KENNY MACASKILL ON HATE CRIME.

Posted byiainlawson27Posted inUncategorized

TIME TO GET THE FOCUS RIGHT ON HATE CRIME – MACASKILL

GROWING EPIDEMIC OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN  EXPOSES SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT’S FAILURE TO ACT 

ALBA Depute Leader Kenny MacAskill MP has released figures which show that crimes of domestic abuse are at an all-time high having risen by 57% during Covid lockdown between 2019-20 and 2020-21.

He has said that these figures amount to a “growing epidemic of violence against women” which “exposes the Scottish Government’s repeated failure to act” in addressing hate crime and misogyny against women and girls.  The Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act became law in March 2021 but does not include sex as a hate crime “aggravator”.

The former Justice Secretary believes that all Hate Crimes should be prosecuted and that disability, race, religion, sexual orientation and transgender identity are correctly included in the Hate Crime Act.  However the failure by the Scottish Government to include sex in the Hate Crime Act and to make misogyny a hate crime are inexcusable.

Mr MacAskill has released a paper which shows that:

Domestic Abuse

  • Incidents of domestic abuse rose by 57% between 2019-20 (40,803) and 2020-21 (64,193).

Sexual Crimes

  • There has been a 34% increase in rape and attempted rape between 2013-14 (1,808) and 2018-19 (2,426).
  • There has been a 36% increase in attempted rape between 2013-14 (1,690) and 2018-19 (2,293).
  • There has been a 50% increase in sexual assault between 

2013-14 (3,405) and 2018-19 (5,123).

In a statement Mr MacAskill said:

“As this paper shows the biggest problem in respect of hate crime in every community in Scotland and in ever increasing numbers is that of violence against women.  At a time when recorded statistics show crimes of sexual assault, rape and domestic abuse on the rise, the Scottish Government’s Hate Crime Act, fails to address crimes that are motivated by prejudice and hate against women.  That is not just unacceptable it is shameful.

“These figures show the Scottish Government’s repeated failures to act. The failure to include sex in the Hate Crime Act was a huge failure and went against all the available evidence.  Since then whilst some hate crimes seem to have reduced violence against women and girls has increased.

“So why does the Hate Crime Act fail to address the fact that crimes of violence against women are at their highest ever level, by failing to include sex as an aggravator for hate crimes? And why is the Scottish Government continuing to drag its feet, nine months after promising action, when it comes to introducing a separate hate crime of misogyny?

“It is right that Hate Crimes should be prosecuted. Those who perpetrate such crimes on the basis of their prejudice and hate towards individuals regarding their disability, race, religion, sexual orientation or transgender identity are correctly included in the Hate Crime Act. Progress is being made on many fronts and that should continue. But the omission of violence against women and misogyny in the Act is staggering.

“The Scottish Government have compounded the failure to include sex in the Hate Crime Act by failing to bring forward a separate law to address misogyny.  They are failing to focus and act where the problem is the greatest.

“That is why I believe that these crime statistics should be a ‘wake up’ call to the Scottish Government to act and to act now. 

“It is time the Scottish Government acted to protect the section of our community who suffer most from hate crime. Baroness Helena Kennedy’s  working group report must be accelerated, and the law amended to include all hate crime victims and especially those who suffer most”.

ENDS

Hate Crime – Facts and Failure

The Scottish Government Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill was passed in March 2021 following recommendations to consolidate all hate crime law into one bill contained in Lord Bracadale’s review of hate crime legislation.

The intention was stated to be to ensure that there was legislation capable of addressing crimes motivated by prejudice. The aggravators in the Act are:

Disability

Race

Religion

Sexual orientation and

Transgender identity.

Concerns were expressed by women’s organisations over the fact that unlike the Equality Act 2010, sex as a protected characteristic had not been included as a hate crime aggravator even although statistics showed sexual assault, rape and domestic abuse was rising while crime overall in Scotland was decreasing.

During the passage of the bill an amendment was proposed that sex should be added as an aggravator. That was rejected by the Scottish Government who suggested that a stand-alone of misogynistic harassment be brought to parliament at a later date.

