Miss B , age 14, is challenging the College of Policing’s Guidance on Hate Crime

[ChristinaXYZ]

Miss B is a 14 year old who is gardening supported by FairCop.

"Like many teenagers, Miss B. likes to discuss cultural issues with her friends and peers as part of a diverse and open school environment. However, the new APPHCG guidance from the College of Policing could see a “non-hate crime incident” recorded against her name, should a person to whom she is speaking – or a third party, such as a teacher or fellow pupil who did not even witness the incident – report her, however unfairly or mistakenly, for expressing hostile or prejudiced views. "

As the College of police are not appealing Harry Miller's win both Miss B and Sarah Phillimore can now proceed.

Sarah Phillimore's gardening is considering whether The police should not secretly record us as 'hateful'

Such a dilemma @Whatwouldscullydo

Not sure I can make up my mind

I expect this particular 14 year old is extremely worried, pissed off, angry, maybe even horrified.
We all know the shit that's happening in schools. She doesn't need to give her specific personal reasons to anyone.
Good luck to her.

*So just to make it clear, Miss B has never experienced such an incident, she is challenging this law on the basis that she might hypothetically possibly one day if precisely the right confluence of events should happen to fall together, no matter how unlikely that is,
This.
So for something completely hypothetical that hasn''r even happened?!

Artichoke leaves, that was one amazing post. I will be saving it for future use, as it just nails the issue for girls.

My own rural council had this exact scenario written as policy into their 'trans guidance' until forced to withdraw it. They are not backing down though, they are saying it was ' best practice at the time'

A brief look around FWR would make it clear that it is happening. All the time.

This makes me so angry.

• You're not allowed to complain about this male supremacism and biological disadvantage of being born female while the male people at the heart of it tell you that they want you to pretend that sex doesn't exist until you have absolute cast iron proof you have been harmed

• Then we'll exclude you from services, tell you you're a bad person who doesn't deserve services for not making your life all about a male stranger who matters more than you do, and threaten to take action including police and a criminal record while refusing to record what happened to you

• We'll tell you repeatedly that what happened to you, whatever it was, was not bad enough to justify anyone caring, and you probably deserved it for being traumatised/disabled/of the wrong faith/thinking you had rights

• If you fuss and try to push this or go public, you risk a huge pile on and death threats (Hi JKR) and rape threats while we try and get you silenced

• If you succeed in getting it to court, we'll get our rich lobby to fight on the grounds that males are much, much more important and you're a bad person with bad friends who has no rights in law anyway and ought to just be harmed quietly and appreciate it.

Just wtaf are people thinking here that they don't believe children should be allowed a voice to stand up to policies that harm them ?

It's flat out male supremacism. Covered with a police enforced demand not to mention that it's bleeding obvious sex exists and doesn't shift because we all know who wins and who loses and isn't even allowed to talk about their needs.

@Artichokeleaves

You know what is shit for children? The female ones?

Being told they have no choice but to undress and shower alongside teenaged males, because the teenaged males want it and have feelings, and the female children's feelings about it don't matter . They are much less important than the male ones, and their bodies are not theirs to control for their own privacy, dignity and comfort, their bodies are something male children have a right to make use of.

That is shit. That is absolutely sickening. That is something that anyone who truly cares about children should be absolutely up in arms about.

We are telling female children that they cannot say no to a male, regardless of how it affects them or makes them feel, if saying no would be unkindly refusing the male an experience and access to them that the male would like.

It actively discriminates against girls who cannot share mixed sex spaces, and have no option but to subject themselves to all the shit and unpleasantness and being scolded for being prejudiced and unkind for not making special males happy over having their own trauma, disability, culture or faith catered for. The male gets included. The male is a magic person who makes the female children's inclusion rights vanish like snow off a hot brick; they're protected under the Equality Act until suddenly..... inclusion is something only for males, not females.

And female children are being told that if they argue about this, if they speak out for their equality of their own feelings and needs and access, their own inclusion, their right to not believe that a male child is something other than a male child who wishes to have a different identity, who does not believe that meeting the diverse needs of male children should remove all inclusion and privacy and dignity from female children who do not consent ?

They're being told the police could be involved.

This creates two castes of children: the ones who get to do whatever they want regardless of impact on others and be the centre of everyone else's service, and the ones who are allowed to do nothing but provide service and shut up or else.

If you're worried about what is shit for children, worry about that and not about whether a teenager is seeing all of this and hating it and wanting her voice to be heard. Against adults telling her to not pick up all that stress which might affect her exams and just submit quietly .

