[ad_1]
On June 15, 2022, the Mayor of London released a new version of the Violence Against Women and Girls Strategy 2022 – 2025. Despite the unfortunate title (is the Mayor’s budget no longer for proofreaders? Can’t the word “Decrease” has been shoehorned into the name?) document and strategy on reducing violence, the goal is surprising and necessary. The first page explains that the target is “perpetrators of abuse and violence“. It clearly states “that violence starts with words, and we all have a responsibility to challenge behavior that can lead to violence and make women feel unsafe.”
A very clear sentiment, reinforced by what Sadiq Khan wrote in the introduction:
“it is the person who has the responsibility to step up and do more to tackle this scourge. Of course, not all men are violent towards women. But when more than three-quarters of British women say men aren’t pulling their weight to help keep women and girls safe, we can’t deny that this issue has become a cultural blindspot for us..”
He continued: “We must be clear – this problem is caused by the unacceptable attitude and behavior of many men. This is not only a problem with violent minorities, but also with sexist people; who continue to act inappropriately for women; that perpetuate a toxic form of masculinity; or who just stand by silently when women feel threatened, or are being threatened.“
Convenient. Just amazing stuff.
Yesterday there was a Trans Pride march in London. Earlier, the Mayor tweeted this:
“I want everyone at London Trans Pride today to be happy, safe and empowered. It is not more important to support trans people, who are being stigmatized and placed at the heart of a toxic culture war. As your Mayor, I will always be by your side.“
Also amazing. And what the Mayors of different cities have to say.
At the march there was a rally with various speakers, one of whom was Sarah-Jane Baker, the person now known as the woman, who has been imprisoned for 30 years for kidnapping, torturing and attempting to kill other prisoners. Equal made into a movie say”If you see Terf a, punch in the f**king face.” Part of the crowd cheered those words. Dear me. There are many things that can be done – breaching the terms of Baker’s release from prison, Public Order offences, incitement to violence and more. Prison authorities may wish to check this. The Met, too, may want to act. It also has an action plan to reduce violence against women and girls (and not just by officers). You can read it here. Someone other than the author should.
A complaint has been made to the Met already. He was dismissed by a police officer from Charing Cross station without investigation on the grounds that “Convenient” is not a protected characteristic so this is not a hate crime. He also cited Article 10 of the ECHR on freedom of speech although he did not recognize that incitement to violence was – and has long been – an accepted exception to freedom of speech.
Where to start with all that is wrong with this?
- A breach of public order does not depend on whether a person has a characteristic protected under the Equality Act.
- It also does not contravene S.44 of the Serious Crime Act 2007 (promoting a criminal act such as ABH or GBH)
- Nor is it incitement to violence.
- Gender-critical beliefs are a protected characteristic.
- Gender is also a protected characteristic.
- Violence against women is a crime.
The Met has been asked to investigate whether a breach has occurred. One would think this should at least be done, since the first chapter of the Violence Against Women and Girls strategy is “Rebuilding Trust“. It would be unfortunate, wouldn’t it, if the suspicion arose that one reason why the Met has been so quick to eliminate this is because of a member of the Stonewall plan, a conflict of interest that is incompatible with “police without fear or favour“. I have written about it here. Or because they just don’t understand criminal law.
Return to the Chief. He is not, of course, responsible for what Baker said. They don’t organize marches or choose speakers or tell them what to say or check what they want. But what else are the words? “This is not only a problem with the minority of abusive men, but also with men……..who just stand by silently when women feel threatened, or threatened..”
So Mr. Khan – here we are days later and it’s been silence from you. What would you do if you said it was wrong – not clearly wrong – for anyone, no matter how strong they are on an issue, to threaten violence against those who disagree with them or urge others to do so? You are right to show support for trans people and against those who stigmatize them and make them feel unsafe. Will you now show support for women and against those who stigmatize them those people and made him feel insecure, who threatened violence against him at a publicly supported rally? You definitely don’t want people (not just women) to think you’re a hypocrite when you write a word about someone standing up”silent by“, about “violence begins with words“, about “blind spots“? Or you don’t really like them? Or you think that some women deserve violence, or “punch a man in the f**king face” Is it just a joke or rhetoric, or are you just concerned with violence and harsh words against your favored group?
what are you
Cycle free
[ad_2]
Source link