Accordingly, the Hate Crime Act doesn’t address sex-based hate. But what are the facts relating to hate crimes.

Aggravators Covered by the Hate Crime Act

Incidents of protected characteristic aggravated crimes recorded by Police Scotland 20014-15 to 2019-20.

Year2014-152015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20
Total number of charges of an offence aggravated by prejudice related to disability 176 199 188 282 299 387
Total number of charges of an offence aggravated by prejudice related to sexual orientation  848  1027  1081  1116  1194  1486
Total number of charges of an offence aggravated by prejudice related to transgender identity  21  30  42  52  40  41
Total number of charges of race crimes 3820 3721 3367 3278 2921 3038 
Total number of charges of an offence aggravated by religious prejudice  567  591  678  650  534  660

It’s right that Hate Crimes should be prosecuted. Those who perpetrate such crimes on the basis of their prejudice and hate towards individuals regarding their disability, race, religion, sexual orientation or transgender identity are correctly included in the Hate Crime Bill. Progress is being made on many fronts and that should continue. But the omission of violence against women and misogyny in the Bill is staggering. 

Incidents of sex aggravated crimes recorded by Police Scotland 20013-14 to 2018- 19.

SexualCrimes2013-142014-152015-162016-172017-182018-19
Rape & attempted rape 1808 1901 1809 1878 2255 2426
Rape 1690 1797 1692 1755 2136 2293
Attempted rape 118 104 117 123 119 133
Sexual assault 3405 3727 3963 4281 4826 5123

Incidents of domestic abuse recorded by the Police Scotland 20014-15 to 2019-20.

Gender of Victim & accused 2014- 15 2015- 16 2016- 17 2017- 18 2018- 19 2019- 20
Female victim male accused394834315842759398643972140803

Figures published by Police Scotland show 64,193 incidents of domestic abuse were recorded between April 2020 and March 2021 – an increase of 57% from the previous year coinciding with coronavirus lockdown.

Facts relating to Violence and Against Women and Girls

The Facts

1 in 10 women in Scotland have experienced rape.

1 in 5 women in Scotland have had someone try to force them to have sex against their will.

238% increase in other sexual crimes since 2010/11 including an increase from 5,763 in 2018-19 to 5,984 in 2019-20

The Scottish Crime and Justice Survey 2019-20 found that only 22% of rape victims and 12% of women who were victims of other sexual offences reported it to the police, so the true figures are much higher.

Refuge highlighted an 80% increase to their domestic abuse hotline whilst lockdown was in place.

112 women in Scotland were killed between 2009 to 2019 by their partners or ex partners, working out at 1 female death per month.

What Needs Done

Whilst Police Scotland may recognise a reported act as motivated by misogyny, but as sex is not included as a legal classification under the Hate Crime Act, they will be unable to charge the aggressor with a hate crime act.

Failure to include misogyny in the Hate Crime Act was a huge failure and went against all the available evidence. Since then whilst some hate crimes seem to have reduced violence against women and girls has increased. It’s time the Scottish Government acted to protect the section of our community who suffer most from hate crime. The working groups report must be accelerated, and the law amended to include all hate crime victims and especially those who suffer most.  

BEAT THE CENSORS

Sadly some sites had given up on being pro Indy sites and have decided to become merely pro SNP sites where any criticism of the Party Leader or opposition to the latest policy extremes, results in censorship being applied. This, in the rather over optimistic belief that this will suppress public discussion on such topics. My regular readers have expertly worked out that by regularly sharing articles on this site defeats that censorship and makes it all rather pointless. I really do appreciate such support and free speech in Scotland is remaining unaffected by their juvenile censorship. Indeed it is has become a symptom of weakness and guilt. Quite encouraging really.

50 thoughts on “KENNY MACASKILL ON HATE CRIME.”

    1. Yes. I’m rather disappointed that MacAskill simply jumps on the bandwagon of hating the haters without mentioning that tackling the underlying problems would go a long way to fixing some of the issues.

