UK: No, it's not ridiculous to call misogyny a hate crime

Submitted by Mastodon on Wed, 2016-09-14 00:39

Article here. Excerpt:

'Women have very little idea of how much men hate us, wrote Germaine Greer, and the criminal justice system has hardly gone out of its way to disabuse us. Hate crime monitoring by the police covers disability, race, religion, sexual orientation and gender identity, but astonishingly, not sex. While the police have all-too-slowly come to recognise the systemic underpinnings of violence when it affects male victims, the targeting of women because they are women has been left behind. If you want to find out how much men hate women, you won’t find the answer in the official statistics. Until now, because a successful pilot by Nottingham Police to record misogyny as a hate crime is now being considered for adoption by forces across England and Wales.

The Nottingham experiment inevitably attracted derision on its launch in July, with multiple snickering headlines about the prospect of wolf-whistling becoming a crime – the implication being, of course, that this would be inherently absurd. What actually happened was different: under the Nottingham scheme, police have dealt with more than 20 incidents, “all of which required some form of police action”, according to Dave Alton, hate crime manager for Nottingham Police. Two men have been arrested for public order offences and actual bodily harm.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

Though, it's really not surprising, given how gynocentric the U.K.'s justice system already is. I think the U.K should be called, "The Land of She-spended Sentences", seeing that it really hates to see a poor wittle woman sent to jail, even for things like stabbing a man in the abdomen, glassing him in the face, or even biting off part of his manhood, to the point that surgery was required to repair the damage. I bet it won't be long until a man saying "good morning" to a woman he doesn't know will carry a bigger sentence than a woman causing a man grievous bodily harm. If such is not already the case, that is.

I also couldn't help but notice the red herrings in the article: that revenge porn is a wholly male vs. female phenomenon (simply not true - the two most recent cases I read of this in the U.K were women posting nude photos of their former lovers - one female, one male), and the implication that rape and DV were condoned not too long ago. Could have fooled me, judging by the fact that less than a century ago rape was punishable by death and castration (at least in the U.S.). Rape was always a crime that carried a hefty penalty in Britain. In the days of William the Conqueror the punishment was castration and loss of both eyes. Interesting sentences for a crime supposedly viewed as trivial by society.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by xtrnl on Wed, 2016-09-14 20:24