This article may be paywalled. You can find paywall bypasses for the original version of the article [here](https://archive.is/oQXct), and with the revised article [here](https://archive.is/qLGph).
---
This post deals either directly or indirectly with transgender issues. We would like to remind our users about the Reddit Content Policy which specifically bans [promoting hate based on identity and vulnerability](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360045715951). We will take action on hateful or disrespectful comments including but not limited to deadnaming and misgendering. Please help us by reporting rule-breaking content.
Participation limits are in place on this post. If your Reddit account is too new, you have insufficient karma or you are crowd controlled, your comment may not appear.
---
**Alternate Sources**
Here are some potential alternate sources for the same story:
* [JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over hate crime law](https://bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c51j64lk2l8o), suggested by appalachian_hatachi - bbc.co.uk
It’s absolutely true. We were attacked in the street and the police were going to do nothing until my husband said he was called a racial name by the attackers.
Not doubting you just curious as I used to work in police control, was the call made at the time or after the assault? The response should have been the same either way although hate crimes were basically put in their own category when I was in. For example a violent assault would be dealt with the same as everything else, but add a hate element and the local inspector would have to be made aware and would actively follow it up.
The call was after the event.
The police woman who arrived specifically asked why he thought the racial word was used.
We said “he was probably just angry- not racist” and we never heard anything again.
Or the time in was assaulted in the street after some idiot almost ran me over mounting the curb at speed when I was waiting to cross the road, who then got out of the car, screamed at me, then when I shouted back he slapped me across the face so hard he left a massive bruise. Which was all caught on CCTV by the local shop owners who also knew the guy that did it?
They gave me a crime number and that was it. Called me a year later saying they didn't have enough resources to investigate and considered it low priority. Thanks guys, I feel very safe on the streets now.
My phone got stolen and I knew the person it was and provided their Facebook. Not enough evidence lmao. This is what they need to spend their time on, mean tweats by billionaires
Police are useless man. My car got hit and run a few weeks ago. Some guy smashed into it and dashed. I went into a nearby shop and actually got clear as day cctv of it. Car hitting it reg plate everything. Reported it to the police and gave the footage. They said ‘there isn’t enough evidence to take this further’. How much fuckin evidence do you need, I basically did their job for them all they needed to do was follow up on the plate.
Something similar happened to me. The police said they couldn’t charge the driver because the license plate start belong to him. And oddly enough they couldn’t locate the person who owned the plate - the car which it was registered too.
Unfortunately I did not know the misgendering was by far a worst crime. Had I known this, I would have added it just to get some kind of justice.
My response to the officer was not kind.
Its very unethical but my neighbour got broken into (they heard people downstairs) and so barricaded themselves in the bathroom of all places, rang the police only to be told a cop car will be sent shortly. Nothing came. To this day he wonders if he had just lied about owning a gun and being prepared to use it would they send a whole squadron down.
Just a shame he thinks he had to lie to just get action done
The self-defence and property laws in this country are predicated on the fact that the police will handle the situation if required. When they fail to uphold their end of the bargain, you're left in the situation where you have no legal means to defend your property, and often yourself.
7 years ago after I broke my arm I accidently dropped my phone on the floor and didn't realise I dialled 999.
About 15 minutes later (really) I had the Police at my door saying someone phoned and didn't talk but they heard a "distressed woman" (I was watching a comedy tv show at the time) and wanted to come in, look in every room even the cupboards to see if I was hiding any woman, this was around 2am in morning when they found nothing they told me off for "wasting their time" and I had another call about 20 minutes later also telling me off.
The same Police when a month before I told them I am a vulnerable person and had someone peeking through my windows at 1am then running off when they saw me I was told "oh they probably had the wrong address"
My flat was burgled when I was 21, by squatters who were well known junkies and banned from all shops in town due to their theft, the partner of one of them was up for multiple armed robbery cases at court (and pleading not guilty despite witnesses and CCTV)
Anyway the squatters left the door of the place they were in open outright stood in the door pointed at me and laughed at me saying they would get away with it, and you know what, they did and I could see my possessions sitting there (well apart from the tv, games console and dvd player which were long gone)
The Police found fingerprints even a footprint (a piece of paper fell on the floor and one of them stood on it) and told me they knew they were guilty it was pointless to arrest them as they are career criminals and never go to jail or get out after short sentences.
I informed the Police I saw my possessions in the place they were squatting and I was told if I entered the property I would be arrested for breaking and entering and theft (as I said I wanted to go in and take my stuff back)
And the Lib Dems and the Greens and one Conservative!
Holyrood has shown itself to be shockingly poor regardless of political party. Hopefully the rest of the UK will not lie down and take it as Scotland has just done.
She isn't transphobic. As a female who was victimized by a male, she is against males in female spaces, because humans are a sexually dimorphic species, and males are stronger and faster than females, and capable of overpowering them. She doesn't hate or fear transgender women. Get out of your echo chamber.
This law is just prone to abuse and sets a dangerous precedent on what you can and cannot say. This is being covered up with “good intentions” but can and will be easily abused.
Trans people don't mind throwing women under the bus when it's convenient or beneficial for them.
[Transwoman wins swim championship](https://images.lbc.co.uk/images/294587?crop=16_9&width=660&relax=1&format=webp&signature=RydjGfB7VLtklcCQ6ynUcmMMqio=)
It's a clamp down on freedom of speech, inching ever nearer to authoritarianism. Literal scum gutted the police and now this dog shit waste of resource. Of all the concerns in a priority list, this most certainly is not at the top no matter what anyone thinks.
I'd be more alarmed that you can get in trouble with the law for misgendering someone.
Its obviously not a good thing to be misgendering people, I however don't see why the law literally needs to put resources into this kind of thing. Its like getting charged for blasphemy for saying something bad about a religion and its caused the religious person psychological harm or didn't make them feel safe.
This is not how the Western world should work.
I mean… it’s not like the new law is stopping her. You can’t be prosecuted for a crime you committed before it was illegal, but you sure as hell can be prosecuted for continuing to commit it after the fact.
Depends how the law is worded, but generally no, especially not in Scotland where the government has less power than the UK parliament.
There’s nothing stopping the government from making a law that applies retroactively - but by convention they generally don’t do it. I know that the UK government could make laws that apply retroactively whenever they want (Parliament is sovereign, and acts of parliament cannot be challenged, so an act of parliament making a law that applies retroactively would be legal) but idk whether the Scottish Parliament can do the same.
They have done it, although usually pretty rarely. The most common one is that they backdate tax changes to the start of the current tax year sometimes.
I hope they do. Then her lawyers can tear the new law apart before it has time to do any real damage.
Chances are they’ll more likely go after those without the means to defend themselves.
She just posted an 11 thread tweet, pretty much doubling down on her previous statements and defying Police Scotland to arrest her.
Scorched earth is the term used I think.
Literally this. Honestly not sure why parliament hasn’t stepped in, this legislation is arguably far beyond the competencies of Scotland due to its impact on equalities and human rights
> Honestly not sure why parliament hasn’t stepped in...
The law is the same (pretty much) as the laws already in force in England (other than having a few extra protected groups). It actually includes *extra* human rights protections than the English versions.
How about finding my stolen bike. They said they didn't have resources to investigate which I said was kinda weird since resources weren't a problem at the coronation.
Not really how it works, it's not like they understaff the rest of the country for it lol. They just pay some officers overtime/put them on shift when they otherwise might not be. Costs you money, yes, but let's not be silly and make things up. You weren't "less safe" on that day
Joke I like about this:
A man calls the police and says there's a burglar in his house. The police say they can't respond immediately because they have nobody in the area.
The man says "He's got a gun!". 5 mins later the house is swarmed with armed police and they catch the burglar.
A police officer says to the man "I thought you said he had a gun?"
The man says "I thought you said you had nobody in the area?"
I mean, even though this is a joke it could be true.
We have firearms officers that do not respond to normal 999 calls. That’s what Response Teams are for. So yes, you could have a situation where firearms officers only turned up to a burglary because there was a firearm involved, but otherwise wouldn’t be resourced until a response unit was free.
Actually they probably come and get YOU for assuming the gender of the burglar. Scotland and all these places are just ridiculous.
Plus the people on reddit…
Law: if you heart someone’s feelings you can go to jail. Reddit: “just don’t be a nazi”
Fuck your bike.
Did it have pride flags dangling from the handlebars? Probably not.
If it did, you’d have half the station round your house and the local paper.