      Also the use of the word “hate” needs to go away. It’s simply a touchpaper for more hate. There’s a lot of things that are spiralling out of control and perpetuating the problems by using the same language that got us to this point helps no one. My confidence that Alba has what it takes to create a better Scotland and not simply deliver more of the same has diminished as a result.

      (Alba Party Founder Member. Neale Hanvey for First Minister)

      Liked by 4 people

      1. I will assume I missed something in the article that you will point it out.

        When the Government fails to include a group covered under the Equalities in new legislation and the recorded crimes against that group increase how do you interpret that as a failing of Kenny or Alba???

        At the moment Kenny, Alba, myself and many others are simply commenting as concerned citizens and expressing outrage at perceived gaps in legislation. All of the actual powers required to protect Women reside with Holyrood.

        Liked by 14 people

      2. That’s my point exactly. When the Hate Crime bill was introduced it got lambasted as a enabler of persecution because “hate” cannot be defined in precise terms. As a result the legislation leaves the door wide open for abuse of individuals and groups that are currently and in the future are considered undesirable. Marion Millar has already felt the effects of that.

        Now we see MacAskill, instead of trying to fix the problem, perpetuate it. Instead of binning legislation that is unsound and which can be used to oppress political opponents he seeks to widen it’s scope.

        However, let’s look on the bright side. With the legislation in place I’m sure we’ll an immediate ban of of the Orange Order and sectarian bigotry in all it’s forms. I won’t be holding my breath.

        Liked by 3 people

      4. Personally, I don’t believe we need laws for everything that everyone, but everyone, agrees is wrong anyway. what I do agree with you on is, after independence, we should be thinking of a different way to do things, stop spending our time on things that should never have to be raised in a civilized society, you can not legislate against peoples feelings. I want Scotland to start with a new and clean page, not carry on in the same way as the (SNP under Sturgeon) has been carrying on since taking office, lets get our priorities in their right order. Poverty, Homelessness, Affordable Housing, Better Education, (not this one size fits all), Good training and re-training, leading to full employment, Sort out reoffending within our prisons, which is epidemic in Scotland, Move to a better and cheaper (even free) public transport service, need I go on? Scotland has real and serious problems needing our attention, I believe they can only be taken when our parliament holds the purse strings, let’s start talking about becoming independent and then buckling up and start building a NEW and BETTER Scotland. anything other than this is simply coffeehouse filled crap.

        Liked by 4 people

    2. People were being visited by the police on the basis of protests consisting of no more than ribbons and chalked messages in favour of women’s rights. If MacAskill thinks this law should be strengthened rather than repealed or at least reconstituted somehow to protect our rights to free speech and protest he is on the wrong side of the argument.

      It is a bollocks piece of legislation. How can women be better protected by amending a law that deliberately left them without protection and has been used since to try and shut them up?

      Liked by 5 people

      1. I would have to agree with that, Obair. It is the legislation itself that is nonsensical and oppressive, with too many opportunities for misinterpretation, deliberate or otherwise. It needs to be scrapped completely, rather than refined, and existing law strengthened.

        Liked by 5 people

      2. The behavior of Police Scotland in swearing and man handling pensioners in a pub at Hogmanay is also a concern in this space. As an architect of this unaccountable, failing single force I feel MacAskill needs to step up and address the misuse of our police and justice system. The deliberately legally uncertain Hate Crime Bill is an enabler of this abuse, not a solution for anyone. A crime implemented at the discretion of the police (and their FM master). Heaven help us.

        I agree with Stuart: this diminishes my confidence in ALBA.

        Liked by 4 people

  2. These figures make horrific reading and the situation is unacceptable. Erosion of womens rights by the present regime will only worsen this. Action is required but the Scottish Government are more concerned with lesser issues such as trans rights than to tackle the serious issues in our country.

    Liked by 16 people

  3. It is dreadful that women continue to be unprotected in this way. The SG had an opportunity to correct this mistake by passing Joanne Lamont’s amendment which would have included women. Each and every MSP who voted against that amendment should be ashamed of themselves.

