“Anti-male” activist faces court in UK

suicide_circus · 06-10-2015 10:35pm

Links234 wrote: »

I'm gonna duck out of this, so I'll just leave you guys with this.

Bit late, damage done

smoking_kills · 06-10-2015 10:35pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

The UK does not have Protected free speech try again.

I know, and they should! Whatever she said she should not go to jail.

Links234 · 06-10-2015 10:36pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

Bit late, damage done

You're right, I could've spent this time gaming.

Icemancometh · 06-10-2015 10:37pm

Britain's laws regarding social media are ridiculous and I'm glad we don't have them here. There must hundreds if not thousands of violations of this on twitter in the UK everyday, and this allows the police to selectively enforce the rules on certain targets only. Previously it seems to have been people trolling rape victims, or other unfortunates, or at least that's what I've seen reported. But you can't demand rules on others' speech and then be surprised when it comes back to bite you.

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 10:39pm

smoking_kills wrote: »

I know, and they should! Whatever she said she should not go to jail.

Who wants her to go to jail ? Seems here previous twitter rants have come back to haunt her and this complaint was taken seriously off the back of stupid comments previously. Seems fairly cut and dry. Big fine smack on the wrists soon sort our people like this that seem to think they can spout nonsense. Especially having a job like she did.

I await her supporters now dropping out on the backs of her coming off as a scumbag judging by her previous comments and alike.

Very Bored · 06-10-2015 10:40pm

smoking_kills wrote: »

I know, and they should! Whatever she said she should not go to jail.

But the initial question was not whether or not she should go to jail, it was whether she should be summonsed to court. The court has numerous ways of dealing with any offence should she be proven guilty of anything in the first place.

smoking_kills · 06-10-2015 10:40pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Who wants her to go to jail ? Seems here previous twitter rants have come back to haunt her and this complaint was taken seriously off the back of stupid comments previously. Seems fairly cut and dry. Big fine smack on the wrists soon sort our people like this that seem to think they can spout nonsense. Especially having a job like she did.

I await her supporters now dropping out on the backs of her coming off as a scumbag judging by her previous comments and alike.

She will blame the patriarchy! No doubt :eek:

cantdecide · 06-10-2015 10:42pm

She should be issued an ASBO in my opinion. It's a minor slap on the wrist for being a douche

06-10-2015 10:46pm

Clandestine wrote: »

Before you feel too sorry for her:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQiwpvPWwAEHsnx.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQiwqlXWEAAXWch.jpg

But should she go to prison? No

Threatening/supporting violence toward Tories is a much more credible threat than #KillAllWhiteMen, that's the one police should speak to her about tbh!

She's clearly mental* and should never have been allowed keep her role as a Student Union officer but her being a dickhead isn't really grounds for bringing her to court. Maybe there's more to the story than just #KillAllWhiteMen because I find it hard to reconcile a satirical hashtag with being genuine hate speech and incitement to racism.

*oops, please forgive my ableism, I'm off to check my privilege

osarusan · 06-10-2015 10:51pm

DeadHand wrote: »

Having said that, her university needs to act. There is absolutely no way she should be allowed to continue as a welfare and diversity officer with an insane attitude like that no matter how irrelevant the position. There are grounds for expulsion here.

There has been a thread about her before.

The university can't do anything about her position in the union as it is independently run. There was a petition about removing her as diversity officer, but it didn't get enough signatures to actually trigger a vote.

I'm not sure about expulsion as a student though.

Old Jakey · 06-10-2015 10:52pm

She looks pretty white to me...anyway I hope she gets sent down, will wipe that smug look off her face.

Very Bored · 06-10-2015 10:52pm

cantdecide wrote: »

She should be issued an ASBO in my opinion. It's a minor slap on the wrist for being a douche

Thought they were only for kids?

Also, they're a badge of honour in some parts.

RDM_83 again · 06-10-2015 10:59pm

Icemancometh wrote: »

Britain's laws regarding social media are ridiculous and I'm glad we don't have them here. There must hundreds if not thousands of violations of this on twitter in the UK everyday, and this allows the police to selectively enforce the rules on certain targets only. Previously it seems to have been people trolling rape victims, or other unfortunates, or at least that's what I've seen reported. But you can't demand rules on others' speech and then be surprised when it comes back to bite you.

this +100
You can't support these types of law as some of the posters that are arguing against it do but rejecting them as soon as soon as its applied to a group that they consider "privileged" stinks of double standards.

adamshare01 · 06-10-2015 11:03pm

Well, if you publish a statement like that, it's more than reasonable for the police and judiciary to dig around to see whether or not you're serious, and that may mean a day in court.