That is shit for children. That is truly shit.

I love this post.

I think this is pertinent. It shows how to deal with double bind situations.

images.app.goo.gl/QYK6Aq6WUxtpsG9E7

So, challenge in private and through official procedures. Namely, go straight to the legalisation. In the public arena use the 'how to deal with double bind steps'. Muster support only when you are sure you are in a safe space.

Well said Artichokeleaves both posts. This ideology is harming our children especially girls, why can't they stand up against it?

Sick of people telling us what we can and cannot care about.

So for something completely hypothetical that hasn''r even happened?

Yes

Its quite straight forward

Someone wants to bring a law in….fair enough

Others look at the law and think ‘ooooh thats a bit shit’

Others raise an objection to the law BEFORE its an actual law….also fair enough

Democracy in action

artichokeleaves 👏🏻

I have a similarly aged DD who is likewise annoyed by the situation. Initially she had to keep calling friends different names (e.g. Sara is now Simon), then she had to listen as 'genders' were explained to her.

She distanced herself from those girls (in a girls school) and most of the time doesn't have to hear it about it. The threat is that a group in her class act as gender police, if someone says something factual and pro-science it could be turned on them.

This is why I'm delighted to hear about this court case and any movement towards freedom of speech.

@EeeICouldRipATissue

*So just to make it clear, Miss B has never experienced such an incident, she is challenging this law on the basis that she might hypothetically possibly one day if precisely the right confluence of events should happen to fall together, no matter how unlikely that is, This. So for something completely hypothetical that hasn''r even happened?!

You're giving a "this" to a poster who thinks the worst must come to pass first before an applicant can have locus standi to challenge poorly drafted legislation and policies?

This ideology is harming our children especially girls, why can't they stand up against it?

My 13 year old and her friends can talk fairly fluently about the zillion genders and the like. She is very #bekind and we’ve argued about trans ideology before.

However when a boy in her year “came out” as trans with a new name and girl’s uniform she said was how cool it was and how the school guidance officer had talked to them all about being kind and accepting. She said she’d previously thought the transgirl was “just” gay and that he’d had an obvious crush on a boy who was popular and dismissive. She tried very hard to not use the “dead name”.

However, I could sense that in spite of what she said there was anxiety and I assured her that it’s the right thing to be kind to a troubled child but it was normal NOT be ok with the concept of this child with a penis intruding in their changing spaces, showers or toilets at school. I told her that even though SHE might be ok (although I could tell she wasn’t) there would be some girls who would feel very awkward, maybe for religious or cultural reasons or maybe if they had their period.

She relaxed after that. She swims a lot and is comfortable getting changed around other girls but not males. Given her specific school (not public) I don’t think that mixed sex changing will ever happen but she knows that if it does we would complain loudly. The transgirl currently changes in a 3rd space.

There is an exquisite awkwardness and self-consciousness to teenaged girls, no matter what they may say. People need to respect their boundaries. It makes sense that a girl of a similar age “gets it”,

I don't think it would be possible for an adult to effectively bring this case. There are 14 year olds who have brought cases and our upcoming generation have had enough of policing and virtue signalling. One of my DGS believes this authoritarianism is doing more harm than good for equality

@RufustheFloralmissingreindeer

So for something completely hypothetical that hasn''r even happened?

Yes

Its quite straight forward

Someone wants to bring a law in….fair enough

Others look at the law and think ‘ooooh thats a bit shit’

Others raise an objection to the law BEFORE its an actual law….also fair enough

Democracy in action

This!

Otherwise, the "chilling effect" reigns, with the risk it will never be challenged formally because no-one dares move a foot out of line to be a test case. Why? Because it would require fighting a personal prosecution and filing for a review of the overarching policy at the same time.

But I think Blueberry and Eee see the ramifications of their preferred limit on use of judicial remedies as a feature, not a bug.

@BlueberryCheezecake why do you think the 14 year old girl, who has legitimate concerns, should be prevented from taking this to court?

So if you see a potential accident such as a toddler walking alone in the road by a blind corner do you wait until they are hit till you take action? Or do you challenge the parent looking the other way? And say oy! your kids in danger?

Because we are walking into male rule like it or not and it's going to kill people children are at risk

Personally I would rather act now than wait

@Artichokeleaves

You know what is shit for children? The female ones?

