Hello Feminist Chat. My first thread - really nervous.
So earlier this evening I was distracted whilst the evening news was on. I only caught half the story but it peaked my interest. So I did a bit of googling (as you do).
I apologise in advance as I’m still unsure how to post links to anything on the internet but the story’s title is: Dolly’s Law: Trolls to face AVO’s, five-year jail sentences under new NSW Legislation. Website is 9news.com.au.
Dolly’s story is a tragic one. A beautiful 14 year old girl committed suicide due to internet bullying. A story that these days had sadly become far too common. Here in NSW we have over the past few years have introduced new laws, usually in relation to a public outcry. Some examples are - the coward punch (used to be called a king hit) generally involves someone coming up from behind and throwing a hard punch at someone’s head, often resulting in death or serious injury. Skye’s Law - this one is personal to me I knew the baby girl it was named after. Too upsetting to explain so please google.
At face value Dolly’s Law looks awesome too. I really abhor bullying and am a big proponent of The Bystander Effect. I.E. bystanders speaking up. But in the news item there were a few things that were worded in a way that made me go hmmm. Particularly after having seen what’s happening in the UK Posie Parker questioned under caution with a reference made to “test case”. Also the recent events with Graham Linehan.
These are quotes from the article that I find strange:
“The Attorney-General says the NSW changes will cover conduct by juveniles but he expects children’s courts will usually put young offenders into diversionary programs rather than prison”.
“The government is essentially clarifying the Crimes Act to make clear that online activity can amount to stalking and intimidation”.
“This is not about protecting people’s injured feelings. This is about protecting people against potentially devastating psychological and tragic consequences”.
Ok so item 1 obviously I don’t expect teen/child bullies to be gaoled (yes the US spelling in the headline irks me). But the law is named after a 14 year old girl that was bullied by her peers.
Item 2 re-read the last 8 words. How will this be defined (remembering Posie and Glinner).
Item 3 when words are literal violence and dictionary definitions become hate speech. This imo really leaves the floodgates open.
Now down here we can have an AVO taken out. I’m not personally familiar with the law myself, but if this helps to extend protection for victims of DV and stalking - excellent. Why though is it put together with a law to help prevent bullying, instead of extending protections to these victims.
Maybe I’ve been down too many rabbit holes. But this just feels sketchy to me. Like it’s appealing to emotion (and Dolly’s case was heartbreaking) sometimes this is how stuff gets passed by stealth. I just keep thinking test case.
Sorry for the long post. I will reply for a bit. Then take a break (time zones people) and get to other replies tomorrow.