you for years.
"No you're not, you're a boy, you're wrong"
type thing?
You're not them.
Tweet D. Publicly accusing of child abuse.
Two right there. It's not hard to see if you can see Confused

CuriousaboutSamphire · 22/03/2019 07:20

Forestafantastica - I know it IS controversial, I wasn't being disingenuous. I just want someone to be able to tell me WHY it is controversial. It self evidently is NOT POSSIBLE for a uman to change sex so why has it become a 'crime' to think, say, post it?

The only true answer is 'because some people want you to ignore science as it hurts their feelings. They want you to join their delusion or be prosecuted if you fail to do so'

Now, tell me again why I shouldn't refute that?

No on eis denying trans people exist or that they have rights. They just don't have ALL righst to everything!

CuriousaboutSamphire · 22/03/2019 07:24

Tweet A - Facts.

Tweet B - self proclaimed proof of illegal activity by SG

Tweet C - Eveidence of the double think - she can post, make films, make money from her illegal activty but nobody elsemay refer to it

Tweet D - Points out what shoud have happened long ago! Mermaids should never have got off the grond as SG should have been detained and prosecuted on her return from Thailand!

JessicaWakefieldSVH · 22/03/2019 07:30

LimeKiwi

You were asked to explain why each tweet was unlawful.

AstonishedFemalePersonator · 22/03/2019 07:41

The word "mutilated" in Tweet A was pretty strong but I can't see the problem with the rest of the tweet or with the other tweets.

CuriousaboutSamphire · 22/03/2019 07:48

What word would you have used, Astonished ?

We use the term female genital mutialtion quite a lot,i it is abhorrent and illegal.

Cutting off a boys penis and testicles is male genital mutilation and is also abhorrent and illegal.

I can't see how CF could have got her point across without using the word. But SG seems to have 'got away with it' for some reason!

JessicaWakefieldSVH · 22/03/2019 07:49

We use the term female genital mutialtion quite a lot,i it is abhorrent and illegal.

Yes, why are male genitalia different or requiring different words? That’s not fair.

WeepingWillowWeepingWino · 22/03/2019 08:04

Asking questions that need to be asked in order to keep children safe and to protect single sex spaces that women have fought for, confronting out-and-out lies is shit stirring, is it Lime?

So you don’t think investigative journalism, for example, is a good thing?

TRAs are terrified of people like Julia and Nic, because they ask questions in a calm, clear manner than expose the nonsense of trans ideology time and again. They only want affirmation. They say they want a debate and then refuse to debate with anyone with an opposing view.

I’ll bet Susie Green didn’t want Julia there, because god forbid anyone should expose her in front of her fawning audience.

There was nothing illegal in Caroline’s tweets.

LimeKiwi · 22/03/2019 08:46

Is shit stirring is it lime

Yet again, intent. I didn't say what you said was at all. Are people not getting what I'm saying on purpose or something Confused

CuriousaboutSamphire · 22/03/2019 09:27

Are people not getting what I'm saying on purpose or something I think it is more you keep slightly changing what you are saying, are internaly inconsistent!

For example: you still say you and I agree, depsite us using different words, referring to different things and my saying I disagree with you. You change your terms (platform to individual for example)

Also you don't answer a question you have been asked, instead you give an opinion about something slightly tangential, ignore any additional information / correction.

We only have what you actually type to go on. If we are all 'misunderstanding' you maybe it is you, the common denominator.

Deep breath, start again? Please don't just disappear, debate, even when confusing, is useful/interesting.

JessicaWakefieldSVH · 22/03/2019 09:35

Are people not getting what I'm saying on purpose or something confused

You’re not answering the questions regarding the tweets. What’s unlawful about them? Intent is to inform.

LimeKiwi · 22/03/2019 09:36

Stifle the individual if deemed hateful was what was said.
I agreed.
So that means we agree on that point then.

LimeKiwi · 22/03/2019 09:44

Maybe it is you

Nope, cheers for that though.
I'm not going to start doubting myself. I've said it several different ways just because people didn't understand the first time about intent so I tried again.

CuriousaboutSamphire · 22/03/2019 09:55

So that means we agree on that point then. That is clear, unequivocal. Your original response was not... that is what I mean.

I'm not going to start doubting myself. Why doubt yourself? I am trying to explain that how you choose to respond is causing numerous others to misunderstand you. If you can't hear that, take it on board, then your writing style will continue to cause such misunderstanding!

LimeKiwi · 22/03/2019 10:05

That is clear*

Good! I finally got there then lol