Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Scottow verdict: Guilty

384 replies

DeployTheTut · 14/02/2020 10:46

I have no words. Reports from Joani Walsh and Maya Forstater at the Trial in St Albans

twitter.com/mforstater/status/1228261217212522497?s=21

twitter.com/joaniwalshi/status/1228259484801359872?s=21

OP posts:
Thread gallery
17
MrsSnippyPants · 19/02/2020 18:42

Go and read the whole thread MissChardonnay.

Then you will see you are a little bit misinformed.......

MissChardonnay · 19/02/2020 18:43

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Lordfrontpaw · 19/02/2020 18:45

But sauce for the goose ought to be sauce for the gander...

MissChardonnay · 19/02/2020 18:51

But surely from a legal perspective this is no different from using another protected characteristic as the focus of your insults - e.g. insulting somebody for being disabled or a POC.

Cascade220 · 19/02/2020 18:59

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Lordfrontpaw · 19/02/2020 19:05

Yup. It’s all part of being womanly surely - along with cat calling, told to ‘cheer up luv’ and getting your bum pinched. Same old same old, didn’t realise the police would take me so seriously...

Datun · 19/02/2020 19:15

Exactly. Nice legs, shame about the face, sixteen-sixty, spot the grot - the list is endless. From tart with a heart, to Ho Ho Ho.

Why is it so much worse when it's directed to a trans person, rather than a woman?

BustedWench · 19/02/2020 19:17

I wasn't found guilty of abusing TW. I was found guilty of being annoying... Which I'm finding some posters on here are Grin

theflushedzebra · 19/02/2020 19:17

I'm not sure the police would be quite so quick off the mark to prosecute someone who, say, insulted someone in a wheelchair, with a comparable insult.

I don't think the courts took reasonable account of the fact that Kate had blocked Hayden on twitter - so how was it harassment?

Plus there seemed to be incorrect info about tweets said either in court, or in the reporting of the case - if someone retweets something from an account that blocked you, you don't get to see it, it says "tweet unavailable" and tweets from protected accounts cannot be retweeted at all. It's pretty unlikely that you'd come across a tweet from an account that has blocked you - unless you purposely look for it.

Good luck Kate Thanks

Langbannedforsafeguardingkids · 19/02/2020 19:30

Why is it so much worse when it's directed to a trans person, rather than a woman? because the trans person in question is biologically male? And so doesnt realise thst such comments and worse are a pretty standard part of most womens lives?

Also, personally I think Kate was found guilty of being annoying only because she is biologically female. It stinks.

I wonder if Caroline could take the cps / police to court for discrimination based on the protected characteristic of sex because it mystifies me how the cps could prosecute Kate yet do nothing about the far more extensive online abuse, intimidation and stalking of Caroline.

Cascade220 · 19/02/2020 19:37

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MrsSnippyPants · 19/02/2020 19:37

I think the vast majority of judges haven't got the first bloody clue about how Twitter works.

Cascade220 · 19/02/2020 19:37

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Datun · 19/02/2020 19:39

MrsSnippyPants

I think the vast majority of judges haven't got the first bloody clue about how Twitter works.

I'm sure you're right. At the very least, they should have an expert on Twitter standing right next to them. Wasn't the last judge confusing emails with tweets?

Datun · 19/02/2020 19:41

As sorry as I am, Kate, that you've had to go through this (and all fingers crossed for a successful appeal) but it has highlighted this ludicrous application of the law.

I'm not sure it's much consolation, Kate, but this is absolutely bang on. You're a pioneer.

Langbannedforsafeguardingkids · 19/02/2020 19:51

Yes, agreed - Kate you're a modern day suffragette.

MrsSnippyPants · 19/02/2020 19:54

They were Datun.

I am clearly on some sort of terfblocker list, so on occasion I am discussing something and someone says 'did you see what x said on Twitter?' and I can't see it as I am blocked.

I then have to log out of my account in order to see some Tweets, or people have to screenshot them to show me; the point being I have to GO AND LOOK FOR THEM, simple as that. I don't think judges grasp that, and the law Kate was prosecuted under is not fit for the internet age.

