Hate crime according to the government

[NeurotrashWarrior]

Sex not listed.

Identity is.

C'mon government read your own laws!

*A hate crime is any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim, or anybody else, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards someone’s:
• race
• religion
• sexual orientation
• transgender identity
• disability
These aspects are known as ‘protected characteristics’.

A hate crime can include verbal abuse, intimidation, threats, harassment, assault and damage to property.

A hate incident is behaviour which isn’t a crime but which is perceived by the victim, or anybody else, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on the 5 protected characteristics.*

https://hatecrime.campaign.gov.uk/?utmsource=Facebook&utmmmedium=social&utmcampaign=SocialSignIn

I'm tempted to report that government page as a hate crime against women.

Sex isn't included in the relevant laws, as a deliberate exclusion, I thought. There is some discussion about including it in future. Notts police did a trial to monitor reports of misogyny and it was considered a "success".

Transgender identity is protected but not sex.

So only biological men can be victims of misogynistic hate crimes.

Even women who identify as women are excluded.

Unfortunately, sex is not included in hate crime legislation. It was purposefully left out. With three women killed every eight days, at least 30% victims of domestic abuse by males, at least 40% victims of male physical or sexual violence, at least 70% victims of sexual harassment, and a whole host of open discrimination against female people from the way crimes against women are reported to the way female politicians are treated, hate crime against women (that is crimes against women which are motivated by hatred, malice and ill will against women) is such a widespread, all pervasive phenomenon in our society that it is deemed impossible to police and legislate against.

The Scottish Government set put to include it, but then the genderists got their fingers into that pie and the recommendations currently debated is for a hate crime based on gender hostility and no mention of sex while all other protected characteristic continue to be included apart from those originally aimed at protecting women (marital status, pregnancy and maternity and sex).

From the Scottish Government workshop I attended on this in Edinburgh earlier this year, it is clear that this isn't a use of gender-meaning-sex for the prudish but the now prevalent deliberate use of gender in the sense of gender identity. Much of what we fed back to the civil servant chairing the debate at our round table (there were many tables) was new to her about sex discrimination etc.

Suffice it to say that I do not hold out much hope for hate crimes on the basis of someone's sex ever being legislated against. We will end up with legislation that protects men claiming womanhood twice - on the basis of gender reassignment and on the basis of gender, while gender-non-conforming women and girls will have no protection.

Yet what happened to Caro isn't a hate crime.

Videos including rape threats? Not a hate crime
Constant abuse online? Not a hate crime
Threats of turning up at her place of worship? Not a hate crime
Constant deliveries to her house? Not a hate crime

She isn't covered for her sex.
She doesn't seem to be covered for her religion either.

How can something be a hate crime when we are to blame for it happening in the first place

With our short skirts
Maybe we had an opinion about something
Not doing as we are told

And what with daring to have a vagina

Sex should be included as a subject of hate crime so both men and women can be protected.

The Law Commission is currently considering the law on hate crime, particularly as to whether sex should be included.

www.lawcom.gov.uk/project/hate-crime/

I think it should be, if other protected characteristics are, although I can see how that might lead to a serious strain on the justice system!

However, the more I read about hate crime and in particular its widening to “hate incidents” (ie just hateful behaviour, rather than an actual crime motivated by hate), the more I think this is a slippery slope in the criminal law, based on identity politics more than anything, and we should never have started down it.

Sex was an obvious and deliberate omission from the original law as it is

1. Too prevalent and
2. Seen as normal /something that women and girls should put up with

Eg if someone thinks a man is gay and yells something related at him aggressively , I think that's a hate crime
If a man aggressively yells at a woman or girl eg slut, slag, tart, show us your tits etc (it's there a way to do this other than aggressively? I would say not). this is normal and a bit annoying but not a hate crime

It's obvious why it was excluded and that's really depressing.

Notts police got massive pushback on including sex, apparently touchy hysterical women would be reporting men for whistling.

In the end most of the things reported were crimes including some quite serious but that's not of interest to the public. The idea that women are over sensitive and just dying to report men for nothing is a strong view in general.

Also I haven't heard a man whistle for years! When they use to I hated it though it means I want to fuck you and is not what you need when walking home from school! I put it in same thing as all the other street harassment.

I can understand the rationale for hate crime even if I think it needs to be applied very stringently. However hate incidents is the most ridiculous piece of legislation, I can't find one good thing to say about it. If we want codes of conduct in public places then ok but they should apply to everyone.

I did wonder that charlie.

But sex is so starkly absent when written down like that and referring to protected characteristics.

Plus, 'identity.'

Recent hate crime in Colorado Springs, USA being investigated:

www.krdo.com/news/top-stories/colorado-springs-trans-man-attacked-at-his-home-for-acting-gay-/1067088082

In this case the victim is a transman, while the attackers perceived her as lesbian. So is it a homophobic or transphobic hate crime?

Good question but all transgender hate crime is essentially homophobic.

We definitely need hate crimes to be recognised.

It's just so disingenuous to give a nod towards the EA and not include sex.