Mel O'Drama
Admin
LV
12
- Messages
- 13,889
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 28,220
- Awards
- 29
- Member Since
- 28th September 2008
The new hate crime law has now come into force, creating quite a stir this week, what with J.K. Rowling daring the police to arrest her.
Since there is a lower bar which covers "insulting" behaviour and requires proof that stirring up hatred was "likely" rather than "intended", there has been a backlash from those fearing the loss of freedom of expression.
Much of the explosive recoil seems to focus on the trans aspect. I've just spent some time on YouGov, and here's how it's looking from the current votes:
Once again, though, the comments section gives these stats context, since many of the comments focus on the whole biological gender debate tied in with the trans aspect, with little to no mention of the additional protection this will afford those discriminated against on the basis of age or disability. Rather like discourse around Brexit having an unhealthy focus almost entirely on the issue of Immigration, it seems opposition to the new law is being sold almost entirely on its inclusion of protection for gender identity.
It's a different story, however, when a question is framed around another aspect of the law:
This brings me on to the aspect of the law that I find most concerning. I oppose sexism and would back the rights of anyone subjected to it, but women do not have a monopoly on this. It sickens me that casual sexism towards men is so socially acceptable that it's invisible and appears to have not even been considered for inclusion. If gender prejudice is to be protected, let the law work both ways. The quiet voices are the ones which most need to be heard.
I'd be interested to find out your views on the new law.
Since there is a lower bar which covers "insulting" behaviour and requires proof that stirring up hatred was "likely" rather than "intended", there has been a backlash from those fearing the loss of freedom of expression.
Much of the explosive recoil seems to focus on the trans aspect. I've just spent some time on YouGov, and here's how it's looking from the current votes:
- Over 60% of respondees are opposed to the law (46% "strongly opposed")
- 54% of voters feel the law will make Scotland less tolerant (47% "a lot less tolerant")
- 75% of voters are concerned that the law will limit freedom of speech (59% "very concerned")
Once again, though, the comments section gives these stats context, since many of the comments focus on the whole biological gender debate tied in with the trans aspect, with little to no mention of the additional protection this will afford those discriminated against on the basis of age or disability. Rather like discourse around Brexit having an unhealthy focus almost entirely on the issue of Immigration, it seems opposition to the new law is being sold almost entirely on its inclusion of protection for gender identity.
It's a different story, however, when a question is framed around another aspect of the law:
- 63% of voters feel women should have been afforded protection. And, as the article says, those demands will be met:
...some feminist groups have raised concerns that the absence of sex as a protected characteristic in the legislation leaves women unprotected.
The Scottish government has promised to introduce a separate misogyny law "in due course" following a report by the barrister, Helena Kennedy KC.
This brings me on to the aspect of the law that I find most concerning. I oppose sexism and would back the rights of anyone subjected to it, but women do not have a monopoly on this. It sickens me that casual sexism towards men is so socially acceptable that it's invisible and appears to have not even been considered for inclusion. If gender prejudice is to be protected, let the law work both ways. The quiet voices are the ones which most need to be heard.
I'd be interested to find out your views on the new law.