Help Stella Creasy make misogyny a hate crime

[thinkingaboutLangCleg]

From Stella Creasy MP today:

I am emailing you as someone who has expressed an interest in my campaigning surrounding women's rights. Since the Upskirting Bill in 2018 I have been campaigning to make misogyny a hate crime. After some promising initial recommendations from the Law Commission's report into hate crime our campaign has recently taken another exciting leap forward.

Today in the House of Lords, Peers will be debating our amendment to require all police forces to record when a crime is motivated by misogyny. We need your help to raise awareness of this and encourage members of the House of Lords to support this proposal and this message tells you how to do that.

This amendment to the Domestic Abuse Bill has been tabled by Lord Russell who is a cross bench peer, and it has support from members across the House of Lords. If there is a lot of interest in this proposal at this stage in the legislation, then we will be able to have a vote to include it in the Bill itself and make it become law. And that's where you come in.

Please use your social media to tell the world this debate is happening and encourage members of the House of Lords to take part and listen. Below are some suggested tweets you can send - and you can find a list of Members of the House of Lords who are active on twitter here.
lordsdigitalchamber.co.uk/twitter/?page=2

'Today members of the House of Lords have the power to help victims of Domestic Abuse and empower police investigations by making misogyny a hate crime! #MisogynyHateCrime'

'Today the campaign to make misogyny a hate crime to help tackle domestic abuse comes to the House of Lords - follow Clause 70 of the Domestic Abuse Bill to find out more'

'Member of the House of Lords? Want to tackle domestic abuse? Please join today's debate on Clause 70 of the Domestic Abuse Bill to find out why making misogyny a hate crime can help! '

'Do you think victims of domestic abuse deserve better support? Do you want to see misogyny recognised under hate crime law? Do you want every police force to follow best practice? Watch tonight as the House of Lords has the opportunity to do all of that. #MisogynyHateCrime'

If you know of anyone else that would like to receive these emails, please do direct them to sign up to our mailing list here:
working4walthamstow.co.uk/make-misogyny-history-campaign

[DancelikeEmmaGoldman]

What BabyItsAWildWorld said really. The notion of “hate crimes”, which aren’t actual crimes, is dubious. It creates a dangerous category of wrong-think, weaponises misunderstandings and hurt feelings of the malicious, wastes police time and suppresses freedom of speech.

A former Australian Attorney-General opposed a similar bill on the grounds that people had a right to be bigots. It didn’t go over well at the time, but I’m not sure he was wrong, in retrospect. (mobile.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-24/brandis-defends-right-to-be-a-bigot/5341552?nw=0)

I don’t enjoy men calling me names, but the problem is not their speech, but the ways society shaped their attitudes to women. Bridling their tongues won’t change their hatred of women.

[Al77]

Misogyny should be a hate crime definitely. Incitement to violence maybe but Non crime hate speech shouldn't even be a thing in a liberal society.

[MichelleofzeResistance]

I don't want misogyny to be a hate crime.

FWIW I agree with Bunting

There is no need for new and exciting laws. There is a crying need for existing law to be policed thoroughly and properly, without prejudice or partiality, even when the victim of a crime is female. The institutionalised, currently very fashionable prejudice against females that pervades government, police and everything currently needs confronting. Tucking it nicely behind a new, shiny, carefully pomo'd and worded new law will do nothing except hide it better.

[MichelleofzeResistance]

Bear in mind: those busily pushing to subordinate female people in law to male people all flapped flags and made media-pleasing noises for the 100th anniversary of the suffragette achievement of the vote.

The hypocrisy and lack of conscience or integrity is hard to get your head around I know, but females really don't need more politician crafted pretty packaging to fight their way through. They just need prejudice against females to stop being so fucking fashionably acceptable.

[RoyalCorgi]

How can you make it a crime to hate women when your definition of women includes men?

[AnyOldPrion]

Hmm... Stella Creasey’s very first meeting when discussing this was Stonewall. If anyone is going to support her, it would seem to be wise to check and double check the terms and conditions. There’s a good chance it’ll be designed to support men more than women.

[peak2021]

As long as we define hate crimes then misogyny should be among them. Need proper definition though.

Given we have a misogynist as Prime Minister, I wonder what chance it has of becoming law though. I wonder what arguments he will get his supporters to use against it.

[ArabellaScott]

@Barracker

I have a caveat and shall now argue with myself:

I am opposed to hate crime in its entirety. However, for as long as it exists as a legal concept, women need to be under it for protection. My thoughts are that should misogyny become a hate crime strand, (even if this is a potential weapon that might be used by bad players against women) it ALSO may function as a halter upon the 'hate speech/hate incidents' of men (all varieties) against women. And there are more women to report hate crimes against us than there are men prepared to tell us what bitches and terfs we are.

My ultimate hope is that the flawed system of hate crime is dismantled. But so long as it stands, it is a weapon in the hands of men whilst women are disarmed.

Just thinking out loud.

Exactly this.

I wholeheartedly oppose the hate crime legislation and have written to MPs etc on the subject.

If they insist on forcing it upon us, women HAVE to be protected = otherwise the law is so uneven we are going to be enormously oppressed by it. Women will be charged and reported for hate crime, we can be sure that there will be plenty of men happy to use this legislation to enact misogyny and use the state as a proxy bully.

I suppose it's a case of having to play by the rules of the game while also trying to dismantle the game itself, longterm.

[merrymouse]

What is the point if she can't say that this statement from the ACLU is wrong?

I'm not trying to catch her out or score a point. I know the ACLU is American, but I think they have significant influence on what we generally accept as western values and policies.

If we can't define 'woman', how can a concept like misogyny exist philosophically or legally?