Being told they have no choice but to undress and shower alongside teenaged males, because the teenaged males want it and have feelings, and the female children's feelings about it don't matter . They are much less important than the male ones, and their bodies are not theirs to control for their own privacy, dignity and comfort, their bodies are something male children have a right to make use of.

That is shit. That is absolutely sickening. That is something that anyone who truly cares about children should be absolutely up in arms about.

We are telling female children that they cannot say no to a male, regardless of how it affects them or makes them feel, if saying no would be unkindly refusing the male an experience and access to them that the male would like.

It actively discriminates against girls who cannot share mixed sex spaces, and have no option but to subject themselves to all the shit and unpleasantness and being scolded for being prejudiced and unkind for not making special males happy over having their own trauma, disability, culture or faith catered for. The male gets included. The male is a magic person who makes the female children's inclusion rights vanish like snow off a hot brick; they're protected under the Equality Act until suddenly..... inclusion is something only for males, not females.

And female children are being told that if they argue about this, if they speak out for their equality of their own feelings and needs and access, their own inclusion, their right to not believe that a male child is something other than a male child who wishes to have a different identity, who does not believe that meeting the diverse needs of male children should remove all inclusion and privacy and dignity from female children who do not consent ?

They're being told the police could be involved.

This creates two castes of children: the ones who get to do whatever they want regardless of impact on others and be the centre of everyone else's service, and the ones who are allowed to do nothing but provide service and shut up or else.

If you're worried about what is shit for children, worry about that and not about whether a teenager is seeing all of this and hating it and wanting her voice to be heard. Against adults telling her to not pick up all that stress which might affect her exams and just submit quietly .

That is shit for children. That is truly shit.

This post cannot be quoted enough times. Thank you for articulating this.

In vain?! If people only gave money to causes guaranteed a successful outcome, rather than something they believe in and support, what a miserable place we would be in, no hope at all. I’m more than happy to donate to causes I believe in, irrespective of the outcome, you don’t need to worry about me.

Sonia Appleby did okay too.

The one I’m most looking forward to is Allison Bailey’s case. If she wins that, will people wonder why they donated so much money to Stonewall?

Being told they have no choice but to undress and shower alongside teenaged males, because the teenaged males want it and have feelings,and the female children's feelings about it don't matter. They are much less important than the male ones, and their bodies are not theirs to control for their own privacy, dignity and comfort, their bodies are something male children have a right to make use of.

This. Why does a girl always have to suffer first due to these policies before we can act?

@EeeIcouldRipATissue I'd like to know what you think about this.

Text for people using screenreaders.

Upper Caption:

Chicago School District 211 Grants Transgender Students "Unrestricted Access" to Locker Rooms

Lower Caption:
After the School Board voted 5-2 to allow male students who identify as female into girls' locker rooms, two students reacted

Two passport-style photos of students. The left image shows a smiling teenager with pink hair and glasses. This is labelled with the quote
"I'm ecstatic"

and attributed to a [named] Transgender Student at the school.

The right image shows a sad-looking teenage girl with brown hair. This is labelled with

"I feel uncomfortable my privacy's being invaded. As a swimmer, I change multiple times, naked, in front of the other students in the locker room."

It is attributed to another [named] student at the school.

That poor girl. The smirking transwoman because they managed to destroy women's safeguards and get to be in the same place where girls undress. That's appalling.

How do we know if we have hate crimes reported against us?

And if we do how do we get rid of it

Why is the focus always on women needing to sort out male issues?

Rapists are male. Women are told to take precautions rather than clear announcements to men than sexual attacks mean life in prison.

TW are men worried they will be attacked by men. Instead of men being told they must support TW in their spaces, women are told to accept men into their spaces.

Women and girls go to court to push back for rights that should not be in jeopardy.

Text for screenreaders. This was someone's answer to the Staniland question.

I'm actually saying that you are demonising trans women with a penis by refusing to undress in an enclosed space with them.

This is the social environment that Miss B is growing up in. And Miss B is supposed to wait until someone does report her for resisting the social pressure?

No, we should be preventing people using legal means to subjugate women and girls!

So for something completely hypothetical that hasn''r even happened?!

Yes, this is how laws work, you see. They are not worked out and applied after every instance of a A Bad Thing Happening. Clever people with important jobs think about how a law would work (a 'hypothetical' situation) and then discuss how the law might prevent that Bad Thing from Happening. Then they try to make the law as effective a prevention as possible.

We don't all just sit about waiting for Bad Things to happen and then go 'oh no waily waily what will we do', because that would be a bit silly.

HTH. Have a wee think, you'll get there eventually!