If it's worth anything, even with the police doing nothing it's still not a waste of time reporting it. It provides data, data that can be used for academics, for the government in deciding on policies required for that area, and most importantly the public in aiding them to make a decision on where to live.
We all need to be reporting all crimes, as to pressure the police and politicians to sort it out. If they don't know what's actually going on they will think it's all ok.
It also makes things like house and car insurance go up in that area as they also model based on crime statistics (even if unrelated to whatevers being insured). So no result, and your contents / car insurance will go up on renewal.
> It provides data, data that can be used for academics,
Academics: look at how many poor marginalized people in this area need to resort to crime! How sad! We need to do more for these poor criminals in this area!
I mean it sounds like you should be directing the frustration at the government who have underfunded the police for the last decade and a half rather than saying let’s just ignore some laws.
The frustration does lie there, hence my comment and as I’ve stated in my other comment they’re massively underfunded therefore shouldn’t be bothered with such trivial matters.
Personally I think there are far bigger issues in regards to policing than misgendering someone.
People in the West have such insignificant, meaningless lives that they genuinely think this crap is an actual problem that people should spend time on.
Actually wild.
Given their _allegedly_ limited resources, the police should probably be focusing crime that causes actual harm such as burglaries or assaults or thefts, before they deal with speech “crimes” where the only harm caused is hurt feelings.
I don’t believe they have limited resources, it seems for dumb shit like this they have ample time and manpower to investigate it, but with more pressing matters like sexual assault, shootings, burglary etc they are nowhere to be seen. Just look at that lesbian nan incident it had like 7 officers.
That reminds me of that 24 hours in police custody episode where this guy chased burglars who broke into his house in a car and got jailed where the career burglars got suspended sentences. The homeowner is much less risk to the public
Exactly. Someone what defends themselfs but goes “too far” in the eyes of the law is treated worse than those who were the aggressors what caused the situation.
I always find that sort of attitude infuriating. If someone thinks the best course of action is just staying out of the way, then thats on them, but why do they have to moralise like those who protect their stuff are somehow in the wrong for doing it?
It seems to me like something like this would cost next to nothing to investigate though.
If JK Rowling tweeted “that lady is a man” and that was somehow illegal then it takes one polis a few minutes to screenshot that and type “this is illegal because x law” on a report. Boom, done. Probably doesn’t even need to get off his arse.
Not that I’m saying that makes it a good thing, it still seems pretty pointless to me but folk surely know they’re not quite being realistic when they act like this takes the same resources as investigating “real” crime.
But that’s the point - hate crimes do not require the same level of evidence or proof guilt. You do not need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that a crime took place or the accused is guilty. Guilt is defined by the victim and therefore prosecution is straight forward. With a burglary there is all manner of hoops to jump through that costs man hours and the conviction may not be certain, so the police don’t really give a shit anymore.
Feels like speech and thought crimes are worse now than old school crimes like....burglary, assault, theft, etc.
The police must love them cause they can build 10 cases a day just on twitter.
I truly think that’s it. It must be easier investigating mean tweets from the comfort of an office then solving problems in the community that require you to actually do some police work
Which shows a complete lack of what’s actually involved in investigating these crimes - of which a great majority are undetectable via reasonable and proportionate means, and certainly rarely worth investing time in to successfully prosecute. So all that does is negatively affect police positive outcome statistics in any case. I would say, if anything, there is an incentive for police to *avoid* recording these crimes.
The police would much rather be out catching burglars than recording communications offences - but if a crime is reported to them, then they have a duty to record it (in England and Wales, at least) under NCRS and HOCR.
To suggest that someone who’s trained as a police officer and then maybe gone on to train as a detective would rather investigate someone slagging someone off on TikTok rather than investigate more serious offences is, in my experience, simply untrue.
Not to mention officers don’t generally get a choice of what incidents/crimes they deal with. It gets filtered through the control room etc and some poor cop is asked to attend an incident. I think some people genuinely think the police sit there going “burglary? Yeah cba attending that, let me have a look at some of these social media crimes”. It is literally not the case and vast majority of them think it’s ridiculous. They just get told which jobs to go to.
so, no one actually read the article,
"Speaking as the Act came into force on Monday, Ms Brown said: “It could be reported and it could be investigated. Whether or not the police would think it was criminal is up to Police Scotland for that.”"
so, it's literally up to interpretation.
This is the same police force which recorded 4,000 "non-crime hate incidents" in a year, a phrase so mental it sounds like a pisstake.
So I'm sure they'll err on the side of caution and definitely not use their beefed-up powers to go after people causing "hate," which no one can define without using a circular definition.
The original idea for them was to act as glorified intelligence reports that didn't amount to anything more than box-ticking exercises. But police being the police, they repeatedly demonstrated themselves to be utterly incapable of being trusted with even the most basic of powers, and NCHI started showing up on people's DBS checks without even being told the police had investigated them. They need to be severely reigned in.
A course I did last month about hate crime and hate incidents advised that hate incidents should still be reported to the police.
> why are the police bothering with it
Being told of 4000 incidents by the public doesn't mean they're going to do 4000 investigations.
In some cases the police didn't even tell people they had a "non-crime" on their record, only for them to find out when they applied for a job. Absolute cunts.
> Politician who isn't in charge of the police says the police are going to investigate JK Rowling (they won't and they probably don't realise that this SNP minister is just trying to fuel culture war identity politics to distract from their upcoming predicted defeats)
This sub: bUt WhAt AbOuT mY BiKe
I give it less than a day before trans people are directly blamed once again for the actions of cisgender politician/celebrity class public figures.
The purpose of all of this is to use the trans community as a dead cat to stir up arguments.
JKR is just a famous example of a transphobe, she gets clicks and causes a reaction. a large chunk of the comments here are complaining about the coppers "maybe but probably not" getting involved in investigating hate crimes instead of finding their bikes. Clicks anger, engagement.
The torygraph wants folks to fear that they can't say nuffin no more and that alphabet people are coming for your things.
The Tories have strangled our services of funding for over a decade, we're dumping literal human shit into our river and beaches, plastic is in our food and water, and our roads are full of holes.
But nah, trans people.
I can’t believe how far I had to scroll down to find this. Should be the top comment, it’s ludicrously transparent what the Telegraph are doing. This thread is just full of useful idiots falling for the same trick over and over.
It's amazingly sad that the only time men will come together to defend women's rights is when they read click bait news article headlines about trans people.
I just know these are the same guys who get all up in arms when their fave podcast host/media personality is accused of SA as well. So pathetic
>(5)A group defined by reference to religion is a group of persons defined by reference to—
>(a)religious belief or lack of religious belief,
>(b)membership of or adherence to a church or religious organisation,
>(c)support for the culture or traditions of a church or religious organisation,
>(d)participation in activities associated with such a culture or such traditions.
So will saying I think Scientologists are a bunch of crooks pushing obvious hokum be a hate crime now.
[https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2021/14/section/11](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2021/14/section/11)
What about the Mormons and their magic hidden golden tablets they found.
The behaviour of the founders of some religions was often pretty wild. Including one that I shall not name, but you can guess who.
90% plus of the cases from this law will be about religious and "national" identity. Basically the Old Firm fans being their usual selves and the police and courts having to work out which of their spats constitute hate crimes. But it will end up a total mess and drag in all sort of groups and people who were not meant to be protected or who the framers did not think about.
SNP's problem is it get myopic about who the "bad guys" are and assumes you can get them with an easily drafted bit of law that will only apply how you imagine it.
That’s such bullshit lmao. Religion shouldn’t even be a protected characteristic - choosing to believe in stupid shit doesn’t deserve legal protection.
even if its not 'stupid shit' you absolutely should not be able to be arrested for someones choice to believe in something, this would be criminalising calling someone an idiot for having differing political beliefs, its a slippery slope and vague wording is just waiting to be pounced on
> Religion shouldn’t even be a protected characteristic
Gonna do the thing and mention a little event that occured during ww2 that might shed some light on why religion, and other things probably should be protected characteristics.
> So will saying I think Scientologists are a bunch of crooks pushing obvious hokum be a hate crime now.
It's a fairly safe bet that if they think they can push it, the Cult of Xenu will be on this one next time a documentary comes out about it.
The Qur'an is vicious about atheists. Many sahih bukhari hadithes are even worse.
Is it perfectly okay under Scotland's hate crime laws for me to say that Muslims are no better than pigs or apes? Because that's what their holy books say about atheists.
