Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Thread gallery
17
anniegun · 15/10/2023 13:31

Tory propaganda spread by the Daily Mail to keep this terrible government in power. We could all be huddled, starving around a fire fed by the last of our furniture and some people would be saying "yes but, labour might be worse"

quantumbutterfly · 15/10/2023 13:31

duc748 · 15/10/2023 13:17

Fair enough. It's not like there hasn't been plenty of poorly thought-out legislation in recent years with unintended consequences, is it?

I do think, for any incoming administration, a good motto is, don't rush to yet more legislation; rather, try to ensure the laws we already have are applied properly.

Interpretation of the law is judicial isn't it?

It is helpful to know what the law is and how it has been interpreted and that interpretation justified, in the interests of open justice.

EasternStandard · 15/10/2023 13:33

I also don’t get pp insistence on the wording when it’s clear organisational bodies use the term hate crime

The Law Commission concluded in its ‘Hate Crime Laws: Final Report (PDF, 3.2MB)’ (published 7 December 2021) that making misogyny a hate crime may be: “more harmful than helpful, both to victims of violence against women and girls, and also to efforts to tackle hate crime more broadly” and that “…we have reached the view that hate crime recognition would not be an effective solution to the very real problem of violence, abuse and harassment of women and girls in England and Wales, and may in fact be counterproductive in some respects.”

bombastix · 15/10/2023 13:41

My point is that "hate crime" is a concept.

What the law actually does is aggravate the sentence. The "hate" is considered afterwards. Aggravated offences have not been extended for the reasons I gave below.

The notional idea of "hate crime" as an academic concept undermines the criminal law. Why it is needed a significant issue in of itself.

EasternStandard · 15/10/2023 13:51

It’s coming across as Labour led jargon and gaslighting at this point

The amendment was proposed. The Law Commission didn’t flail around with ‘concept’ and used plain English and legal reality and found

  • This is because expert opinion and major women’s groups, such as Women’s Aid and Rape Crisis, believe it may actually be harmful and make it even harder to secure convictions. In 2018, the Government asked the Law Commission to conduct a wide-ranging review into hate crime to explore how current legislation could be made more effective, which included whether ‘sex or gender’ should be added to the various characteristics currently protected by hate crime laws.

Labour coming back to this should make women question the outcome for them

Ofcourseshecan · 15/10/2023 13:54

cuckyplunt · 15/10/2023 06:50

It’s quite simple, call people by the pronouns that they choose to use?

No. Using wrong pronouns to pretend you believe a man is a woman is lying. If you actually believe it, of course, go ahead. But governments should not pass laws forcing people to lie.

ArabellaScott · 15/10/2023 13:55

bombastix · 15/10/2023 13:14

It's a good start but I want to campaign for people not using "hate crime". It's very confusing!

It's actually - crime committed, sentence aggravated (so increased in seriousness and so greater in length) if there is a relevant protected characteristic which has been integrated into the criminal law.

Transphobia is already covered explicitly.

Biological women are not. They should be.

Of course in Scotland we have the new Hate Crime Bill, which means anyone can accuse anyone else of committing a hate crime and requires no evidence. Can be reported online, anonymously.

viques · 15/10/2023 13:55

So they will let rapists out of jail and replace them with people who prefer not to be used as confirmation dupes for someone’s sexual kink or mental confusion.

Yep, that’s a vote winner right there.

ArabellaScott · 15/10/2023 13:56

bombastix · 15/10/2023 13:41

My point is that "hate crime" is a concept.

What the law actually does is aggravate the sentence. The "hate" is considered afterwards. Aggravated offences have not been extended for the reasons I gave below.

The notional idea of "hate crime" as an academic concept undermines the criminal law. Why it is needed a significant issue in of itself.

And there are still Non Crime Hate Incidents. Which are largely undefined, but can be recorded against someone.

bombastix · 15/10/2023 13:58

The Law Commission doesn't set government policy. They thought about changing the law.

The Ministry of Justice does. They would have to legislate. They didn't.

But in any event, the law has problems which in part the report recognised.

But "hate crime" is not anything but a policy concept. You will not find it anywhere in the criminal law as a phrase in England and Wales.

bombastix · 15/10/2023 14:01

@ArabellaScott - Scotland is frightening.

They invent fake law frequently. I am glad Sturgeon is gone. The simple minded nature of their criminal law recently is scary. Fortunately we take our time with this in England and Wales.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 15/10/2023 14:01

Any law currently being passed (and that has been passed in the last 13 years) has been agreed by a Tory majority.

The GRA and EA were both passed by Labour.

duc748 · 15/10/2023 14:02

Fortunately we take our time with this in England and Wales.

It's the way you tell 'em! 😁

ArabellaScott · 15/10/2023 14:02

bombastix · 15/10/2023 14:01

@ArabellaScott - Scotland is frightening.