    Liked by 19 people

  4. The SG have put themselves in a corner. They have become so rigid in speech due to the TransCult guidance that they can no longer use the word Women. That is why it was not used in the Hate Crime Bill. We have reached the point that even using the word Women is Transphobic.

    The Equalities Act will become redundant. All documents will be re-written or burned. New Speech is here.

    Can you imagine what legislation would pass in an Independent Scotland under Sturgeon. Sadly I can.

    Liked by 21 people

    1. I’d like to know what we, as natural born females are meant to be addressed as? Is this a case of political correctness gone too far? I agree with everything Kenny MacAskill said in this article

      Liked by 5 people

      1. That’s actually the point, Elsie. We aren’t allowed to call ourselves anything except cis women, and we can like it or lump it, according to this ideology. They want, quite literally, to erase us from the lexicon, from all public spaces, from all positions of authority, and why? Because, at the front-line level, many of these men believe they are better women than we are, others believe that we should not exist except in the domestic and sexual availability spheres, like slaves and items on a fast food take-away menu, until we are too old, then we should just die and no cost the state anything more. At the middle level, we are in the way of the new phase of capitalism which will be fuelled by a massive extension to the prosthetics/cosmetic/drugs/insurance/porn industries where mega bucks bat their seductive eyelashes (the military complex, always a good bet for mega bucks in the past, is waning because American/British/European influence and excuses for deliberately-started wars and conflicts is also on the wane). At the third level, the superpower that is still the States, being on the wane, will leave a massive hole in world influence which other powers, such as Russia, but, mainly, China are waiting to fill. Some of it is planned, but some of it is just a lucky chance of where the cards fell for these sociopaths. Don’t get me wrong: medicine proper will be brought forward by robotic and technological advances; but, as per, they will also be used to interfere in humanity’s basic building blocks. Predatory capitalism never sticks, Elsie: it just enters a new, usually, even more despicable and exploitative phase; and even in those countries where it is anathema, supposedly to their religious beliefs or to their socio-economic political beliefs. Those trans identified people on the front-line have been given the sweetie bag of all sweetie bags, extreme and wide-ranging sexual licence, as their reward for the foot-soldiery. I’ve been called deranged for pointing this out, but, hey, I’d rather be deranged any day that a complete and utter fool, taken in by this ordure. Once you see it for what it is in reality, the shock will throw off he blinkers and the ‘just be kind’ dangerous nonsense.

        Liked by 7 people

      2. ” Predatory capitalism never sticks, Elsie: it just enters a new, usually, even more despicable and exploitative phase ” . Like a permanently pathologised , vaccine or other Covid- related drug- requiring population for example Lorna ?

        If one believes the whole Trans phenomena is being promoted/enabled – in the shadows – by Pharma Corps ( I totally agree it is ) ) it requires no great leap of imagination to see the same process being replicated with Covid .

        Indeed , the parallels are numerous ..viz …the censoring , de-platforming , vicious attacking of any dissenting voices – no matter how qualified and credible – the resort to legal measures to threaten and prosecute , the fanatical demand for complete compliance , the warping of existing Laws and the introduction of new ones to also compel compliance .

        I know some may baulk at the suggestion of equivalence , thinking one ( Covid ) is a * distraction * from the other ( Self-ID ) the latter being more important than the former .

        I’m not so sure that is the case

        Liked by 3 people

      3. Robert: I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but I do acknowledge that conspiracies certainly exist (a conspiracy being nothing more than the decision by two or more people to con others into doing what they want, basically, or into hiding something). The pandemic, however it started, could not be allowed a free rein or we would have had deaths in the same numbers as the Spanish flu of 1918-21/22. Even then, huge efforts were made to contain it with lockdowns and isolation. I have no doubt that some medicines, including vaccines, have proved to be inimical to public health, for one reason or another. Nonetheless, vaccines have also proved to be the saviours of public health, and, usually, you have to weigh up the pros and cons and decide for yourself. Vaccines are boosters for our own immune systems that kick in, in ways which they might not do normally. I don’t know what the ratio of natural immunity is, but I’d guess it’s not high. Some people will, of course, have adverse reaction, but the pros usually outweigh the cons. If not, common childhood ailments would have cut down children before they were any age, and you just have to look in the older cemeteries to see the truth of that. I’m not claiming that pharmaceutical companies don’t make profits, but they have massive outlay initially to get to those profits, so they are not all bad when they are concentrating on helping people rather than on the money.