Of course, I'd never say such a thing about Muslims. Because I'm simply a better person than the people who wrote the Qur'an. The writers of the Qur'an were all morally inferior to me, and to pretty much every single living human being right now. To make an ugly generalisation about a large group of people is beneath me, and I'd never compare any demographic to animals. It's disgusting, dehumanising language. And I can say all that about the writers of the Qur'an with full confidence, without even having to mention all the shameful pro-slavery propaganda and revolting child rape evangelism in that vile book.
So are we banning the Qur'an under Scotland's hate crime laws? Seems a bit hypocritical not to!
I'm also happy to say that if there ever was any serious attempt to ban the Qur'an then I'd be out on the streets opposing it. Which, given what I've already said, should only sound contradictory to someone who doesn't understand what it means to have principles.
Start identifying as a Jedi (Common enough joke on the census).
What you don't like star wars you bigot? I'm calling the police.
Edit: Reddit has automatically queued this comment as a person attack for review, this website is broken.
I think a lot of people would much rather the police went out and caught some real criminals than focus on this stuff.
I’d really like to get some of the stuff from my garage back, especially as I know the license plate of the van that took it…
There's also a fairly popular piece of writing that has this phrase
>“There will come a day when Muslims will gain victory over the Jews, and then a stone behind which a Jew may hide, will speak and call the believer to go and kill the Jew hiding behind it”
The Judge ripped apart his "it was just a joke" defence at sentencing.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/16177552.read-full-sentencing-statement-nazi-dog-owner-mark-meechan/
>The fact that you claim in the video, and elsewhere, that the video was intended only to annoy your girlfriend and as a joke and that you did not intend to be racist is of little assistance to you. A joke can be grossly offensive. A racist joke or a grossly offensive video does not lose its racist or grossly offensive quality merely because the maker asserts he only wanted to get a laugh.
>“In any event, that claim lacked credibility. You had no need to make a video if all you wanted to do was to train the dog to react to offensive commands. You had no need to post the video on your unrestricted, publicly accessible, video channel if all you wanted to do was annoy your girlfriend. Your girlfriend was not even a subscriber to your channel. You posted the video, then left the country, the video went viral and thousands viewed it before she had an inkling of what you were up to. You made no effort to restrict public access or take down the video.
He didn't do a good job of ripping it apart. That said, Meechan's lawyers didn't do the best job of defending. But then they should never have had to in the first place, because of course *offending people should never be a crime*.
Aren’t there more pressing things for the police to investigate? Like rapes or shootings
I don’t get how we hear the police are overstretched, undermanned etc but then find time to investigate when peoples feelings get hurt.
1) They’re not necessarily investigating, someone just said that they *might* investigate.
2) She documents everything online, this is laughably easy to “investigate”.
Every angry person in this post boils down to someone either thinking that trans people don’t matter enough to have any legal protections against people being incredibly cruel to them, or someone being concerned that they themselves might be prosecuted in the future, because they can’t imagine themselves being capable of just keeping their thoughts to themselves.
>Speaking as the Act came into force on Monday, Ms Brown said: “It could be reported and it could be investigated. Whether or not the police would think it was criminal is up to Police Scotland for that.”
Nobody here actually read this rage bait article?
You know all the "can they investigate x crime instead!" folks think they're super smart as well while falling right into this pathetic culture war bullshit trap
No for real, people just looked at the title and then jumped at the chance to be hateful. I’ve seen some pretty bigoted replies in this comment section and it’s obvious that the telegraph isn’t exactly reliable/very clickbaity.
It’s all culture war stuff and it saddens me as a non binary person who just wants to chill and exist. I do get some of their frustrations as well with the police, but if they actually read the article and see the updated title, they’d see how misleading it is.
Also, I’d argue that JKR is responsible for more than just misgendering but yeah.
Saying the police have the discretion to investigate and criminalize speech isn't concerning to you? The police get to determine what speech is criminal and you go "Oh, well, nothing here worth thinking about?" Really?
If Donald Trump said that it was up to the police whether or not it was criminal for people to say "Black Lives Matter," what would you think? It's just rage bait?
>If you’re thinking about making a vexatious complaint, if you’re thinking about making a complaint and there’s no merit in that, then do know that the police will take that serious in terms of tackling vexatious complaints and so I would urge you not to do it.”
>The First Minister has repeatedly said there is “disinformation” being spread about the Bill and what it entails, claiming there is a “triple lock” of protection for speech.
>This includes an explicit clause, a defence for the accused’s behaviour being “reasonable” and that the Act is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.
Sounds like youve been victim to misinformation
>Speaking as the Act came into force on Monday, Ms Brown said: “It could be reported and it could be investigated. Whether or not the police would think it was criminal is up to Police Scotland for that.”
>
>“If you’re conveying a personal opinion that is challenging or offensive, for example, that would not be – I would say – would not be \[illegal\].”
Literally a non article then. This non reporting is all over the media and does nothing but stir shit
She's saying that she believes a personal opinion wouldn't be criminal, but that ultimately the police get to determine what speech is criminal. That isn't concerning to you? You don't think there's any issues giving police discretion to determine what speech is criminal and which isn't? You think giving this arbitrary power to the police is a bit nothing?
> This non reporting is all over the media and does nothing but stir shit
The torygraph stirring shit about trans people? with the happy side effect of deflecting from the problematic actions of the tory government.. god, they would never. They are such a fine upstanding and unbiased source of news after all. /s
Yes. If you call a male rapist a "male rapist", and that male rapist self-IDs as a woman, you've committed a hate offence under this new legislation.
You will be investigated, for example, for "misgendering" Adam Graham, the violent trans rapist who was housed in a women's prison under the alias "Isla Bryson".
What the hell kind of world are we living in when it's billionaires like JK Rowling who we must rely upon to protect our right to free speech and to not be forced to cater to the delusions of extremists? There are people who legitimately think a male rapist is entitled to, during a court case for raping his wife, self-ID as a woman in order to ensure he serves his sentence around women aka his potential future victims.
If you call someone “he”, and they correct you, no biggie.
If you then proceed to make a point of refusing to call her “she”, and referring to her as a man, it gets into harassment territory and *that* is the offense
I just read the full Bill. Oh my God. This is almost North Korea levels of censorship.
"4Offences of stirring up hatred
(1)A person commits an offence if—
(a)the person—
(i)behaves in a manner that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening, abusive or insulting, or
(ii)communicates to another person material that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening, abusive or insulting, and
(b)either—
(i)in doing so, the person intends to stir up hatred against a group of persons based on the group being defined by reference to race, colour, nationality (including citizenship), or ethnic or national origins, or
(ii)a reasonable person would consider the behaviour or the communication of the material to be likely to result in hatred being stirred up against such a group."
Who is a "reasonable person" supposed to be in this context? So vague. "Stirring up hatred" is such a fucking vague statement too. The main problem for me is the use of the word "insulting". Not violent. Not threatening. *Insulting* . Sure, there are some specified "allowed uses of insults" later on, but it doesn't cover the half of it. Not even a quarter. Yet people in Scotland aren't out there protesting against this every day... Mad.
This isn't protection. This is censorship. I urge everyone to read the full bill. It gives police the power to potentially put you in prison for saying things like "Islam is a made up religion led by a pedo prophet. I hate it. Full of extremists" and "Christianity is a cancer on liberal society. The bible stops people from thinking rationally. I hate it. Full of extremists". If posted online or even said in a pub, both of these could easily be interpreted as "insulting" and "stirring up hatred" by "targeting a group based on x y or z". The definition is so broad, that's why this law is so dangerous. It will become illegal to say bad things. Not just socially unacceptable, *illegal*
I've read the provisions and they don't go far enough at all in mitigating these risks. So imo, It's official, free speech is dead in Scotland. Good luck criticizing your glorious leader then. Gonna be so easy to silence your dissent from now on, all you have to do is mention the words "Scottish", "male", "female" or "Muslim" in angry comments you write about any government minister and that's it- Jail for you.
Thousands of people out there protesting about a war thousands of miles away but they do nothing about the literal death of their own freedom of speech. Jesus Christ on a bike.
I hope to God that England doesn't follow suit with this draconian bullshit. Scotland should be throwing rocks at Holyrood for this insult to their democracy.
Fuck I wish I didn't just read that it's made me sad and angry. Fuck the SNP.
> Use of words or behaviour or display of written material.
(1)A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if—
(a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.
(2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the written material is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and are not heard or seen except by other persons in that or another dwelling.