06-10-2015 11:06pm

She should relax, maybe do a spot of baking or ironing.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i · 06-10-2015 11:11pm

strelok wrote: »

she's a ****ing see you next friday but she shouldn't face any criminal charges over it, kill all men is just a way for feminists to let their hair down and tell the world what they really think, it's very rarely an actual call to arms.

A synf? Or maybe a cunf? I think you got it wrong dude.

06-10-2015 11:12pm

Icemancometh wrote: »

Britain's laws regarding social media are ridiculous and I'm glad we don't have them here. There must hundreds if not thousands of violations of this on twitter in the UK everyday, and this allows the police to selectively enforce the rules on certain targets only. Previously it seems to have been people trolling rape victims, or other unfortunates, or at least that's what I've seen reported. But you can't demand rules on others' speech and then be surprised when it comes back to bite you.

I'd be less concerned about those who use social media to target one person, like the trolling rape victims stuff. But such any empty, pointless threat like "kill all left handers/brunettes/white men"...I just it doesn't convey any immediate threat, more hysteria. A court appearance is a waste of time and effort and will give her campaign an airing it doesn't deserve.

Sand · 06-10-2015 11:12pm

Links234 wrote: »

You're right, I could've spent this time gaming.

I'd presume your gaming choices are very limited given the inherent white male bigotry and racism that frames much of modern game design.

One eyed Jack · 06-10-2015 11:15pm

Two minds about it tbh. On the one hand, I hate to see anything which would fuel her persecution complex, she's enough of a martyr as it is.

On the other hand, I'd like to see her being made an example of to others so that they begin to realise that their words do actually have an effect on other people, and what one person may construe as the inoffensive and inane ramblings of a tumblr warrior, or a person who gets their jollies from insulting other people or encouraging other people to insult other people...

Someone else who is the target of such communications may actually take them seriously. We can tell them to get some perspective, but the more hateful crap I'm seeing posted online, I'm beginning to wonder - who really needs to get some perspective here, and why should anyone find this behaviour and these attitudes acceptable, and why should it be allowed to continue?

Make an example of them until people start getting the message that it's really not acceptable to attempt to humiliate and denigrate other people online.

"Don't be a dick" has never gone out of style, even though it may not be all that fashionable nowadays.

Icemancometh · 06-10-2015 11:18pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd be less concerned about those who use social media to target one person, like the trolling rape victims stuff. But such any empty, pointless threat like "kill all left handers/brunettes/white men"...I just it doesn't convey any immediate threat, more hysteria. A court appearance is a waste of time and effort and will give her campaign an airing it doesn't deserve.

I'm more concerned about the ability to charge people for what they say on social media. By all means have it is a civil offence, but a criminal offence is way too much. And as I said earlier, it gives the police pretext to go after certain targets only. There must be thousands of people they're choosing not to prosecute, whether that's hateful bigots like this woman, or trolls who get their kicks going after the vulnerable.

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 11:20pm

Icemancometh wrote: »

I'm more concerned about the ability to charge people for what they say on social media. By all means have it is a civil offence, but a criminal offence is way too much. And as I said earlier, it gives the police pretext to go after certain targets only. There must be thousands of people they're choosing not to prosecute, whether that's hateful bigots like this woman, or trolls who get their kicks going after the vulnerable.

Citation ? A complaint was made in this case. And her history is pretty bad a lot of loaded wording in her tweets.

Sand · 06-10-2015 11:22pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Two minds about it tbh. On the one hand, I hate to see anything which would fuel her persecution complex, she's enough of a martyr as it is.

On the other hand, I'd like to see her being made an example of to others so that they begin to realise that their words do actually have an effect on other people, and what one person may construe as the inoffensive and inane ramblings of a tumblr warrior, or a person who gets their jollies from insulting other people or encouraging other people to insult other people...

Someone else who is the target of such communications may actually take them seriously. We can tell them to get some perspective, but the more hateful crap I'm seeing posted online, I'm beginning to wonder - who really needs to get some perspective here, and why should anyone find this behaviour and these attitudes acceptable, and why should it be allowed to continue?