        Liked by 1 person

      4. I’m neither a Conspiracy Theorist nor an Anti-Vaxxer Lorna – two terms which have been rendered meaningless by scattershot application – I had my son vaccinated when he was young without hesitation , as I myself was as a child .

        My concern has always been the ways in which the situation could be exploited by * bad actors * of various kinds , including Governments .

        Nothing I’ve seen up to now persuades me such concern is groundless

        Liked by 5 people

      5. Robert: I agree that bad actors are always a possibility, if not a probability where money/power/influence/control, etc. are concerned. We can never be too vigilant.

        Liked by 5 people

  5. The problem with «hate crime» is one of effective definition. That is an issue with the various «phobias» and the old chestnut antisemitism, who exactly is a Semite? Technically, I am one but the label doesn’t refer to me. Keeping people «safe» could easily end up as a catch all net limiting any critique, opinion or comment.
    The law protecting people from personal physical violence ought to be sufficient in a sophisticated environment.
    That old saw about sticks, stones and words has the virtue of not limiting freedom of expression.
    The current situation where people dissenting from the current narrative regarding what is best for world health ought to be silenced, cancelled, deleted or even jailed is a timely warning of an oppressive societal trend that for certain lawmakers might tick the «hate crime» box.
    Giving the Scottish police more occasions to hassle citizens is not good government.

    Liked by 8 people

    1. You are right, Otto: it is a catch-all, and every statute that is created, creates loopholes and meanings and definitions that were never intended, and which might often be detrimental to the original concept of the law. I have always been an advocate of the Scottish Common Law, under which most crimes are dealt with, and which is entirely flexible enough to stretch into present-day crime. It has its detractors, of course, and I acknowledge that, but the Common Law crime of Breach of the Peace is, although a wide concept, if applied properly and if police officers are sufficiently proficient in administering it, is capable of encompassing all these so-called ‘hate crimes’. The Common Law is one one area, I believe, where Scots Law is superior to English (mainly) statute Law. However, I’m sure someone will have a different opinion.

      Free speech is actually a privilege, rather than a legal right, with certain caveats attaching, and no one has the absolute right to say whatever he or she chooses to say; there are always responsibilities to have a care for the feelings of others, and pointless and deliberate offence can be a criminal or civil offence. Comedians, though, have to be able to ply their trade without fear of treading on overly-sensitive toes, and I think it has been no accident that that comedians have been targeted for all kinds of so-called offences when they are actually a very good counterpoint to ridiculous societal/political posturing. If we were to extend sensitivity to all areas of entertainment, most films these days (and in the past) show very stereotypical caricatures of women, and, though stereotypical images of black and Asian people are far more muted now, these were once staples of Hollywood and our own studios. So, a line has to be drawn between the pace that society changes towards minority groups who may be stigmatised and the reflections (in books, in film, in art, in comedy, etc., across all cultural areas) that we absorb. Often society is slow to catch up when social and political mores change and are reflected in prophetic artistic ways.

      What we should always avoid is a knee-jerk reaction to what some may perceive as offensive or sensitive, and we should definitely avoid changing laws that have existed for a long time simply to appease any one group, and I include women here, too, although we are hardly a minority group, comprising 51-52% of the entire population. We have many rights and huge advancements have been made in the past century. What is happening is that another ‘minority’ group has come to the fore which is anything but a minority; it comprises trans identified males, in the main, who might be offended by non-validation, but who have no legal right to compel it – as yet – and who are a privileged majority. Does that mean that trans identified people should not have human rights, civil rights, recognition of their right to exist? Of course not. What they should not expect the law to do, though, is validate their anti biological ideology, particularly when it is a direct threat to another group’s human and civil rights and societal concessions that exist precisely because of sex, rather than ‘gender’.