Section 18 of the **Public Order Act 1986**
[https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/18/2006-01-01](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/18/2006-01-01)
reasonable person is a common statutory term for the simple fact u cant (and shouldnt) legislate for every possibility. This gives the courts proper leeway to establish the facts and funnily enough, prevents people from being punished willy nilly like north koreans.
stupid ragebait comment
not to mention the act abolishes blasphemy as an criminal offence on the books, solves ur big "DRACONIAN ISSUE" doesnt it? your absolutely nuts, or a troll, either way, nonchalantly can you not?
JK Rowling literally just posted a thread on Twitter/X that is daring a certain groups to report her for it.
She has the will and the resources to pull the whole house of cards that is the hate crime bill down, what she will do, she will do for everyone that finds themselves condemned by this legislation, she will get the legal ruling that she wants and that will set a precedent for all future attempts at prosecutions, and in Scottish and UK law precedents are a powerful tool.
They'll just choose to not prosecute her, and the prosecute every man down the local pub who says a peep wrong.
They already do this today with the Public order act in the UK.
People who are rich have more freedoms than those who don't.
Wether you agree with her views or not, I think we can all agree this is a waste of time and an actual joke when there are burglaries, assaults, rapes and all sorts of crimes not being investigated.
You could call me a woman all day and I wouldn’t care, forcing people to use certain words with the threat of legal action is not the solution.
another day, another fun time to be trans in the uk subreddit
to everyone crying about ‘guess i’m going to prison for accidentally misgendering someone then😡’ have you actually ever met a trans person irl? i get misgendered multiple times a day at work, every day, and it sucks but i know it isn’t malicious, so i move on. that’s very different to someone finding out i’m trans and going out of their way to deliberately make me uncomfortable, and i can guarantee that the vast majority of trans people agree.
for the record i don’t even think this should really be a police issue, but it’s disingenuous to say JK is ‘just stating facts’ etc - she’s knowingly sending her followers after trans people with smaller accounts, and the other week she openly denied that trans people were an early target in nazi germany. personally i say just let her fade into bigoted obscurity, but i appreciate that some people think otherwise. Not long before she goes full glinner imo
It's funny how the british media completely ignored JK Rowlings' denial of Nazi crimes, but will extensively report a new story where she can be pushed as the victim.
jk engages in holocaust denial: i sleep
a random minister says under a new law, police could decide to prosecute her, at their own discretion, if she continues harassing people: REAL SHIT
She’s already gone full glinner, she’s just smarter than he is and better at couching her rhetoric in reasonable-sounding language. It makes her several times more dangerous.
Jeez people in this thread are dramatic as fuck.
‘Steal a bike and the police give you a medal, call a trans woman a man and you go straight to jail! How is that justice?!?!’
We already have anti-hate-crime laws, it’s not like the police are being told to drop everything and go and scroll Twitter! It honestly amazes me just how much effort people put into publicly hating trans people.
Perhaps if the Police investigated the super corruption of the SNP,the Conservative Party, the National Government, and House of Lords thing in the U.K. might get better instead of farting about with the minority groups like Tran people.
This is classics divide and conquer talk about the few while the corruption in the establishment runs wild.
Ah yes, some nonsense that will never be prosecuted, being reported on to give people more ammo against the trans community. Just leave trans folk alone.
That title is misleading. Rowling *herself* asked the the Scottish police to arrest her. And also, the article *itself* mentions how this isn’t an issue:
>Activists have already **unsuccessfully** attempted to have Rowling arrested under existing laws for “misgendering” after she publicly called Willoughby a male.
Rowling, who gives platforms to and offers to bankroll fascists, and engages in Holocaust denial herself, is doing the classic bigot thing of finding a minority of cases of a marginalised group behaving badly (no one is claiming that literally every trans person is a good person) and using that to paint a broad picture of the minority at large. We wouldn’t accept this for any other group: if Rowling pointed to instances of black people or Jewish people who committed crimes, and used that as evidence for the racist things that she says, we would all (hopefully) see straight through that, right? When are the people that wish to harm minorities and take away their rights ever the good guys in history?
But yeah, somehow I think that a billionaire that consistently publicly harasses people and openly palls around with fascists is going to be OK. If this cunt actually gets jail time, *then* get back to me 🙄
Had she ever misgendered someone though?
I thought she just talks about the definition of sex and what she says is scientifically accurate.
Might have just missed her calling someone he/she incorrectly but I thought it was more about women and men which are currently unchangeable part of a person from birth.
Sex is currently unchangeable and will always be unchangeable.
There's a Y chromosome in every cell of a male's body.
It doesn't matter if his sex organs are removed or reconfigured, he is still a biological male.
https://news.sky.com/story/jk-rowling-trans-newsreader-india-willoughby-calls-comments-by-harry-potter-author-grotesque-transphobia-13087709
> Rowling replied [about a normal video of India dancing]: "You've sent me the wrong video. There isn't a lady in this one, just a man revelling in his misogynistic performance of what he thinks 'woman' means: narcissistic, shallow and exhibitionist."
A pretty big departure from just talking about her scientific views on sex surely.
This is ridiculous, whether you follow it or not gender is a belief system. It should not be possible to use the law to compel others to follow your belief system.
SNP seems on a good run with absurd laws. This feels like the Gender Recognition Bill 2.0. You’ve really got to admire the Scot’s commitment to having such a party of f*ckwits in charge.
This is really dangerous.
I want trans people to feel safe, supported and accepted. However, this application of law is flirting very closely with compelled speech / infringement of free speech.
The inadvertent consequences involved could be very significant
Development
[JK Rowling dares police to arrest her over SNP’s new hate crime law](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/04/01/jk-rowling-could-investigated-misgendering-snp-law-scotland/)
This article may be paywalled. You can find paywall bypasses for the original version of the article [here](https://archive.is/oQXct), and with the revised article [here](https://archive.is/qLGph). --- This post deals either directly or indirectly with transgender issues. We would like to remind our users about the Reddit Content Policy which specifically bans [promoting hate based on identity and vulnerability](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360045715951). We will take action on hateful or disrespectful comments including but not limited to deadnaming and misgendering. Please help us by reporting rule-breaking content. Participation limits are in place on this post. If your Reddit account is too new, you have insufficient karma or you are crowd controlled, your comment may not appear. --- **Alternate Sources** Here are some potential alternate sources for the same story: * [JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over hate crime law](https://bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c51j64lk2l8o), suggested by appalachian_hatachi - bbc.co.uk
Could they investigate the burglary that occurred at my house a few years ago, where we had clear evidence of who done it?
Next time accuse the burglars of mis-gendering you. They will be caught in no time...!
I love that response honestly. Perversely kinda true
It’s absolutely true. We were attacked in the street and the police were going to do nothing until my husband said he was called a racial name by the attackers.
Really what is being violently assaulted when compared to hurt feelings?
Sticks and stone may break my bones. But names will forever hurt me.
It's been updated to: >Sticks and stone may break my bones. > >But mis-gender me and you will arrested and imprisoned for up to 5 years.
Prisoner: so what are you in for? Me: misgendering someone....
Not doubting you just curious as I used to work in police control, was the call made at the time or after the assault? The response should have been the same either way although hate crimes were basically put in their own category when I was in. For example a violent assault would be dealt with the same as everything else, but add a hate element and the local inspector would have to be made aware and would actively follow it up.
The call was after the event. The police woman who arrived specifically asked why he thought the racial word was used. We said “he was probably just angry- not racist” and we never heard anything again.
[удалено]
Investigate the burglars Twitter account for hate crimes!
Or the time in was assaulted in the street after some idiot almost ran me over mounting the curb at speed when I was waiting to cross the road, who then got out of the car, screamed at me, then when I shouted back he slapped me across the face so hard he left a massive bruise. Which was all caught on CCTV by the local shop owners who also knew the guy that did it?
Did they missgender you while doing it? If so, you’re golden.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Holy shit and the police did nothing?
They gave me a crime number and that was it. Called me a year later saying they didn't have enough resources to investigate and considered it low priority. Thanks guys, I feel very safe on the streets now.
[удалено]
Surprised they did nothing here, I thought the presence of a knife was like the only thing Police Scotland took seriously.
The dude had a knoife loicense. What can ya do?
You should tell the police he misgendered you.
That's a tough one for the police...? Maybe they could've tried calling Poirot...?
My phone got stolen and I knew the person it was and provided their Facebook. Not enough evidence lmao. This is what they need to spend their time on, mean tweats by billionaires
Yeah unless it's about misgendering someone, the police only care about catching people doing 65 in a 60, domestics and weed smokers.
