Woman told by PSCO that her thinking is wrong and she needs to educate herself.

[Signalbox]

Woman is visited by a PSCO and told to remove an "offensive" sticker, told that her thinking is wrong and that she needs to educate herself. Also that TWAW is a fact.

FFS what the fuck is going on...

twitter.com/IXthoth/status/1558864403746922496

Is there any line more infuriatingly condescending than ‘educate yourself’? Quite apart from the abuse of position and illogical arguments, it is enraging to hear this woman being directed to read and change her mind by someone who sounds like they don’t do an awful lot of reading or thinking.

"Educate yourself" in this context just means "indoctrinate yourself".

Anyone with an ounce of critical thinking and a foothold on reality who actually does attempt to "educate" themselves generally arrives at the position that genderism is ideological metaphysical bs.

The way that PCSO behaved is an utter disgrace and if anyone needs educating it's her - specifically on things like the legality of daring to have an opinion in a supposedly free country.

"The PCSO is expressing her own political opinion, and expecting that for reason this can be substituted for law."

Yes. This is the realm of a legislator, a politician. You cannot do this outside of Parliament, and, if you wish to do this, you must first be elected as a member of parliament, and your political opinion subject to various levels of rigorous debate in the two Houses, and you will need a lot of parliamentary support.

And even then, nothing may happen.

im not sure that’s quite right is it? See this case where someone was charged under Section 5 Public Order Offence for wearing a T-shirt that implied hillsborough disaster was pest control.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/can-you-arrested-wearing-offensive-8087967.amp

”This relates to the display of threatening and abusive sign and writing, likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.”

the sign is on her front door so definitely can be counted as a display. But it then comes down to what counts as “threatening and abusive sign likely to cause alarm or distress”

im not saying her sign fits that description, I’m just saying we don’t have the automatic right to be offensive.

But this is exactly the problem with 'non-crime hate incidents'.

If someone perceives your action/words to be offensive then that can be recorded against your name as a 'non-crime hate incident'. And presumably this is what triggers these visits.

www.college.police.uk/app/major-investigation-and-public-protection/hate-crime/responding-non-crime-hate-incidents/changes

Definition of a non-crime hate incident:

'A single distinct event or occurrence which disturbs an individual, group or community’s quality of life or causes them concern.

National standard for incident recording (NSIR)'

Fair Cop's analysis of recent changes in those guidelines:

www.faircop.org.uk/non-crime-hate-incidents-updated-guidance/

PCSOs are not volunteers, they are Special Constables.

I saw an ex regular being interviewed, he said the specials came in three forms.

1. retired regulars who wanted to use their skills

2. people who genuinely wanted to give something back to their community and aspired to be regulars.

3. those who wanted a uniform and power

He said the first two were easy to work with, the last were a nightmare.

I think it is a problem with PCSOs that will get worse, the police are changing into a graduate entry organisation but PCSOs still don't need any formal qualifications.

My take is that the PCSO is a TRA, or has had Stonewall type training. They see themselves as a PC, someone in authority with the right to tell people what to do.

They haven't remotely done any critical thinking and I think the police force and it's rainbow lanyards has to think about what they r teaching, as they will employ some people like this who will take advantage of their position.

The PCSO also sees this lady as a bit of an easy target - female, on their own, they might even have known their trauma history etc.

That Lib Dem councillor is a doughnut if they can't see this as harassment.

Which police force was this? Sorry if already asked I can't see it.

im not saying her sign fits that description, I’m just saying we don’t have the automatic right to be offensive.

Where are you getting "offensive" from in what you quote? It's talking about "threatening and abusive". That sticker is nowhere near that. The PCOS' behaviour, on the other hand...

Not known which police force/area this is.

Another hot take from Twitter:

'PCSO seemed reasonable IMO.

Or do you think "You can be shitty about strangers in the privacy of your own home, but not outside" is an unreasonable position for a public order official to take?'

For what it's worth, the sticker was criticising ideology, not people. At the point people are not reasonably allowed to criticise ideology, we're really in trouble.

For clarity - the sticker said 'trans ideology erases women'. The clue that it's a message about ideology, not people, is in the use of the word ideology.

Chilling that anyone could think this is OK. Fucking police state. Trans ideology is simply that an ideology, people must be able to challenge ideologies.

Special constables are volunteers. I believe they are only paid expenses.
PCSO's are paid staff, they aren't allowed to arrest members of the public. The ones where I live do the 'door knocking' ,' intelligence' type of work. Ours asks if we have any issues that the police should know about . e.g. drug dealing etc.

If I was told to educate myself , I would smile sweetly and say' I have actually, which is how I have reached this conclusion'. I would also ask what laws I had broken and ask for that in writing.

No "we all" don't. YOU might personally find it offensive, as the PCSO did, but that really is a matter of opinion.

As I've said above, if one person finds something offensive, that is enough for an 'incident' to be recorded as a Non Crime Hate Incident.

I would call something that was threatening and abusive offensive.

Again I don’t think her sign is. I was more thinking of how people can express themselves whilst protecting themselves.

going back to that t-shirt example, it was considered abusive because it was so offensive. Is it possible if someone complains a sign like that is offensive it could be considered abusive ? It just worryingly feels like it could come down to what someone thinks is offensive enough to be abusive.

Interesting that the PCSO says that one problem with the sticker is that 'people in the real world might see it and begin to think along the same lines' (paraphrased)

If there ends up being an allotment for this one, I am ready to dig very deep.

to Bella.

Lost for words beyond that.

Who has 'educated' her? This is actually a far more important question than one daft PCSO going off-script.

Attended the PC Gul School of Risible Nonsense no doubt.

More seriously, this indoctrination and politicisation of the Police HAS to be reversed - no wearing of ANY badges or lanyards apart from the neutral Force Badge their uniforms should revert to as they were - totally politically neutral, their cars should return to what they were - cars in standard, recognisable Police colours - no stickers, no flags, no showing allegiance to one community or another, the Police are there to serve EVERYBODY EQUALLY ALL THE TIME.

I can't get past the fact that there had already been a police visit in response to a complaint about the sticker and the police had decided there was no issue.

This PCSO then turned up on the pretext of enquiring about local drug crime before launching into her bullying diatribe.

She only backed off when the feisty daughters stood up for their mum.

I picked up on this, very telling indeed.

And, it occurs to me that at no time did the woman or her daughters resort to bad language or aggression, despite the extreme provocation.

I'm not sure I would have had such self-control.

At around 50 seconds in the clip up thread

PCSO: I think that is quite damaging, because what you are doing is trying to give other people the idea of what YOU believe, which, I think you need to do a lot more reading on. personally. And now because someone has spoken to you about it, you're going to keep it there because you feel that that's your right to do so

Seems concerned that 'people in the real world' might see the sticker and it might make them change their belief in TWAW (which, according to the PCSO is not a belief, but a FACT).

BTW, a non crime hate incident is bollox IMHO. If it’s a crime , in other words illegal, then investigate. If it's not criminal, leave it alone. To believe that stating a biological truth is a hate crime is ridiculous. To distress a woman who is vulnerable is nothing short of evil, bullying behaviour and unacceptable.