      Liked by 7 people

      2. I think it is a privilege, Marion, with caveats and corresponding responsibilities. The right to free speech is always qualified and is not absolute. However, trying to prevent free speech is authoritarian, especially where that free speech involves provable facts. For example, the facts prove that trans identified males are relatively safe in comparison to women, so, anyone saying so cannot be deemed to be carrying out a hate crime unless factual evidence is a hate crime.

        Like

      3. Hall, in depicting Voltair, said:
        I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”
        I agree there are lines but incitement laws pretty much covered those I feel. So although I usually whole heartedly agree with you Lorna I will respectfully disagree here.
        Je suis Charlie. Free speech is worthless if we are not allowed to offend.

        Liked by 3 people

      4. Marion: that is not what I said. If we are going to offend, and I agree that we have the privilege to do so, we must do so with pure motives, not so that we may injure another for no discernible point but our own prejudice. In comedy or satire, for example, the point is to highlight, by means of ridicule, silly and daft notions or claims or lifestyles or beliefs that are open to such ridicule because they either make no sense in reality or they are, by their very nature, based on what a rational person might call irrational beliefs or because of hypocrisy, etc. What no one has the right to do is bend others into compliance with his or her own beliefs or wants in order to satisfy a purely personal desire. If trans beliefs, for example are imposed upon us in order to validate something that is neither rational nor based in material reality, then why not Sharia Law even though it is alien to the majority? It is blindingly obvious that Sturgeon and her cohort have not actually thought through the implications of GRA reform because: a) they do not have the capacity to do so and can’t be bothered to employ those who could; b) she wants this pushed through come hell or high water because she knows what the implications will be for all women and girls, and does not give a fig. Therefore, no debate, no consultation is to be encouraged because it might sow dissent from the stated object of the exercise. The Hate Crime legislation will form a barrier against all dissent.

        Liked by 2 people

      5. Ah I see Lorna
        I think we are on slightly different pages
        SO:
        Sturgeon thinks nothing through with disastrous consequences – agree
        The HCB is being used to impose compliance with rules and behaviors that remove the rights of women and others – agree
        we must speak pure motives, not so that we may injure another for no discernible point but our own prejudice – disagree, we have the right be assholes

        It could be that I am a grumpy old sod. In 2014 someone did tell me how wonderful it was the schools were going to Flanders and I asked why? The ones who went out there to fight in that horror and those who waited for them so anxiously were nothing like the society we are building. Why are they going out to see what an alien society did? Could kids today get on the bus to Flanders without a support group? What would they do when they got there? OT but I think war is coming and when it does we are going to get our asses kicked – those with an agenda have engineered a frail society, self obsessed and weak. I can only hope they pay fully when it is shown this frail society cannot save them.

        Liked by 2 people

  7. Hi Iain/Kenny: That all kinds of prejudices exist is undeniable, given the evidence. What is deniable is that crimes against trans people i the UK, and in Scotland itself, are anywhere near the numbers for biological human females. Indeed, this is the case everywhere in the world. Evidence-based data is crucial, which is why the trans lobby wants it skewed in favour of trans people. Well over a hundred crimes of serious sexual assault have now been committed by ‘women’/’females’, although they have actually been committed by trans identified males. The Trans lobby ants to shut that down – any reference to trans crimes (which, again the evidence proves are as prevalent in this group as in every other male group).

    In times of adversity or change – and we are speaking here of comparatively privileged Western society, not other extremely deprived parts of the world – someone or something is always the scapegoat, the punchbag. That is usually women and children in human terms, and animals. Animals, too, tend to take the hit for all kinds of human angst and rage. Children can be targets of aggression from both males and females, or a passive female allows an aggressive male to damage her child(children). In almost all cases of displaced rage, the victims will be weaker than the perpetrator, so it is not hard to work out why women, children and animals get the brunt. Put simply, other males can hit back and injure an aggressive man, or another woman/man can hit back an aggressive woman.