Make an example of them until people start getting the message that it's really not acceptable to attempt to humiliate and denigrate other people online.

"Don't be a dick" has never gone out of style, even though it may not be all that fashionable nowadays.

My view is similar but differently motivated - I hope she gets taken to court and jailed to highlight the inanity of the laws. I truly do believe that targeted bullying or victimisation of a person - be it on the street or across the internet should be tried and convicted.

But the idea that it illegal to offend other people is quite inimical to freedom. I say that as a white male. The likes of this fool is free to be a fool in my opinion with the general nonsense and abuse she spouts - I have zero respect for the student culture she represents. What negatively affects me is when take her activity, or the activity of other fringe morons serves as justification to enact sweeping laws to ban people offending other people. I retain the right to offend other people, and other people retain the right not to read or hear what I say. Freedom of speech is a little more nuanced than blanket bans on offending people in general or individuals having to accept any abuse.

stunmer · 06-10-2015 11:23pm

How she made Welfare and Diversity Officer is beyond me.

Arrested - no.

Fired from her position at the university - absolutely

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 11:25pm

Sand wrote: »

My view is similar but differently motivated - I hope she gets taken to court and jailed to highlight the inanity of the laws. I truly do believe that targeted bullying or victimisation of a person - be it on the street or across the internet should be tried and convicted.

But the idea that it illegal to offend other people is quite inimical to freedom. I say that as a white male. The likes of this fool is free to be a fool in my opinion with the general nonsense and abuse she spouts - I have zero respect for the student culture she represents. What negatively affects me is when take her activity, or the activity of other fringe morons to enact sweeping laws to ban people offending other people. I retain the right to offend other people, and other people retain the right not to read or hear what I say. Freedom of speech is a little more nuanced than blanket bans on offending people in general or individuals having to accept any abuse.

Let me stop it right there, Uk and Ireland do not have protected Free speech. Sure you can get done for Blasphemy here. Not that anyone has been. I to am very weary of new laws governing the internet. But when it's stuff that was not legal in the first place like incitement or hatred.

Sand · 06-10-2015 11:27pm

stunmer wrote: »

How she made Welfare and Diversity Officer is beyond me.

The cynical white male in me isn't all that surprised she made Welfare and Diversity Officer in a student union. The world weary part of me is bemused that such a jobsworth role exists in such a trendy lefty environment - surely the "Dont be a dick" rule suffices?

Sand · 06-10-2015 11:30pm

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Let me stop it right there, Uk and Ireland do not have protected Free speech. Sure you can get done for Blasphemy here. Not that anyone has been. I to am very weary of new laws governing the internet. But when it's stuff that was not legal in the first place like incitement or hatred.

Agreed - I am totally against incitement to hatred against an individual (in particular) or groups in general, though I more wary in the latter case. What I am against is the growing calls of people to have a right not to be offended. That should never serve as a condition for free speech, and indeed the law should be positively suspicious of any effort to lead it in that fashion.

In terms of negative impact from an error in judgement, I'd rather a person be offended than the free speech of others be impeded.

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 11:33pm

Sand wrote: »

Agreed - I am totally against incitement to hatred against an individual (in particular) or groups in general, though I more wary in the latter case. What I am against is the growing calls of people to have a right not to be offended. That should never serve as a condition for free speech, and indeed the law should be positively suspicious of any effort to lead it in that fashion.

In terms of negative impact from an error in judgement, I'd rather a person be offended than the free speech of others be impeded.

I would love Ireland to have Protected Free speech. The problem is though people get offended by this and that and agree on it. So as you said it should not be a right but alas. But this case is slightly different.

steddyeddy · 06-10-2015 11:34pm

TBH I think she has a persecution complex like a significant number of third wave feminists.

Harry Palmr · 06-10-2015 11:38pm

steddyeddy wrote: »

TBH I think she has a persecution complex like a significant number of third wave feminists.

I believe its the forth wave we're now being deluged with. The one's who hate everyone.

Bahar Mustafais could be considered a poster girl sorry women for all that is wrong with modern diversity - narrow minded, self serving, hateful, ideological, mean spirited

06-10-2015 11:44pm

Sand wrote: »

The cynical white male in me isn't all that surprised she made Welfare and Diversity Officer in a student union. The world weary part of me is bemused that such a jobsworth role exists in such a trendy lefty environment - surely the "Dont be a dick" rule suffices?