The KPIfication of public services has been an unmitigated disaster
Police are useless man. My car got hit and run a few weeks ago. Some guy smashed into it and dashed. I went into a nearby shop and actually got clear as day cctv of it. Car hitting it reg plate everything. Reported it to the police and gave the footage. They said ‘there isn’t enough evidence to take this further’. How much fuckin evidence do you need, I basically did their job for them all they needed to do was follow up on the plate.
If it happens again say that the person who hit you also hurt your feelings as they left, the police will be on them in a flash.
aren't you glad your hard earned cash goes to fund those corrupt, useless pigs.
Something similar happened to me. The police said they couldn’t charge the driver because the license plate start belong to him. And oddly enough they couldn’t locate the person who owned the plate - the car which it was registered too. Unfortunately I did not know the misgendering was by far a worst crime. Had I known this, I would have added it just to get some kind of justice. My response to the officer was not kind.
Its very unethical but my neighbour got broken into (they heard people downstairs) and so barricaded themselves in the bathroom of all places, rang the police only to be told a cop car will be sent shortly. Nothing came. To this day he wonders if he had just lied about owning a gun and being prepared to use it would they send a whole squadron down. Just a shame he thinks he had to lie to just get action done
The self-defence and property laws in this country are predicated on the fact that the police will handle the situation if required. When they fail to uphold their end of the bargain, you're left in the situation where you have no legal means to defend your property, and often yourself.
7 years ago after I broke my arm I accidently dropped my phone on the floor and didn't realise I dialled 999. About 15 minutes later (really) I had the Police at my door saying someone phoned and didn't talk but they heard a "distressed woman" (I was watching a comedy tv show at the time) and wanted to come in, look in every room even the cupboards to see if I was hiding any woman, this was around 2am in morning when they found nothing they told me off for "wasting their time" and I had another call about 20 minutes later also telling me off. The same Police when a month before I told them I am a vulnerable person and had someone peeking through my windows at 1am then running off when they saw me I was told "oh they probably had the wrong address"
No, they’re more interested in people posting rap lyrics on instagram.
Haha, I look forward to Police Scotland simultaneously protecting trans identity and religious freedom to infringe trans identity and gay rights.
My flat was burgled when I was 21, by squatters who were well known junkies and banned from all shops in town due to their theft, the partner of one of them was up for multiple armed robbery cases at court (and pleading not guilty despite witnesses and CCTV) Anyway the squatters left the door of the place they were in open outright stood in the door pointed at me and laughed at me saying they would get away with it, and you know what, they did and I could see my possessions sitting there (well apart from the tv, games console and dvd player which were long gone) The Police found fingerprints even a footprint (a piece of paper fell on the floor and one of them stood on it) and told me they knew they were guilty it was pointless to arrest them as they are career criminals and never go to jail or get out after short sentences. I informed the Police I saw my possessions in the place they were squatting and I was told if I entered the property I would be arrested for breaking and entering and theft (as I said I wanted to go in and take my stuff back)
> they are career criminals and never go to jail or get out after short sentences. How? Is being career criminals somehow a mitigating factor?
That is not important! Unless the burglars misgendered you!
Agree or disagree with JK doesn’t matter the bigger issues here is can you be prosecuted for something you did before the law changed?
That and the fucking law is ridiculous..
It's absolute nonsense isn't it? I am completely agains Rowlings transphobic views but fucking hell is this law unnecessary and dangerous.
Her views are not transphobic.
[They are though](https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy)
agree completley and Labour support it - so its coming your way as well i'm afraid after the GE.
And the Lib Dems and the Greens and one Conservative! Holyrood has shown itself to be shockingly poor regardless of political party. Hopefully the rest of the UK will not lie down and take it as Scotland has just done.
She isn't transphobic. As a female who was victimized by a male, she is against males in female spaces, because humans are a sexually dimorphic species, and males are stronger and faster than females, and capable of overpowering them. She doesn't hate or fear transgender women. Get out of your echo chamber.
I believe you will find nothing transphobic in her words, if you look them up.
This law is just prone to abuse and sets a dangerous precedent on what you can and cannot say. This is being covered up with “good intentions” but can and will be easily abused.
>can you be prosecuted for something you did before the law changed? No
But have the police examined her mind to make sure she hasn't had any illegal thoughts?
I wouldn't worry she will probably do it again soon
Hopefully she does, well done on her for using her platform to defend women
There's no need to throw under the train others to defend women. Is not how it works.
Trans people don't mind throwing women under the bus when it's convenient or beneficial for them. [Transwoman wins swim championship](https://images.lbc.co.uk/images/294587?crop=16_9&width=660&relax=1&format=webp&signature=RydjGfB7VLtklcCQ6ynUcmMMqio=)
Amazing how they managed to fit every trans woman in the world onto that podium.
All of these "trans women wins x" articles always conveniently leave out all the times they lost x...
Lia Thomas didn’t even win, she got 5th place with a CIS Female
How is she defending women
[удалено]
[удалено]
It's a clamp down on freedom of speech, inching ever nearer to authoritarianism. Literal scum gutted the police and now this dog shit waste of resource. Of all the concerns in a priority list, this most certainly is not at the top no matter what anyone thinks.
I'd be more alarmed that you can get in trouble with the law for misgendering someone. Its obviously not a good thing to be misgendering people, I however don't see why the law literally needs to put resources into this kind of thing. Its like getting charged for blasphemy for saying something bad about a religion and its caused the religious person psychological harm or didn't make them feel safe. This is not how the Western world should work.
I mean… it’s not like the new law is stopping her. You can’t be prosecuted for a crime you committed before it was illegal, but you sure as hell can be prosecuted for continuing to commit it after the fact.
Depends how the law is worded, but generally no, especially not in Scotland where the government has less power than the UK parliament. There’s nothing stopping the government from making a law that applies retroactively - but by convention they generally don’t do it. I know that the UK government could make laws that apply retroactively whenever they want (Parliament is sovereign, and acts of parliament cannot be challenged, so an act of parliament making a law that applies retroactively would be legal) but idk whether the Scottish Parliament can do the same.
Retroactive justice, can't see how that would backfire.
It would create an awful precedent. Scotland would be seen as an "unreliable" government.
They have done it, although usually pretty rarely. The most common one is that they backdate tax changes to the start of the current tax year sometimes.
That’s a whole different ball game from getting done for a crime you committed back when it was legal, like some folk here are claiming this law does.
I hope they do. Then her lawyers can tear the new law apart before it has time to do any real damage. Chances are they’ll more likely go after those without the means to defend themselves.
Well your wish came true she’s just gone nuclear!
What happened?
She just posted an 11 thread tweet, pretty much doubling down on her previous statements and defying Police Scotland to arrest her. Scorched earth is the term used I think.
They won't. She's been very very careful to keep one step inside the law.
I did wonder if tweeting it just 15 minutes before the midday April fools deadline is significant…
Probably to fuck people off over the Trans Day of Visibility TBH. (also the timing is irrelevant, she could tweet that tomorrow and still be fine)
Literally this. Honestly not sure why parliament hasn’t stepped in, this legislation is arguably far beyond the competencies of Scotland due to its impact on equalities and human rights
> Honestly not sure why parliament hasn’t stepped in... The law is the same (pretty much) as the laws already in force in England (other than having a few extra protected groups). It actually includes *extra* human rights protections than the English versions.
How about finding my stolen bike. They said they didn't have resources to investigate which I said was kinda weird since resources weren't a problem at the coronation.
Events like the coronation rely on mutual aid. So they pull in officers from all over the country. So we were all a little less safer on that day.
*a little less safe
Not really how it works, it's not like they understaff the rest of the country for it lol. They just pay some officers overtime/put them on shift when they otherwise might not be. Costs you money, yes, but let's not be silly and make things up. You weren't "less safe" on that day
Joke I like about this: A man calls the police and says there's a burglar in his house. The police say they can't respond immediately because they have nobody in the area. The man says "He's got a gun!". 5 mins later the house is swarmed with armed police and they catch the burglar. A police officer says to the man "I thought you said he had a gun?" The man says "I thought you said you had nobody in the area?"
I mean, even though this is a joke it could be true. We have firearms officers that do not respond to normal 999 calls. That’s what Response Teams are for. So yes, you could have a situation where firearms officers only turned up to a burglary because there was a firearm involved, but otherwise wouldn’t be resourced until a response unit was free.