    Almost always, any aggressive act by a male person (and by a female person) while having the appearance of being immediate and uncontrollable is a calculated action: in a split second, the perpetrator has calculated that he or she has the advantage. That the law has not yet caught up with this very evident psychological truism is to be regretted. In comparative terms, it has only quite recently caught up with the psychological differences between men and women when it comes to aggressive behaviour in the domestic marriage/partnership sphere: that is, that females have a slower burn than males; and that what might appear to be a long-planned and calculated act of violence has probably been building to snapping point after years of ill-treatment.

    In that sense, women tend to kill husbands or partners in a sense deliberately as the only means of escaping the constant torture and punishment. It become a life or death situation because the woman is so psychologically crushed that she sees no other way to escape, such as leaving the situation, and lack of resources to do so also plays a large part, if she earns no money of her own. Men tend to kill their wives/partners in a sudden frenzy of overkill, using their greater strength to full advantage, even if not consciously. To a great extent, we can actually work out the hot spots of violence: the aftermath of football matches where disappointment can lead to heightened aggressive responses; and times of change and deprivation over which people feel they have no control come into this category, too, so that it should be possible to alleviate the triggers. It helps no one to deliberately fudge and obscure crucial data on sex and record sexual and violent crimes committed by men in lipstick as those of women, specially when we would not dream of recording a hate crime against a black person or an Asian person or a disabled person as having been committed by another black or Asian person or another disabled person when the perpetrator was so very evidently white and/or able-bodied. That would mount to a crime on its own.

    Liked by 10 people

      1. Thank you, PP. Spot on. Professionals right across the board – in law, in psychology, in psychiatry, in medicine, in academia, everywhere – are dumping their professional ethics and jumping on this bandwagon. They are going to bitterly regret it when this ordure all falls through or, worse, when everything that so many women have been warning against, happens.

        Liked by 6 people

      1. It derives from philosophy into jurisprudential discourse, Obair, and from there into a kind of quasi legal status, but it is always qualified by responsibility not to deliberately and from malicious intent create or encourage ill-feeling against or ill-treatment of others or simply out of prejudice. For example, if you want to show that something is a belief built on shifting sands, your best bet is either to strip away the fallacies through factual proof or to highlight the ridiculousness of the beliefs through comedy and satire. These are not intended, through pure malice, to hurt anyone or to force them to abandon their belief system. It is saying: go for it, mate, but count me out. In other words, it prevents enforced compliance which is precisely what the trans lobby is attempting to do through authoritarian and silencing tactics. Their belief system cannot be sustained against exposure through comedy or satire or factual proof, so it seeks to silence and enforce compliance on all of us – which tactics in any normal country would be illegal.

        Liked by 4 people

      2. A beautiful explanation and I disagree with nothing in it. It may well have been the case that I have been kidding myself on out of ignorance (in which case I will stand corrected) but I am no yet sold on the idea of the giving up a right in exchange for a privilege.

        Liked by 2 people

  8. Forgive me what rights should women have not to abused.

    Is it the same rights that allows families to live in cold houses because they cannot pay for electricity and gas due the huge levels of fuel poverty. Or what of the right to have food instead of having to rely on food banks.

    lots of drivel talked by this government about rights. Turning society upside down to grant so called rights and protections to micro minority trans – sexual people whilst disregarding a holocaust of abuse in huge sections of our society.

    and so on the 3rd of June 2022 I truly despair about the government and society that Scotland has become. It’s an absolute shit hole of a country capped off with a rotten Police force and a rotten and corrupt prosecution service.

    But hey, cynical maybe, but for so many of our ruminant citizens, do they actually care.

    And as prices and inflation soar, health care becomes more scarce, let us all enjoy the cake we have baked for ourselves. A country without rights, or at least rights for many – that’s our choice.