They invent fake law frequently. I am glad Sturgeon is gone. The simple minded nature of their criminal law recently is scary. Fortunately we take our time with this in England and Wales.

the Hate Crime Bill was all Humza Yousaf's work.

He is still First Minister.

EasternStandard · 15/10/2023 14:03

bombastix · 15/10/2023 13:58

The Law Commission doesn't set government policy. They thought about changing the law.

The Ministry of Justice does. They would have to legislate. They didn't.

But in any event, the law has problems which in part the report recognised.

But "hate crime" is not anything but a policy concept. You will not find it anywhere in the criminal law as a phrase in England and Wales.

Obviously, where did I say otherwise? It was still proposed as an amendment and rejected due to the Law Commission report.

You running ragged with the term hate crime doesn’t change the fact it was proposed and rejected and Labour intends to propose it again.

It’s just gaslighting from a Labour loyalist. God knows why.

bombastix · 15/10/2023 14:03

ArabellaScott · 15/10/2023 13:59

This is again worrying. What kind of structural problems are there in the police for this guidance (again policy not law) to be required. The capacity for this to be abused seems massive to me.

bombastix · 15/10/2023 14:04

@EasternStandard - look, just stop being rude to me. I'm content to disagree but your attitude which is personal is unnecessary.

Ofcourseshecan · 15/10/2023 14:04

EasternStandard · 15/10/2023 13:20

Thanks for this. This seems most relevant

SJ – We see a fair bit of police attention being targeted against women who are being very clear that they support women’s sex-based rights, whether by banners, or meetings, or stickers and police investigating what you have written on Twitter. Presumably, if that was felt to be offensive by someone that you were advocating for women’s sex-based rights, could that be considered misogyny? It sounds crazy.

JS – It sounds crazy but that is the route we are going down. I wish people who were supporting the amendment would think about where it might take us. I don’t think it helps things women at all. I think it brings a lot of risks for women and I don’t think people fully understand that.

Why would I oppose making misogyny a hate crime? Surely it’s a good thing? Superficially, it sounds attractive, it sounds like it is fair because there are other hate crimes but I think it is misconceived. People don’t fully understand it and it could take us down the route of a woman who advocates for sex-based rights, for example that a woman’s refuge should not have to admit male-bodied people, that is a hate crime. That is where we are going if this amendment goes ahead.

SJ – At FiLiA, we are aware of that because a session around becoming an activist for misogyny was run by Stella Creasy MP, to learn about it and how they could advocate. We applied for a place and we were refused! So are Women’s Rights charities not allowed to learn about misogyny because it was deemed to be inappropriate?
**
JS – I had a Twitter exchange with Ms Stella Creasy and she was absolutely clear that transwomen would be covered by this law and transwomen can be victims of misogyny.

Show quote history

JS – I had a Twitter exchange with Ms Stella Creasy and she was absolutely clear that transwomen would be covered by this law and transwomen can be victims of misogyny.

So men could accuse women of misogyny for excluding them from women-only facilities. Brilliant. What great progress.

ArabellaScott · 15/10/2023 14:05

'There's a question of what is a woman and what is a man. But I would say a woman is someone who is born a woman or someone who under the GRA 2004 is certified as having transitioned from a man to a woman'.

'I support the GRA and don't want to see it rolled back. We brought it forward for a very good reason'.

Harriet Harman, from the Twitter clip above.

bombastix · 15/10/2023 14:05

@ArabellaScott - yes he was justice minister. Scary.

ArabellaScott · 15/10/2023 14:05

bombastix · 15/10/2023 14:03

This is again worrying. What kind of structural problems are there in the police for this guidance (again policy not law) to be required. The capacity for this to be abused seems massive to me.

Show quote history

Yes indeed, it's fucking mad.

EasternStandard · 15/10/2023 14:09

bombastix · 15/10/2023 14:04

@EasternStandard - look, just stop being rude to me. I'm content to disagree but your attitude which is personal is unnecessary.

Yeh it’s a tough one isn’t it, I can’t think where I’ve seen before from Labour lot.

I stand by it. It’s gaslighting. There are real issues with the proposed amendment hence the Law Commission report.

This idea it’s not possible is led by political bias. It obviously was possible, and can be, it yet it got rejected due to paragraphs I quoted.

EasternStandard · 15/10/2023 14:10

Ofcourseshecan · 15/10/2023 14:04

JS – I had a Twitter exchange with Ms Stella Creasy and she was absolutely clear that transwomen would be covered by this law and transwomen can be victims of misogyny.

So men could accuse women of misogyny for excluding them from women-only facilities. Brilliant. What great progress.

Edited
Show quote history

So men could accuse women of misogyny for excluding them from women-only facilities. Brilliant. What great progress.

Yes. Although women are already denied access to single sex rape centres if no men, but it would elevate it to a crime.