[merrymouse]

I feel I need to underline this point - the ACLU isn't saying that there is a common trait that women share, and trans women have this trait. The ACLU are saying there are no common traits.

[RozWatching]

IIRC Stella Creasy answered the Staniland question and told a mother that her daughter should be able to cope with a penis, or words to that effect, so this is a bit rich coming from her.

Hate crime law has been twisted into something unrecognisable. I do think there are cases where something like it is needed, eg drawing a great big swastika on the wall of a synagogue is not just vandalism, but adding misogyny to this mess isn't going to help women.

And Stonewall's involvement is a red flag.

[Mollyollydolly]

After seeing the bloodbath and ridiculousness of what's happening in Scotland with the hate crime bill I'm not in favour. And what's to bet the first case under this misogyny law would be a trans person trying to prosecute a woman for misogyny. I don't trust Labour and I don't trust Stella.

[UppityPuppity]

IIRC Stella Creasy answered the Staniland question and told a mother that her daughter should be able to cope with a penis, or words to that effect, so this is a bit rich coming from her.

So in Stella’s world - misogyny should be a hate crime, but indecent exposure - that’s absolutely fine!!?? Actually I am not surprised.

[SirVixofVixHall]

@Barracker

Who else suspects that misogyny will end up being used as a weapon to prosecute a woman (gynae) for hatred of a man (no gynae, no miso-gyny)?

How does she define misogyny?

Yes. Just what I was thinking too.

[thinkingaboutLangCleg]

Hmmm, I hadn’t thought as far as the possibility of ‘misogyny’ being redefined to include biological men.

[merrymouse]

@thinkingaboutLangCleg

Hmmm, I hadn’t thought as far as the possibility of ‘misogyny’ being redefined to include biological men.

I don't know about hate crimes, but existing discrimination law already allows for protection of people who don't have a particular protected characteristic but are perceived to have that characteristic.

For instance, somebody can be the victim of discrimination because it is assumed that they are muslim, regardless of whether that is true.

However, while I think we have a commonly agreed definition of 'muslim' I'm not sure that Stella Creasy could explain why somebody might be a target for misogynists.

[BaggoMcoys]

I think all hate crime should be scrapped. Though, while hate crime laws exist I do think sex should be covered by them. However, I think this one will be about gender.

I don't trust Creasy or this bill. I can imagine it being used against women who say twaNw.

[MichelleofzeResistance]

misogyny should be a hate crime

Misogyny will be carefully designed to be mean mostly anything that upsets a male who identifies as a woman.

The first people in court charged with misogyny will be biological females saying things like biology exists/female people need sex based rights.

It will be rather like Miranda Yardley being taken to court by a non trans person for transphobia.

[MummBraTheEverLeaking]

I'm sorry but with my cynic head on I can see this fast becoming if a woman says a TW is a male she'll be the one arrested for making a misogynistic hate crime.

What the definition of 'woman' is has to be spelt out absolutely. Trouble is they won't do it. They either say this includes TW which could result in the above scenario which would be an absolute fucking disgrace. Or they state the biological female definition, Stonewall etc have a massive hissy fit, throw the PHOBE word around and before you know it Stella will be doing her own Nicola Sturgeon style pandering video.

Personally, I'm not going to get behind someone who tells a mother that her daughter will just have to get used to a penis in her single sex space. She can fuck alllllllll the way off.

[nauticant]

If misogyny were to be taken seriously and acted against vigorously by the Police and the CPS this would overwhelm the criminal justice system. This means that either nothing will change or particular types of misogyny will be taken seriously and the rest of it will be ignored much like how things currently are.

Having misogyny as a hate crime being a weapon put into the hands of a particular set of sub-groups will do not favours for women.

[nauticant]

I'm always keen to share this contribution from Creasy to the debate:

twitter.com/stellacreasy/status/975440621765873664

The question Creasy was answering was from a mother complaining that her daughter was having to tolerate and accept indecent exposure from a boy identifying as a girl.

[Manderleyagain]

Anybody know what happened with the debate in the Lords? Or have I missed it on this thread, if so sorry? It looked like the wording was to make crimes against someone on the basis of their sex a hate crime - with the definition of sex matching the EA2010.

[thinkingaboutLangCleg]

Oh shit shit shit shit shit shit shit. I didn’t see the October public meeting held jointly with Stonewall.

Oh Stella, why? You could have kept your head down on the trans issue, you could have side-stepped it. Or maybe that’s just not possible any more.

Why did Stonewall have to be involved in a meeting about misogyny anyway? They’ve already got sexual orientation and gender reassignment.

OK. I get it.Women must not be allowed to have anything of our own. So disappointed in Stella.

[merrymouse]

So disappointed in Stella.

At a basic level I'm disappointed when any MP tries to create legislation without being able to explain its purpose, whether its this or laws to protect statues.

I've read articles where she argues for this legislation, but its all gobbledegook if you can't explain what a woman is and why somebody might hate a woman.

[MichelleofzeResistance]

What's happening to Joanna Cherry is demonstrating clearly what happens to female MPs who don't stay at all times on a male centric message. Vanishingly few female people are allowed up the ladder, we have nothing like equal representation, and it is an unfortunate fact that the females that do have almost all got there by being successful at the game of patriarchy. The current fashion requires not only being male centric but demonstrating active gynephobia. This is not an exaggerated term: the kind of abuse being directed to Joanna Cherry and any other female speaking for female rights is not considered acceptable towards any other group.

It's very depressing, but this is what is needed for female people to realise, the time is past for being nice and believing rubbish about equality being achieved. It too me until my 40s to begin to realise what a massive, massive issue it is for females in this country to have so little representation or part in government and other positions of power. Even the little we have have become targets for male people wishing to identify as women, and women are being expected to cheer this on as such a lovely, positive thing.