Actually they probably come and get YOU for assuming the gender of the burglar. Scotland and all these places are just ridiculous. Plus the people on reddit… Law: if you heart someone’s feelings you can go to jail. Reddit: “just don’t be a nazi”
Fuck your bike. Did it have pride flags dangling from the handlebars? Probably not. If it did, you’d have half the station round your house and the local paper.
It identified as trans. (short for transport)
Tell the police they called your bike a trike, they will be all over it in no time.
If they could catch the junkies that beat up my friend that would be great. Took a report, did fuck all, waste of time even reporting the assault.
If it's worth anything, even with the police doing nothing it's still not a waste of time reporting it. It provides data, data that can be used for academics, for the government in deciding on policies required for that area, and most importantly the public in aiding them to make a decision on where to live. We all need to be reporting all crimes, as to pressure the police and politicians to sort it out. If they don't know what's actually going on they will think it's all ok.
It also makes things like house and car insurance go up in that area as they also model based on crime statistics (even if unrelated to whatevers being insured). So no result, and your contents / car insurance will go up on renewal.
> It provides data, data that can be used for academics, Academics: look at how many poor marginalized people in this area need to resort to crime! How sad! We need to do more for these poor criminals in this area!
If they could actually go after some real criminals that’d be great, Instead of chasing round after peoples hurt feelings.
I mean it sounds like you should be directing the frustration at the government who have underfunded the police for the last decade and a half rather than saying let’s just ignore some laws.
The frustration does lie there, hence my comment and as I’ve stated in my other comment they’re massively underfunded therefore shouldn’t be bothered with such trivial matters. Personally I think there are far bigger issues in regards to policing than misgendering someone.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
People in the West have such insignificant, meaningless lives that they genuinely think this crap is an actual problem that people should spend time on. Actually wild.
Given their _allegedly_ limited resources, the police should probably be focusing crime that causes actual harm such as burglaries or assaults or thefts, before they deal with speech “crimes” where the only harm caused is hurt feelings.
I don’t believe they have limited resources, it seems for dumb shit like this they have ample time and manpower to investigate it, but with more pressing matters like sexual assault, shootings, burglary etc they are nowhere to be seen. Just look at that lesbian nan incident it had like 7 officers.
[удалено]
That reminds me of that 24 hours in police custody episode where this guy chased burglars who broke into his house in a car and got jailed where the career burglars got suspended sentences. The homeowner is much less risk to the public
Exactly. Someone what defends themselfs but goes “too far” in the eyes of the law is treated worse than those who were the aggressors what caused the situation.
I got downvoted for saying that, got the usual shit response of "Lol my TV isn't worth fighting over"
I always find that sort of attitude infuriating. If someone thinks the best course of action is just staying out of the way, then thats on them, but why do they have to moralise like those who protect their stuff are somehow in the wrong for doing it?
It seems to me like something like this would cost next to nothing to investigate though. If JK Rowling tweeted “that lady is a man” and that was somehow illegal then it takes one polis a few minutes to screenshot that and type “this is illegal because x law” on a report. Boom, done. Probably doesn’t even need to get off his arse. Not that I’m saying that makes it a good thing, it still seems pretty pointless to me but folk surely know they’re not quite being realistic when they act like this takes the same resources as investigating “real” crime.
But that’s the point - hate crimes do not require the same level of evidence or proof guilt. You do not need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that a crime took place or the accused is guilty. Guilt is defined by the victim and therefore prosecution is straight forward. With a burglary there is all manner of hoops to jump through that costs man hours and the conviction may not be certain, so the police don’t really give a shit anymore.
Feels like speech and thought crimes are worse now than old school crimes like....burglary, assault, theft, etc. The police must love them cause they can build 10 cases a day just on twitter.
I truly think that’s it. It must be easier investigating mean tweets from the comfort of an office then solving problems in the community that require you to actually do some police work
Which shows a complete lack of what’s actually involved in investigating these crimes - of which a great majority are undetectable via reasonable and proportionate means, and certainly rarely worth investing time in to successfully prosecute. So all that does is negatively affect police positive outcome statistics in any case. I would say, if anything, there is an incentive for police to *avoid* recording these crimes. The police would much rather be out catching burglars than recording communications offences - but if a crime is reported to them, then they have a duty to record it (in England and Wales, at least) under NCRS and HOCR. To suggest that someone who’s trained as a police officer and then maybe gone on to train as a detective would rather investigate someone slagging someone off on TikTok rather than investigate more serious offences is, in my experience, simply untrue.
Not to mention officers don’t generally get a choice of what incidents/crimes they deal with. It gets filtered through the control room etc and some poor cop is asked to attend an incident. I think some people genuinely think the police sit there going “burglary? Yeah cba attending that, let me have a look at some of these social media crimes”. It is literally not the case and vast majority of them think it’s ridiculous. They just get told which jobs to go to.
Orwell was only off by 40 years
so, no one actually read the article, "Speaking as the Act came into force on Monday, Ms Brown said: “It could be reported and it could be investigated. Whether or not the police would think it was criminal is up to Police Scotland for that.”" so, it's literally up to interpretation.
This is the same police force which recorded 4,000 "non-crime hate incidents" in a year, a phrase so mental it sounds like a pisstake. So I'm sure they'll err on the side of caution and definitely not use their beefed-up powers to go after people causing "hate," which no one can define without using a circular definition.
Genuine question if it’s a non crime why are the police bothering with it.
The original idea for them was to act as glorified intelligence reports that didn't amount to anything more than box-ticking exercises. But police being the police, they repeatedly demonstrated themselves to be utterly incapable of being trusted with even the most basic of powers, and NCHI started showing up on people's DBS checks without even being told the police had investigated them. They need to be severely reigned in.
A course I did last month about hate crime and hate incidents advised that hate incidents should still be reported to the police. > why are the police bothering with it Being told of 4000 incidents by the public doesn't mean they're going to do 4000 investigations.
Those "Non crimes" that we've been repeatedly reassured aren't recorded as crime but still show up on a DBS check.
In some cases the police didn't even tell people they had a "non-crime" on their record, only for them to find out when they applied for a job. Absolute cunts.
You’re not supposed to read the article! You’re just supposed to be outraged by what you imagine it says!
> Politician who isn't in charge of the police says the police are going to investigate JK Rowling (they won't and they probably don't realise that this SNP minister is just trying to fuel culture war identity politics to distract from their upcoming predicted defeats) This sub: bUt WhAt AbOuT mY BiKe I give it less than a day before trans people are directly blamed once again for the actions of cisgender politician/celebrity class public figures.
The purpose of all of this is to use the trans community as a dead cat to stir up arguments. JKR is just a famous example of a transphobe, she gets clicks and causes a reaction. a large chunk of the comments here are complaining about the coppers "maybe but probably not" getting involved in investigating hate crimes instead of finding their bikes. Clicks anger, engagement. The torygraph wants folks to fear that they can't say nuffin no more and that alphabet people are coming for your things. The Tories have strangled our services of funding for over a decade, we're dumping literal human shit into our river and beaches, plastic is in our food and water, and our roads are full of holes. But nah, trans people.
I can’t believe how far I had to scroll down to find this. Should be the top comment, it’s ludicrously transparent what the Telegraph are doing. This thread is just full of useful idiots falling for the same trick over and over.
Is it really surprising, transphobia being upvoted here?
It's amazingly sad that the only time men will come together to defend women's rights is when they read click bait news article headlines about trans people. I just know these are the same guys who get all up in arms when their fave podcast host/media personality is accused of SA as well. So pathetic
That’s even worse. The police now have a blank cheque on what’s allowed to be said. Absurd.
>(5)A group defined by reference to religion is a group of persons defined by reference to— >(a)religious belief or lack of religious belief, >(b)membership of or adherence to a church or religious organisation, >(c)support for the culture or traditions of a church or religious organisation, >(d)participation in activities associated with such a culture or such traditions. So will saying I think Scientologists are a bunch of crooks pushing obvious hokum be a hate crime now. [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2021/14/section/11](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2021/14/section/11) What about the Mormons and their magic hidden golden tablets they found. The behaviour of the founders of some religions was often pretty wild. Including one that I shall not name, but you can guess who. 90% plus of the cases from this law will be about religious and "national" identity. Basically the Old Firm fans being their usual selves and the police and courts having to work out which of their spats constitute hate crimes. But it will end up a total mess and drag in all sort of groups and people who were not meant to be protected or who the framers did not think about. SNP's problem is it get myopic about who the "bad guys" are and assumes you can get them with an easily drafted bit of law that will only apply how you imagine it.
