Notts police to record harassment as a misogynistic hate crime

[grimbletart]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-36775398

Are they the first to do so I wonder?

'Give an inch and they take a mile'. 'They' meaning women, I think.

How lovely.

I'd like to live in a world where we're bringing SEX (not gender) barriers down too. But we do that by ending discrimination/hate crime against women, not by pretending that it doesn't exist.

I don't understand the the 'give an inch, take a mile' comment. Do you mean that women will manipulate this new crime category for their own nefarious ends?

I did mean I wasn't coming back but I opened the MN app and it came to this I did not mean women I meant government and law. Applauded for starting gendered policing but where may it ago but now I am leaving now that I'm clicking away from the thread, but in a way I'm lucky I did as I've been misconstrued again

And I mean in terms of policing and law etc

Yay for gendered punishments and everything beginning to be based on gender in a time when we're trying to make gender a non issue.

Gender is, or at least should be a non issue, sex which is what this is about sadly isn't a non issue, because so very many men like to make it an issue.

And also I'd say men are threatened more with murder, you know because they are murdered more, albeit at the hands of other men.

And yet, you'd be wrong.

I guess it's the general fear of things creeping, give an inch and they take a mile.

I have no words for this statement though. Apart from, blimey!

Maybe re-read your posts before posting twit as you are so often misconstrued?

Going back to what scallops said at the beginning, I would have expected that DV could also be recorded under this as a hate crime too as I'm quite sure that many instances of DV are also instances of misogynistic hate.

Twitt, what did you mean by this bit - but it could also be implemented in other ways that could be against women ? Don't disappear, I'd be interested to hear what you think.

I did not mean that FWR posters do not care when a loved one gets a shoeing on a Saturday night in the pub. I meant that FWR posters are not going to be overly concerned about classifying men beating up other men as a new category of hate crime (and I don't think men would care either).

If men want to work misandry into the statute book, then that is something for them to take up as a cause.

You see with the male on male violence stuff there are already projects and campaigns to highlight significant areas of male on male violence such as knife crimes. People don't tend to argue about why they aren't focussing on strangulations or gun crimes as most people can see that there is a trend of knife crime violence and to target that would be a good thing.

On the other hand when it comes to targeting violence against oppressed groups such as #BlackLivesMatter or violence against women, this logic seems to fly out of the window and suddenly targeting specific crimes doesn't seem like a good ides. I wonder why? Is it because people don't believe there is a trend of violence in those areas? Or is it that they don't want to recognise oppression and the violence that comes with it?

One thing I do know is that so much energy is wasted just defending the fact that hate crime is even a thing. It is disheartening.

No, you have got the wrong end of the stick. I was responding specifically to Twittwoo about why I didn't think creating a hate crime of misandry was necessary. I was also trying to politely tell her that FWR wasn't a place for any discussion about misandry.

Leaving aside whether people think it actually exists or not, feminism is not about misandry and men's problems per se. In the same way that a Tory conference won't be trying to strengthen ties with Trades Unions, or Labour won't look to ease the tax burden of the top one per cent.

There is no blackmail. It isn't your fight, nor would I expect it to be. As you say, women have every right to devote their time and energy to women's problems. I think you have read an intention that was not there.

No problem.

About bloody time.

The only times I've ever been abused and harassed by strangers, it's been because I'm a woman. Men need to be shown that it's not acceptable to follow someone from a bus-stop making comments, grab hold of my arm to stop me leaving a bar, or yell at me from across the road.

It is a hate crime because not only is it harassment, but it was motivated by an attribute that I have (ie. female), just as racial abuse, or yelling at people because they are gay or lesbian is.

Good. Not before time.

I'm not sure that because women suffer abuse more than men it makes the actual abuse worse

Yeah it does. Because systemic inequalities are so obviously worse for women. It's same thing as racism: hurtful as it is if a black person insults me over my race, I don't have systemic cultural and economic injustice to contend with, so that doesn't underpin the abuse. It's worse if a white person is racist because we are already privileged.

But you are giving him attention and taking it away from women . Just ignore.

I live in Nottingham but I can't say I get harassed much, but that's possibly cos I'm a bit middle aged now and don't look quite as appealing noawadys.
I have in the past had the usual shouting from vans etc which is annoying. I do know others who have had more full on approaches, perhaps the incidence is increasing?

It is a good thing that some way of reporting and tackling it is in place. Men do need to know that they will be held to account for bad behaviour. Education from school level should be done also, it starts with little boys.

"Hate crime" has a very specific meaning. Heterosexual white males cannot be the victims of hate crime, because they have systematically oppressed women, homosexuals and people of colour in the past, and to some extent still do, and never were the victims of systematic oppression at any point in time.

A man hating another man as individual person does not make a hate crime!
Really, it is not rocket science - inform yourself what a hate crime is, before crying "what about the men!".

"Hate crime" has a very specific meaning. what is it then ? Because Heterosexual white males can be complainants for offences such as racially aggravated public order offences - are they not hate crimes, within the definition you have ? You're right, btw, its not rocket science.

Come on Vestal, answer poster cadnowyllt 's question!

I understand "hate crime" is reserved for minority groups, so a white man would be subject to a hate crime if they were living in an area like Detroit or Jackson (majority black areas) so long as it can be proven they were targeted specifically because of their race.

This is why applying hate crime status to crimes against women is problematic, women are not a minority group but they are an oppressed group.

There should be a separate crime called "Misogyny" altogether.

Heterosexual white males cannot be the victims of hate crime

Yes they can. That is a ridiculous statement.

I know the family of a "white heterosexual male" , a young man of 17, who was murdered in what was most definitely a hate crime.