Scotland's new "stirring up hatred" law

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:

  • 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.
 

Crimson

Telly Talk Enthusiast
LV
1
 
Messages
2,080
Reaction score
6,709
Awards
8
Location
Philadelphia
All other considerations aside, everyone should be terrified of any government controlling what's acceptable speech. Too often people are OK with these kinds of laws as long as it's "their side", which overlooks the inevitability that the controls will one day fall into the hands of "the other side".
 

Snarky Oracle!

Telly Talk Supreme
LV
4
 
Messages
16,647
Reaction score
4,579
Awards
13
Location
In that attic above Falcon Crest
There's now a movement in the States to label any commentary not in line with the preferred establishment narrative as "hate speech," certainly online.

Even the ACLU, once the American stronghold for defending "your right to say it, even if I don't agree with it" has decided that, perhaps, they just might need to agree with it after all.
 

Angela Channing

World Cup of Soaps Moderator
LV
16
 
Messages
14,098
Reaction score
26,003
Awards
42
Member Since
1999
I think it's a good law that is being widely misrepresented by its critics and the media. It really doesn't restrict anyone's freedom of speech beyond what it already on the statute book. Freedom on speech in the UK is also protected by the European Court of Human Rights and this law doesn't supersede any European law.

In spite of what many people are suggesting, offensive speech is not criminalised by this legislation. Now in Scotland, just because someone might feel offended by what someone has said it doesn't mean a hate crime has occurred whereas previously it could be considered as such. The new law is would a "reasonable person" think it was hate related which is a standard that already exists in other laws. It means that JK Rowling can continue with her transphobic diatribes (my opinion) because a reasonable person, i.e. wider society, might think it's a reasonable opinion to hold. Further, just making hate based comments alone mostly would not be sufficient for prosecutors to charge anyone. The new would largely be used to decide whether it was an aggravator in another crime, such as an assault, and so warrant a stronger sentence.

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 who most need to be heard.
There is a 2 stage process regarding the changes. Hate crime relating to sex will be addressed in a second bill. Although it is widely being described as an anti-misogyny bill is will be about gender based hate crimes in general. The reality is that these crimes are overwhelmingly against women so I can see why it has been presented as dealing with hate against women but it will address wider issues relating to hate on the grounds of gender.
 

Angela Channing

World Cup of Soaps Moderator
LV
16
 
Messages
14,098
Reaction score
26,003
Awards
42
Member Since
1999
But what actual transphobic diatribes (your opinion) has Rowling engaged in?
I was specifically thinking about her series of tweets this week in which she highlighted a series of trans women and called them all men and suggested that trans rapists and murderers were no different from trans women who lawfully and peacefully go about their everyday lives. She has also denied that trans people were targeted by Nazis in the Holocaust, she has called trans rights dangerous and should be stopped and has repeatedly suggested that all trans women are dangerous predators.

The Scottish hate crime law is so much more than dealing with transphobia and it's important not to lose sight of this being a significant piece of legislation to deal with the large increase in a wide range of hate crimes in recent years.
 

Snarky Oracle!

Telly Talk Supreme
LV
4
 
Messages
16,647
Reaction score
4,579
Awards
13
Location
In that attic above Falcon Crest
I was specifically thinking about her series of tweets this week in which she highlighted a series of trans women and called them all men and suggested that trans rapists and murderers were no different from trans women who lawfully and peacefully go about their everyday lives. She has also denied that trans people were targeted by Nazis in the Holocaust, she has called trans rights dangerous and should be stopped and has repeatedly suggested that all trans women are dangerous predators.

The Scottish hate crime law is so much more than dealing with transphobia and it's important not to lose sight of this being a significant piece of legislation to deal with the large increase in a wide range of hate crimes in recent years.

I trust your judgment and accuracy. Udderly.

So does he:

 

Barbara Fan

Admin
LV
12
 
Messages
10,722
Reaction score
24,333
Awards
28
Location
Scotland
Member Since
2000
Favourite Movie
Witness, Vertigo, Spellbound
Our numpty parliament wanted to send a Male (who then Trans into a female) RAPIST to a female prison
You couldnt make it up :mad:

Your sexuality is determined at conception. Its a fact

JK Rowling stands up for woman rights and just about anyone i know agrees with her.
Concerns have also been raised about the impact the reforms could have on single-sex spaces for women and girls eg such as female only toilets or changing rooms, wards in hospital etc

1712252046206.jpeg


Police Scotland is on its knees at the best of times without this being thrown into the mix

from the Spectator
Within the first 24 hours of Humza Yousaf’s hate bill becoming law, over 3,000 complaints were submitted — with the First Minister on the receiving end of more complaints than JK Rowling.

To bad if you are burgled - they wont come and see you and they have better things to do that this piece of useless Yusaf legislation

And if thats the case I hope that all the MSPs who spout anti English rhetoric will be arrested and there are many and all of the hateful people on Twitter

Free speech in Scotland - Dont you dare - North Korean here we come and I hope they get hammered at the election

1712252476160.jpeg


1712253354269.jpeg
 

Frank Underwood

Telly Talk Superstar
LV
1
 
Messages
4,284
Reaction score
3,116
Awards
6
Member Since
June 2001
Trans people were targeted by Nazis during the Holocaust? That's a new one to me. It's hard to believe anybody was openly trans back then.

I also don't believe all trans women are predators, but treating trans women the same as biological women has the potential of letting the fox in the hen house (so to speak.)