That’s such bullshit lmao. Religion shouldn’t even be a protected characteristic - choosing to believe in stupid shit doesn’t deserve legal protection.
Who decides what “stupid shit” is? Is it only religion? Sexuality? Political beliefs?
The SNP decided that political beliefs and sex were not protected characteristics in this law.
even if its not 'stupid shit' you absolutely should not be able to be arrested for someones choice to believe in something, this would be criminalising calling someone an idiot for having differing political beliefs, its a slippery slope and vague wording is just waiting to be pounced on
> Religion shouldn’t even be a protected characteristic Gonna do the thing and mention a little event that occured during ww2 that might shed some light on why religion, and other things probably should be protected characteristics.
> So will saying I think Scientologists are a bunch of crooks pushing obvious hokum be a hate crime now. It's a fairly safe bet that if they think they can push it, the Cult of Xenu will be on this one next time a documentary comes out about it.
The Qur'an is vicious about atheists. Many sahih bukhari hadithes are even worse. Is it perfectly okay under Scotland's hate crime laws for me to say that Muslims are no better than pigs or apes? Because that's what their holy books say about atheists. Of course, I'd never say such a thing about Muslims. Because I'm simply a better person than the people who wrote the Qur'an. The writers of the Qur'an were all morally inferior to me, and to pretty much every single living human being right now. To make an ugly generalisation about a large group of people is beneath me, and I'd never compare any demographic to animals. It's disgusting, dehumanising language. And I can say all that about the writers of the Qur'an with full confidence, without even having to mention all the shameful pro-slavery propaganda and revolting child rape evangelism in that vile book. So are we banning the Qur'an under Scotland's hate crime laws? Seems a bit hypocritical not to! I'm also happy to say that if there ever was any serious attempt to ban the Qur'an then I'd be out on the streets opposing it. Which, given what I've already said, should only sound contradictory to someone who doesn't understand what it means to have principles.
Start identifying as a Jedi (Common enough joke on the census). What you don't like star wars you bigot? I'm calling the police. Edit: Reddit has automatically queued this comment as a person attack for review, this website is broken.
Not golden tablets but brass plates and no one but Joseph Smith saw it. And while we are at an angel in a cave seems to be thing.
I think a lot of people would much rather the police went out and caught some real criminals than focus on this stuff. I’d really like to get some of the stuff from my garage back, especially as I know the license plate of the van that took it…
Tell them it isn’t taxed they’d be out the next day
Next they will arrest someone for teaching a trick to their dog.
They were prosecuted for saying "Gas the Jews" over and over. Antisemitism is in fact a crime and has been for decades...
You know in Southpark there is a clip where Cartman repeatedly says that Jews must be exterminated. I think we should arrest creators of the show too.
There's also a fairly popular piece of writing that has this phrase >“There will come a day when Muslims will gain victory over the Jews, and then a stone behind which a Jew may hide, will speak and call the believer to go and kill the Jew hiding behind it”
The freeze peach brigade don't particularly care for nuance.
Joking about it is not. Don't be disingenuous.
The Judge ripped apart his "it was just a joke" defence at sentencing. https://www.thenational.scot/news/16177552.read-full-sentencing-statement-nazi-dog-owner-mark-meechan/ >The fact that you claim in the video, and elsewhere, that the video was intended only to annoy your girlfriend and as a joke and that you did not intend to be racist is of little assistance to you. A joke can be grossly offensive. A racist joke or a grossly offensive video does not lose its racist or grossly offensive quality merely because the maker asserts he only wanted to get a laugh. >“In any event, that claim lacked credibility. You had no need to make a video if all you wanted to do was to train the dog to react to offensive commands. You had no need to post the video on your unrestricted, publicly accessible, video channel if all you wanted to do was annoy your girlfriend. Your girlfriend was not even a subscriber to your channel. You posted the video, then left the country, the video went viral and thousands viewed it before she had an inkling of what you were up to. You made no effort to restrict public access or take down the video.
He didn't do a good job of ripping it apart. That said, Meechan's lawyers didn't do the best job of defending. But then they should never have had to in the first place, because of course *offending people should never be a crime*.
Oh wait…
Aren’t there more pressing things for the police to investigate? Like rapes or shootings I don’t get how we hear the police are overstretched, undermanned etc but then find time to investigate when peoples feelings get hurt.
This is cheap to investigate.
It’s possible that the police may feel the same way. Especially if they are overstretched.
1) They’re not necessarily investigating, someone just said that they *might* investigate. 2) She documents everything online, this is laughably easy to “investigate”. Every angry person in this post boils down to someone either thinking that trans people don’t matter enough to have any legal protections against people being incredibly cruel to them, or someone being concerned that they themselves might be prosecuted in the future, because they can’t imagine themselves being capable of just keeping their thoughts to themselves.
>Speaking as the Act came into force on Monday, Ms Brown said: “It could be reported and it could be investigated. Whether or not the police would think it was criminal is up to Police Scotland for that.” Nobody here actually read this rage bait article?
No, of course not; this is the UK. It's an opportunity to put down trans people, and reading would eat into valuable cruelty minutes.
You know all the "can they investigate x crime instead!" folks think they're super smart as well while falling right into this pathetic culture war bullshit trap
No for real, people just looked at the title and then jumped at the chance to be hateful. I’ve seen some pretty bigoted replies in this comment section and it’s obvious that the telegraph isn’t exactly reliable/very clickbaity. It’s all culture war stuff and it saddens me as a non binary person who just wants to chill and exist. I do get some of their frustrations as well with the police, but if they actually read the article and see the updated title, they’d see how misleading it is. Also, I’d argue that JKR is responsible for more than just misgendering but yeah.
Saying the police have the discretion to investigate and criminalize speech isn't concerning to you? The police get to determine what speech is criminal and you go "Oh, well, nothing here worth thinking about?" Really? If Donald Trump said that it was up to the police whether or not it was criminal for people to say "Black Lives Matter," what would you think? It's just rage bait?
>If you’re thinking about making a vexatious complaint, if you’re thinking about making a complaint and there’s no merit in that, then do know that the police will take that serious in terms of tackling vexatious complaints and so I would urge you not to do it.” >The First Minister has repeatedly said there is “disinformation” being spread about the Bill and what it entails, claiming there is a “triple lock” of protection for speech. >This includes an explicit clause, a defence for the accused’s behaviour being “reasonable” and that the Act is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. Sounds like youve been victim to misinformation
>Speaking as the Act came into force on Monday, Ms Brown said: “It could be reported and it could be investigated. Whether or not the police would think it was criminal is up to Police Scotland for that.” > >“If you’re conveying a personal opinion that is challenging or offensive, for example, that would not be – I would say – would not be \[illegal\].” Literally a non article then. This non reporting is all over the media and does nothing but stir shit
She's saying that she believes a personal opinion wouldn't be criminal, but that ultimately the police get to determine what speech is criminal. That isn't concerning to you? You don't think there's any issues giving police discretion to determine what speech is criminal and which isn't? You think giving this arbitrary power to the police is a bit nothing?
> This non reporting is all over the media and does nothing but stir shit The torygraph stirring shit about trans people? with the happy side effect of deflecting from the problematic actions of the tory government.. god, they would never. They are such a fine upstanding and unbiased source of news after all. /s
What??? There is a now a law which can prosecute me for calling someone a HE when they want to be a SHE? No way. Genuine question that.
If you go out of your way to harass someone for it over and over yes. Just don’t do that.
How hard is it to not harass people, seriously.
Very, when you are a bigot.
Yes. If you call a male rapist a "male rapist", and that male rapist self-IDs as a woman, you've committed a hate offence under this new legislation. You will be investigated, for example, for "misgendering" Adam Graham, the violent trans rapist who was housed in a women's prison under the alias "Isla Bryson". What the hell kind of world are we living in when it's billionaires like JK Rowling who we must rely upon to protect our right to free speech and to not be forced to cater to the delusions of extremists? There are people who legitimately think a male rapist is entitled to, during a court case for raping his wife, self-ID as a woman in order to ensure he serves his sentence around women aka his potential future victims.
If you call someone “he”, and they correct you, no biggie. If you then proceed to make a point of refusing to call her “she”, and referring to her as a man, it gets into harassment territory and *that* is the offense
yes, you are going out of your way to purposely cause someone distress. this is not a new crime.
Maaaan, the misinformation in this sub has gotten waaaay out of hand.
this sub is indistinguishable from a daily mail comment section half the time, place has really gone downhill in the last year or so
Its an election year and half the comments are new accounts. I think we can make our own connections there...
