smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
TRAs would have it so that it would be a hate crime to call her a man. this is already the law in Scotland!
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Transwomen are not Women - Part 14
- Thread starter JoeMorgue
- Start date
- Status
TRAs would have it so that it would be a hate crime to call her a man. this is already the law in Scotland!
Hercules56
Banned
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2013
- Messages
- 17,176
In New York you can be forced to pay very hefty fines if your repeatedly misgender a trans person.
No it isn't. As was demonstrated by Rowlings on the first day of new "anti-hate" legislation.
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Yes it is. Just because they chose not to go after JKR for what she said does not mean it isn't the law. They didn't go after her because knew what an absolute ****-storm would come down on them if they did. Those laws will have a chilling effect on free speech, because reports will be investigated, and even though you might not in the end, be charged, the investigation itself is punishment. For example a 74 year old woman was arrested in her house and taken away in a police van. Her offense? Apparently, calling the neighbour who was harrassing her a "mongrel"
https://www.gbnews.com/news/pensioner-arrested-hate-crime-scotland
Ron Obvious
Graduate Poster
Add one to the Orwellian Newspeak dictionary of our times: misgendering: to recognise and refer to the correct sex of a person who believes themselves to be something other than what they really are.
No it is not the law. You are simply wrong and scaremongering. ETA: The E&W laws have been tested several times and the bar is set very high - as it should be (the SC covers Scotland as well)
And really I wouldn't use GB News as a reliable news site. And even that site had to conclude with it being a load of crap.
Last edited:
p0lka
Illuminator
You can recognise her as a woman.
If they start arguing about changing male and female sex then they are factually incoherent cos it doesn't work that way, but gender is a variable.
Ron Obvious
Graduate Poster
I won't even concede that. Up until very recently, gender and sex were absolutely synonymous for those too squeamish to say 'sex'. Right now, other than in grammar, it's a completely useless and misleading word best avoided.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
Can he, though? What does womanhood mean to you, and how do you recommend going about recognizing it in others?
The title 9 changes compel pronouns for federal funding of education institutions.
This means if he decides to teach, kids will be compelled to affirm.
The only way out of this is to call him a man in defiance.
While this is legal till August.
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Its NOT a load of crap - its not a made up story. This actually did happen and even the Scottish Police acknowledged what happened.
Police Scotland said: “A 74-year-old woman was arrested on Tuesday, 9 April, 2024 in connection with a report of verbal abuse in the Harbour Road area of Troon on Monday, 8 April, 2024.
"When I asked why I was being taken to a station they said it was the new bill that had come out on April 1.
“I was searched, my jewellery was taken off, my phone turned off, my bag was emptied into plastic bags. I felt like a criminal.
“They told me that I’d called her a ‘simple m***o’. That’s not even a name I would call anyone.
“They said there was no charge or criminal record and let me go."
"When I asked why I was being taken to a station they said it was the new bill that had come out on April 1.
“I was searched, my jewellery was taken off, my phone turned off, my bag was emptied into plastic bags. I felt like a criminal.
“They told me that I’d called her a ‘simple m***o’. That’s not even a name I would call anyone.
“They said there was no charge or criminal record and let me go."
She was arrested because she called someone a name. And you really think this is OK? Whether or not this was ultimately the Law she was arrested under, it is the law the cops believed they were applying - and that is the ONLY thing that matters when the process is the punishment.
"Humza Yousaf’s dangerous Hate Crime Act is open to exploitation by individuals looking to settle scores, and this can lead to innocent people being targeted and, in some cases, carted off in police vans."
I repeat, you put these laws in place, and it has a chilling effect on free speech. I don't give a fat rat's arse that "the bar is set very high" because the real problem is that people will abuse such a law. There are already nearly 10,000 complaints under the new law. People are not deterred from speaking their minds because they might end up in court, they are deterred because of the process they would be subjected to, being handcuffed and taken away in front of neighbors, friends, family. Having to undergo interrogation, having to get (and pay for) a lawyer to represent them.https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/27294270/hate-crime-police-neighbour-morag-brown-troon-arrested/
Last edited:
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
At least swatting in the US involves allegations of imminent violence, and real consequences for the false reporter.
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
There should always be consequences for a false reporter.
I wouldn't find these hate speech laws so unpalatable if there were some conditions in place, such as...
1. No anonymous complaints of hate speech. Police are not to investigate any complaint unless the complainant signs their name it.
2. No third party complaints. Police are not investigate a complaint made by a third party without the consent of the alleged victim. A person claiming to have been subjected to hate speech may consent to a third party making a complaint on their behalf.
3. Consequences for making a false complaint. A compulsory prosecution with no room for discretion. Anyone making a deliberately false accusation of hate speech must be charged with the crime of filing a false police report.
These would certainly make those serial complainers think twice before accusing someone of hate speech.
Last edited:
p0lka
Illuminator
How do you explain the term 'tomboy' which has been around since the 1500's, If as you say gender and sex were absolutely synonymous?
Ron Obvious
Graduate Poster
I'm not clear what needs an explanation here. Is "Tomboy" a gender now? It's a perfectly self-contained word without dragging genders into the discussion.
Well, so long as they self ID as having a disability, that should be OK... shouldn't it?
Sure as long as their sex is not disabled but their gender is disabled and we pretend that makes sense.
p0lka
Illuminator
You're taking the word 'recognise' and applying it in different ways which is a bit iffy, but to answer
Yes he can, as recognise means acknowledge in that context.
womanhood to me means a gender stereotype that I wish society would grow out of.
You recognise it in others by acknowledging it. It's not like I was using the word to mean physically looking and judging people, is it?
p0lka
Illuminator
Last edited:
Ron Obvious
Graduate Poster
Satire? do I get a point
No, I honestly don't get what your point is. A tomboy is (and has been) a descriptive term for a type of girl or woman. It tells you nothing else about her. What does the word gender, let alone gender ideology, add to the discussion? Some very feminine women of my acquaintance have described themselves as having been a tomboy as a teenager.
For that matter, what's the male equivalent term? A girly man?
Strictly speaking, gender applies to nouns in gendered languages such as German and French. It's also a euphemism for sex. It's never been a thing in and of itself.
- Status