And if we want to get technical, trans women are men. I fully support their right to live their life as they wish, but I don't think it should be required to refer to their new or preferred sex. If people who say "trust the science" actually believe that, then they know there are inherent differences between biological sex and transitioned sex.

As for this particular law, there's so much government interference these days when it comes to "appropriate" speech that I'm weary of any legislation such as this.
 
Last edited:

Angela Channing

World Cup of Soaps Moderator
LV
16
 
Messages
14,098
Reaction score
26,003
Awards
42
Member Since
1999
Our numpty parliament wanted to send a Male (who then Trans into a female) RAPIST to a female prison
You couldnt make it up :mad:

Your sexuality is determined at conception. Its a fact

JK Rowling stands up for woman rights and just about anyone i know agrees with her.
Concerns have also been raised about the impact the reforms could have on single-sex spaces for women and girls eg such as female only toilets or changing rooms, wards in hospital etc

View attachment 52029

Police Scotland is on its knees at the best of times without this being thrown into the mix

from the Spectator
Within the first 24 hours of Humza Yousaf’s hate bill becoming law, over 3,000 complaints were submitted — with the First Minister on the receiving end of more complaints than JK Rowling.

To bad if you are burgled - they wont come and see you and they have better things to do that this piece of useless Yusaf legislation

And if thats the case I hope that all the MSPs who spout anti English rhetoric will be arrested and there are many and all of the hateful people on Twitter

Free speech in Scotland - Dont you dare - North Korean here we come and I hope they get hammered at the election

View attachment 52030

View attachment 52031
Anti-transgender opinions should be separate from the anti hate crime law. Are you suggesting that trans people should not be protected from hate crime?

You say "Free speech in Scotland - Dont you dare" how do you think the law will stop free speech because as I explained in my previous post, it doesn't.
 

Angela Channing

World Cup of Soaps Moderator
LV
16
 
Messages
14,098
Reaction score
26,003
Awards
42
Member Since
1999
Trans people were targeted by Nazis during the Holocaust? That's a new one to me. It's hard to believe anybody was openly trans back then.
Transgender people have been around as long as humankind has existed. Transgender people were murdered in the Nazi holocaust along with disabled people, Roma people, Jewish people and other minority groups.
 

Angela Channing

World Cup of Soaps Moderator
LV
16
 
Messages
14,098
Reaction score
26,003
Awards
42
Member Since
1999
It's about forcing people -- individually and collectively -- into saying things that everybody knows objectively are untrue.
How exactly is the Scottish law forcing anyone from saying things they know are untrue? It doesn't. Please read the legislation rather than the nonsense that the right wing media are putting out about it.
 

Angela Channing

World Cup of Soaps Moderator
LV
16
 
Messages
14,098
Reaction score
26,003
Awards
42
Member Since
1999
Indeed. If "they" can you get to believe a man in lipstick is a woman, "they" can get you to believe anything.
The law aims to stop hate and violence on the grounds of age, disability, religion, sexual orientation and transgender identity and is not trying to get anyone to change their views on "a man in lipstick".
 
Last edited:

Frank Underwood

Telly Talk Superstar
LV
1
 
Messages
4,284
Reaction score
3,116
Awards
6
Member Since
June 2001
Transgender people have been around as long as humankind has existed. Transgender people were murdered in the Nazi holocaust along with disabled people, Roma people, Jewish people and other minority groups.
Currently, I've found that between 0.6-3% of the world's population is transgender. That number is growing, which is unsurprising in today's woke climate.

Still, it's interesting how they make up such a small percentage of the world's population given the attention they receive. And while transgender people may have always existed, I doubt there were many who were open about it in the 1940s. They may have also been targeted by the Nazi's, but this is likely why it's not common knowledge.

The law aims to stop hate and violence on the grounds of age, disability, religion, sexual orientation and transgender identity and is not trying to get anyone to change their views on "a man in lipstick".
Shouldn't that just fall under crime? What makes these laws seem suspect is they come across as elevating certain groups of people above others. Isn't discrimination in housing, the workforce, universities, etc. already criminal? Violence certainly is. The purpose of elevating a crime to a "hate" crime has always escaped me. Is beating a woman or a transgender person more egregious than beating a cisgender man? Is beating a POC more egregious than beating a white person? Apparently so under hate crime law.
 
Last edited:

Snarky Oracle!

Telly Talk Supreme
LV
4
 
Messages
16,647
Reaction score
4,579
Awards
13
Location
In that attic above Falcon Crest
How exactly is the Scottish law forcing anyone from saying things they know are untrue? It doesn't. Please read the legislation rather than the nonsense that the right wing media are putting out about it.

I rarely hear "right-wing media". They're as bad as your sources.

And you should see the stats on violence against men.
 

Crimson

Telly Talk Enthusiast
LV
1
 
Messages
2,080
Reaction score
6,709
Awards
8
Location
Philadelphia
And while transgender people may have always existed, I doubt there were many who were open about it in the 1940s.

"Transgender" people didn't exist, per se, in the 40s because it's a new concept that lumps different groups -- which would have previously been termed transsexuals, transvestites and plain ol' male cross-dressing fetishists -- under one umbrella. Under the Weimar regime, transvestites had some degree of social protections which were stripped away by the Nazis. However there's no evidence of transvestites being specifically killed by the Nazis. Those that were appear to have either been Jewish or homosexual. So the claim that some make that "transgender" people were exterminated by the Nazis is a bit like saying left-handed people were killed by the Nazis. Sure, some were, but not because of that.
 
Top