Datun · 19/02/2020 22:41

the point being I have to GO AND LOOK FOR THEM, simple as that. I don't think judges grasp that, and the law Kate was prosecuted under is not fit for the internet age.

Completely agree. And it will come out.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 19/02/2020 23:43

I find Hayden and Hayden's mate Harrop immensely annoying, and yet...

DuLANGMondeFOREVER · 19/02/2020 23:58

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Neither do three wrongs.

CharlieParley · 20/02/2020 00:18

MissChardonnay

Scottow seems to have created multiple accounts with the sole intention of abusing a TW online, and was specifically targeting her trans status - e.g. 'pig in a wig'.

Kate did not do that.

She tweeted 12 tweets directed at Hayden over a period of six months from her original account which had tweeted many thousands of other tweets. By no stretch of the imagination does this qualify as "created with the sole intention of abusing a TW online".

After Kate was arrested, she never tweeted anything at Hayden again. She created two new accounts in order to continue to join in Twitter; neither of these two accounts communicated with Hayden in any way.

As the ruling by the judge makes clear, a total of five tweets among a great many others from those two accounts were understood to be talking about or referring to Hayden, however obliquely. Again, this does not qualify as "created with the sole intention of abusing a TW online".

If that had been the case, Kate would have tweeted directly at Hayden and focused almost entirely on that. Five tweets for a prolific tweeter, even if sent in the course of just one week, do not qualify. As a pp pointed out, instead of doing as you think, Kate blocked Hayden to ensure no more interaction between them.

As for "e.g. pig in a wig" there is not much of an e.g. about it. A total of three tweets directed at Hayden were found to be offensive and that mostly because Kate accurately sexed Hayden (despite claims to the contrary, misgendering is not a crime).

"Pig in a wig" is also not a trans-specific insult. It is a very well known phrase which typically refers to an overweight female, or more generally an unattractive female. Although the female in question attempts to make herself look more appealing by what she wears, the effect is that of drawing attention only to her obesity or unattractiveness. Which is crudely expressed as "pig in a wig". Kate applied to Hayden an insult usually levelled at women, not men.

"Mutton dressed as lamb" is a similarly sexist phrase almost exclusively used to refer to women.

Can't say I feel particularly sorry for her...

You don't have to. There have been several free speech cases in recent years where I felt no sympathy at all for the defendant, but still considered their prosecution unwarranted, an overreach by the state and a worrying development.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 20/02/2020 00:30

The thing about free speech is that it's not free at all if it only applies to people you agree with. If people aren't free to say disagreeable things, well, there's always someone who finds just about anything that could be said disagreeable, so unless you want public discourse that's composed of nothing except "nice weather we're having" and "puppies are cute" you're going to have to learn to live with some people saying things you vehemently disagree with.

WotchaTalkinBoutWillis · 20/02/2020 00:33

So did she tweet pig in a wig then? As you're implying she didn't and that's not what I read?

WotchaTalkinBoutWillis · 20/02/2020 00:44

Pig in a wig is not a trans specific insult
Even if you see it as being an insult up for anyone, why, why would you tweet that? To or about anyone?
If it's aimed at a person or about a person with misgendering to boot like I've read it was... just... not surprising it comes across like that.
Hence the found guilty verdict.

MissChardonnay · 20/02/2020 00:46

Because the trans person in question is biologically male? And so doesn't realise that such comments and worse are a pretty standard part of most womens lives?

IME, men are much harsher to each other. Laddish blokes wouldn't blink an eye about calling their mate a 'fat bastard' for instance, but I feel most overweight women would be pretty offended by a friend saying this to them.

Either way, a lot of the comments on here seem effectively the female equivalent of 'what about the men'. I often eyeroll at lots of the stuff the TRA's come out with, but I don't really buy the concept that calling a TW a man is 'just speaking the truth'. My manager is unquestionably fat but I'm sure she'd take issue with me saying 'yes, you need to go and speak with Wendy....she's the fat woman who sits by the printer.'

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.