    Happy new year. Maybe hopefully more of our citizens will wake up and demand better. And certainly this blog may help that objective. Keep it up Iain et al.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. Willie: I agree with you that there are many, many societal problems worthy of championing, and I take your point that women do not have priority more than anyone else. I think, though, if you access the data (soon to be skewed out of existence) that females still come last in every group across society in every area of deprivation. Women will not come last in every aspect of the societal ladder, but, where there is deprivation or violence or crime, they are on the bottom rung with their children every time. The skewing of data will make it impossible to understand what the data is telling us, and if females are forced out of public life, their lot will return to pre WW I levels as a matter of logical conclusion.

      Liked by 3 people

    2. If misandry is included then Sturgeons remarks regarding never wanting to shake a hand again, especially a mans hand, would be on thin ice – and rightly so.

      Liked by 4 people

  11. O/T.

    Sturgeon freezing out voices in debate.

    “SNP ministers have been accused of freezing feminist and religious groups out of discussions over controversial gender reform proposals, while offering an open door to pro-trans lobbyists.

    Nicola Sturgeon faces claims that she is breaking a manifesto promise, made ahead of last May’s Holyrood election, to consult with a wide range of groups before pushing ahead with changes that would allow people to legally change gender without a medical diagnosis.”

    https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fpolitics%2F2022%2F01%2F03%2Fsnp-accused-ignoring-feminist-religious-groups-gender-reform%2F

    Liked by 5 people

    1. Sturgeon breaks manifesto promises with the same impunity she breaks what passes for the ministerial code in Holyrood.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. Totally agree Marion, Wings did a few polls on the GRA/Self-Id issues and the Scottish public in the majority didn’t buy into it, that’s probably why Sturgeon is sidelining them and us now to push it through.

        I honestly think she’s using the gender issue to divide Scots, even more so the indy camp because she’s not interested in Scottish independence, she and her party are flying high and have been for years now, why risk this with Scottish independence. She’ll just dangle the indy carrot every now and then to shut the indy masses up, so far its worked a treat.

        Liked by 5 people

    2. We shouldn’t be in the least surprised that sturgeon is freezing out religious groups or anyone opposed to her lunacy , LOOK at the original consultation on GRA that she opened up to the WORLD , NAME any other leader of a country who has done this , encouraged solicited comments and encouragement from persons around the world to participate in the formation of legislation of a country in which they do not reside , have never visited , probably never heard of , couldn’t point to on a map , haven’t contributed to financially , don’t pay taxes to , all these things and more , but we all know it was done deliberately to skew and gerrymander the responses that unfortunately for her failed

      Even though she failed to encourage enough perverts and deviants from around the world to skew the results she is continuing in her contempt of the opposition to this lunacy irrespective of what the majority of people who are aware of the destruction of women’s rights this will bring vehemently oppose

      Liked by 1 person

  12. Marion: this stuff was going to be passed supposing the citadel itself fell. She is too far up the trans lobby’s (and Greens’) nethers to pull back now. The next few years will prove women to have been right and I predict injuries to women as the very least of the implications. In the States, where guns are the norm, it could lead to deaths. Males and females are far too different in their biological sex to ever be able to share spaces. It is so much more than that, though. They also want all of our hard-won rights, and that’s just the front-line trans warriors. Let one in, you let them all in. The sexologists and psychologists of the 1960s who thought that invading women’s spaces was the answer to what is a mental illness (body dysphoria) in order to validate these men have done a massive disservice to women because they did not care, or, more to the point, even take women into account, so desperate were they to pander to these men. These were your actual transsexuals who would eventually go for surgery and hormones. What we are faced with now are mainly autogynephilic and fetishistic men who retain all their maleness while claiming to be women. All females should be very afraid. Sturgeon has betrayed her own sex, as has her enabler-in-arms, Lorna Slater. They are two women that are every bit our ‘enemies’ as the Unionists with their endless caping about the Union. Both sets of collaborationists have brought misery to many in their wake. Hell mend them all.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. I am not surprised. He lost out at this Conference and lost his position. He probably has realised being in favour of Independence is too risky if you want position in the New SNP.

      Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.