In my time there was only "Welfare Officer". When did they nail on the Diversity bit? One man's diversity might impeded another man's Welfare ffs!!!

darkpagandeath · 06-10-2015 11:46pm

Deleted User wrote: »

In my time there was only "Welfare Officer". When did they nail on the Diversity bit? One man's diversity might impeded another man's Welfare ffs!!!

When people became special snowflakes.

jimgoose · 06-10-2015 11:50pm

Are these kind of characters paid actual salaries, by actual educational institutions??

steddyeddy · 06-10-2015 11:53pm

I don't think she should be arrested but I do think it highlights the sort of vague feeling of persecution some feminists have.

kstand · 06-10-2015 11:57pm

Good and about time.
If a Caucasian male said what she said in reverse they would rightfully face the courts and prison. A disgrace it hasn't happened sooner

kstand · 06-10-2015 11:57pm

steddyeddy wrote: »

I don't think she should be arrested but I do think it highlights the sort of vague feeling of persecution some feminists have.

It goes beyond that to race. How she had got this far is astonishing.

cantdecide · 06-10-2015 11:58pm

Very Bored wrote: »

Thought they were only for kids?

Also, they're a badge of honour in some parts.

Badge of honour? I would expect so but as for kids? Not so...

This is more of the kind of flavour I was thinking about.

hatrickpatrick · 07-10-2015 12:38am

Fletcher Greasy Sieve wrote: »

"racism and sexism describes structures of privilege based on race and gender".

I'm so sick of feminists pushing this utter bullsh!t. Apart from the censorship thing, this was the other big issue which led me to not only disassociate from feminism but label myself an anti-feminist. The majority of mainstream, vocal feminists push this bullsh!t - it's a viewpoint which is enforced on almost every feminist forum, blog, discussion etc - and it essentially allows feminists to justify any number of double standards which either unfairly benefit women or unfairly disadvantage men.

And before we get the "no true Scotsman" argument as always, merely disagreeing with this sentiment is not enough. If indeed most feminists do not oppose these views, then they need to demand that those who do stop claiming to represent feminism when pushing this agenda in the media and in public.

Having said all of this, I absolutely oppose her being brought to court. Nobody should be prosecuted for expressing an opinion, regardless of how repulsive, with the exception of direct libel against specific individuals. Freedom of speech is more important than any perceived right not to be offended.

SeanW · 07-10-2015 12:39am

RayM wrote: »

It's a 'hate crime' in the same way as Baz Ashmawy's 'Fifty Ways to kill your Mammy' on Sky 1 is incitement to matricide. Get some perspective. Jesus wept.

Would you have the same opinion if it were misogynists using a twitter hashtag like #KillAllWomen? Even if it was supposidly "just a joke?"

I doubt it. A lot of people would have a real problem with that, and rightly so.

Links234 · 07-10-2015 12:42am

Sand wrote: »

I'd presume your gaming choices are very limited given the inherent white male bigotry and racism that frames much of modern game design.

I only play games pre-approved by Feminist Frequency. Or at least, I play them until the glorious day comes when we ban all videogames.

hatrickpatrick · 07-10-2015 12:52am

wakka12 wrote: »

I suppose..but really were any white males even slightly offended by this? If it said no gays or no blacks it would cause real hurt. I don't care about what she said, Im a white male, and I honestly don't think theres any white male out there who felt genuinely offended or hurt by this issue

Whether is offended anybody is irrelevant - if it would be illegal to target it at one demographic, then it should be illegal to target it at any demographic. No discrimination should be acceptable when it comes to what is and is not ok.

Bearing in mind that I still don't believe that she should go to jail, but nor would I believe that a man who tweeted something similar with the genders reversed should. My issue is that feminists use this "privilege" bullsh!t to justify double standards while claiming to believe in equality. The two are mutually exclusive - you can have double standards, or you can have equality. You cannot cherry pick the aforementioned based on whether or not it benefits you.

Sand · 07-10-2015 2:07am

Links234 wrote: »

I only play games pre-approved by Feminist Frequency. Or at least, I play them until the glorious day comes when we ban all videogames.

Lies! No games are approved by Feminist Frequency.

endacl · 07-10-2015 2:12am

Is it wrong to be prejudiced against stupid people who think they're smart people?