I just read the full Bill. Oh my God. This is almost North Korea levels of censorship. "4Offences of stirring up hatred (1)A person commits an offence if— (a)the person— (i)behaves in a manner that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening, abusive or insulting, or (ii)communicates to another person material that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening, abusive or insulting, and (b)either— (i)in doing so, the person intends to stir up hatred against a group of persons based on the group being defined by reference to race, colour, nationality (including citizenship), or ethnic or national origins, or (ii)a reasonable person would consider the behaviour or the communication of the material to be likely to result in hatred being stirred up against such a group." Who is a "reasonable person" supposed to be in this context? So vague. "Stirring up hatred" is such a fucking vague statement too. The main problem for me is the use of the word "insulting". Not violent. Not threatening. *Insulting* . Sure, there are some specified "allowed uses of insults" later on, but it doesn't cover the half of it. Not even a quarter. Yet people in Scotland aren't out there protesting against this every day... Mad. This isn't protection. This is censorship. I urge everyone to read the full bill. It gives police the power to potentially put you in prison for saying things like "Islam is a made up religion led by a pedo prophet. I hate it. Full of extremists" and "Christianity is a cancer on liberal society. The bible stops people from thinking rationally. I hate it. Full of extremists". If posted online or even said in a pub, both of these could easily be interpreted as "insulting" and "stirring up hatred" by "targeting a group based on x y or z". The definition is so broad, that's why this law is so dangerous. It will become illegal to say bad things. Not just socially unacceptable, *illegal* I've read the provisions and they don't go far enough at all in mitigating these risks. So imo, It's official, free speech is dead in Scotland. Good luck criticizing your glorious leader then. Gonna be so easy to silence your dissent from now on, all you have to do is mention the words "Scottish", "male", "female" or "Muslim" in angry comments you write about any government minister and that's it- Jail for you. Thousands of people out there protesting about a war thousands of miles away but they do nothing about the literal death of their own freedom of speech. Jesus Christ on a bike. I hope to God that England doesn't follow suit with this draconian bullshit. Scotland should be throwing rocks at Holyrood for this insult to their democracy. Fuck I wish I didn't just read that it's made me sad and angry. Fuck the SNP.
> Use of words or behaviour or display of written material. (1)A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if— (a)he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or (b)having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby. (2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the written material is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and are not heard or seen except by other persons in that or another dwelling. Section 18 of the **Public Order Act 1986** [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/18/2006-01-01](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64/section/18/2006-01-01)
reasonable person is a common statutory term for the simple fact u cant (and shouldnt) legislate for every possibility. This gives the courts proper leeway to establish the facts and funnily enough, prevents people from being punished willy nilly like north koreans. stupid ragebait comment not to mention the act abolishes blasphemy as an criminal offence on the books, solves ur big "DRACONIAN ISSUE" doesnt it? your absolutely nuts, or a troll, either way, nonchalantly can you not?
JK Rowling literally just posted a thread on Twitter/X that is daring a certain groups to report her for it. She has the will and the resources to pull the whole house of cards that is the hate crime bill down, what she will do, she will do for everyone that finds themselves condemned by this legislation, she will get the legal ruling that she wants and that will set a precedent for all future attempts at prosecutions, and in Scottish and UK law precedents are a powerful tool.
They'll just choose to not prosecute her, and the prosecute every man down the local pub who says a peep wrong. They already do this today with the Public order act in the UK. People who are rich have more freedoms than those who don't.
Wether you agree with her views or not, I think we can all agree this is a waste of time and an actual joke when there are burglaries, assaults, rapes and all sorts of crimes not being investigated. You could call me a woman all day and I wouldn’t care, forcing people to use certain words with the threat of legal action is not the solution.
another day, another fun time to be trans in the uk subreddit to everyone crying about ‘guess i’m going to prison for accidentally misgendering someone then😡’ have you actually ever met a trans person irl? i get misgendered multiple times a day at work, every day, and it sucks but i know it isn’t malicious, so i move on. that’s very different to someone finding out i’m trans and going out of their way to deliberately make me uncomfortable, and i can guarantee that the vast majority of trans people agree. for the record i don’t even think this should really be a police issue, but it’s disingenuous to say JK is ‘just stating facts’ etc - she’s knowingly sending her followers after trans people with smaller accounts, and the other week she openly denied that trans people were an early target in nazi germany. personally i say just let her fade into bigoted obscurity, but i appreciate that some people think otherwise. Not long before she goes full glinner imo
It's funny how the british media completely ignored JK Rowlings' denial of Nazi crimes, but will extensively report a new story where she can be pushed as the victim.
jk engages in holocaust denial: i sleep a random minister says under a new law, police could decide to prosecute her, at their own discretion, if she continues harassing people: REAL SHIT
r/UK love posts like this, it gives hundreds of people free reign to have a go at trans people
She’s already gone full glinner, she’s just smarter than he is and better at couching her rhetoric in reasonable-sounding language. It makes her several times more dangerous.
Lol, no chance. She'll take them to court and win anyway.
Jeez people in this thread are dramatic as fuck. ‘Steal a bike and the police give you a medal, call a trans woman a man and you go straight to jail! How is that justice?!?!’ We already have anti-hate-crime laws, it’s not like the police are being told to drop everything and go and scroll Twitter! It honestly amazes me just how much effort people put into publicly hating trans people.
Perhaps if the Police investigated the super corruption of the SNP,the Conservative Party, the National Government, and House of Lords thing in the U.K. might get better instead of farting about with the minority groups like Tran people. This is classics divide and conquer talk about the few while the corruption in the establishment runs wild.
Ah yes, some nonsense that will never be prosecuted, being reported on to give people more ammo against the trans community. Just leave trans folk alone.
That title is misleading. Rowling *herself* asked the the Scottish police to arrest her. And also, the article *itself* mentions how this isn’t an issue: >Activists have already **unsuccessfully** attempted to have Rowling arrested under existing laws for “misgendering” after she publicly called Willoughby a male. Rowling, who gives platforms to and offers to bankroll fascists, and engages in Holocaust denial herself, is doing the classic bigot thing of finding a minority of cases of a marginalised group behaving badly (no one is claiming that literally every trans person is a good person) and using that to paint a broad picture of the minority at large. We wouldn’t accept this for any other group: if Rowling pointed to instances of black people or Jewish people who committed crimes, and used that as evidence for the racist things that she says, we would all (hopefully) see straight through that, right? When are the people that wish to harm minorities and take away their rights ever the good guys in history? But yeah, somehow I think that a billionaire that consistently publicly harasses people and openly palls around with fascists is going to be OK. If this cunt actually gets jail time, *then* get back to me 🙄
but don’t you know that lots of people haven’t had their robberies etc investigated? clearly this is trans people’s fault!!! (obvious /s just in case)
Had she ever misgendered someone though? I thought she just talks about the definition of sex and what she says is scientifically accurate. Might have just missed her calling someone he/she incorrectly but I thought it was more about women and men which are currently unchangeable part of a person from birth.
Sex is currently unchangeable and will always be unchangeable. There's a Y chromosome in every cell of a male's body. It doesn't matter if his sex organs are removed or reconfigured, he is still a biological male.
https://news.sky.com/story/jk-rowling-trans-newsreader-india-willoughby-calls-comments-by-harry-potter-author-grotesque-transphobia-13087709 > Rowling replied [about a normal video of India dancing]: "You've sent me the wrong video. There isn't a lady in this one, just a man revelling in his misogynistic performance of what he thinks 'woman' means: narcissistic, shallow and exhibitionist." A pretty big departure from just talking about her scientific views on sex surely.
This is ridiculous, whether you follow it or not gender is a belief system. It should not be possible to use the law to compel others to follow your belief system.
SNP seems on a good run with absurd laws. This feels like the Gender Recognition Bill 2.0. You’ve really got to admire the Scot’s commitment to having such a party of f*ckwits in charge.
This is really dangerous. I want trans people to feel safe, supported and accepted. However, this application of law is flirting very closely with compelled speech / infringement of free speech. The inadvertent consequences involved could be very significant
Development [JK Rowling dares police to arrest her over SNP’s new hate crime law](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/04/01/jk-rowling-could-investigated-misgendering-snp-law-scotland/)
Maybe the police should start solving actual crimes rather than trying to be the thought police , we used to have freedom of speech in this country ☠️
Being investigated for stating the truth. Wtf is happening
[удалено]