I think I may be a bigot. I'm bad. I should feel bad. I do. That woman is a stupid people who thinks she's a smart people.

StinkyMunkey · 07-10-2015 2:27am

Some fugly bint hates white men, sorry but my give a fcukometer is registering zero. She prolly fisting herself now while at the same time patting herself on the back thinking about just how edgy she is. Methinks someone has daddy issues tbh.

Tarzana2 · 07-10-2015 2:53am

kstand wrote: »

Good and about time.
If a Caucasian male said what she said in reverse they would rightfully face the courts and prison. A disgrace it hasn't happened sooner

Nobody would go to prison for that. The "If this were reversed" stuff tends towards hyperbolic, often with little basis.

SeanW wrote: »

Would you have the same opinion if it were misogynists using a twitter hashtag like #KillAllWomen? Even if it was supposidly "just a joke?"

I doubt it. A lot of people would have a real problem with that, and rightly so.

Apparently that twitter hashtag does indeed exist, to little reaction or comment.

It was mentioned up-thread. Did you read the thread?

Billy86 · 07-10-2015 2:59am

No different to BNP voting idiots and the like, just on the other side of the fence. I've heard that one before, that minorities "cannot be racist" because they are a minority, and it is, to be blunt, boll*cks.

Oxford Dictionary
Definition of racism in English:
noun

[MASS NOUN]
1Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior:
a programme to combat racism
MORE EXAMPLE SENTENCES
SYNONYMS
1.1The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races:
theories of racism

She absolutely deserves to face the brunt of this, it's vile sh*te that has no place in society, and only serves to help 'majority racists' "cause". Idiot.

The J Stands for Jay · 07-10-2015 7:43am

RayM wrote: »

Any man who was genuinely offended by her silly tweet really needs to have a long, hard look at himself. Consider developing a thicker skin, perhaps. And a sense of perspective while you're at it.

So, imagine you're a white lad at her university. You're broke and hungry (or whatever situation necessitates a visit to the welfare officer) and she's coming out with all this anti white men crap.

melissak · 07-10-2015 8:11am

Links234 wrote: »

I wonder, would all the people who voted yes be in favour of a trip to the joy for every After Hours user who said "we should round up all the knackers, stick 'em on an island and nuke it" or words to that effect? Y'know, for inciting violence or something, whatever trumpted up ****e this woman's being charged with.

I agree. Saying something stupid on twitter is stupid and extremely misguided if you are a welfare officer, but it is not imo a hate crime .Courts should have enough actual crime to deal with. Half of Facebook users etc would have to be investigated. This would cost a fortune and serve no purpose..

melissak · 07-10-2015 8:15am

kstand wrote: »

Good and about time.
If a Caucasian male said what she said in reverse they would rightfully face the courts and prison. A disgrace it hasn't happened sooner

I doubt it. People say things like that and stupider on Facebook, boards etc all the time with no consequences. And rightly so.

melissak · 07-10-2015 8:29am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Two minds about it tbh. On the one hand, I hate to see anything which would fuel her persecution complex, she's enough of a martyr as it is.

On the other hand, I'd like to see her being made an example of to others so that they begin to realise that their words do actually have an effect on other people, and what one person may construe as the inoffensive and inane ramblings of a tumblr warrior, or a person who gets their jollies from insulting other people or encouraging other people to insult other people...

Someone else who is the target of such communications may actually take them seriously. We can tell them to get some perspective, but the more hateful crap I'm seeing posted online, I'm beginning to wonder - who really needs to get some perspective here, and why should anyone find this behaviour and these attitudes acceptable, and why should it be allowed to continue?

Make an example of them until people start getting the message that it's really not acceptable to attempt to humiliate and denigrate other people online.

"Don't be a dick" has never gone out of style, even though it may not be all that fashionable nowadays.

I agree with this too in a way bit she wasn't targeting anyone particular in her hash tag. Being against all white men isn't new for people with her interests. Unless there is more to it that I'm not seeing she is stupid but no worse than many posters on here saying kill all the travelers, poor people, polititions bankers et

wp_rathead · 07-10-2015 8:30am

The people charging her for her idiotic #KillAllMen tweets are idiots

Basically, this story is full of idiots

“Anti-male” activist faces court in UK

Comments