Since writing my A-Z of Terf bullshit, I’ve had a few comments from people attempting to defend the indefensible, as I knew I would. One or two claim what’s happening does not constitute hate crime – and they’re wrong.
A few weeks ago, I wrote a post called Shop a TERF and stop transphobia after my own run-in with a particularly active and vile TERF on Twitter.
Since then I’ve reported quite a few hateful TERF comments on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube. Despite clearly breaking the terms and conditions of these sites, what usually happens is nothing.
It appears that, unless comments are reported by several people at the same time – such as by activisits from Resisting Hate on Twitter – single complaints are simply ignored due to the fact that the sites simply don’t have enough staff to read every reported violation. A tweet is far more likely to be read and action taken if it has been reported by a dozen people as opposed to one.
EDIT! Having said that, I’ve just found out that Twitter is stepping up its efforts against the trolls from TOMORROW! About bloody time, too!
I wonder if they’ll do anything about fake accounts and stalkers…
Anyway, in my Shop a TERF post, I recommended reporting incidents of transphobia to the police, and that’s exactly what I’ve done with one of them in particular. I’m happy to report that the police are taking the matter very seriously and that wheels are in motion. Can’t say anymore than that right now as the case is active.
But a few people, one of whom claims to be a law graduate, have left messages on my blog posts, saying that it’s a waste of time reporting hate to the cops because, under UK law, they’re “hate incidents” rather than “hate crimes”.
To quote probably the most famous transphobe on the planet…
I’ve studied law in higher education myself. But that doesn’t make me an expert in every area of the law. I have looked into the law surrounding transphobic hate crime, though, so that you don’t have to. Aren’t I nice?
Here’s what I found. According to report-it.org.uk, hate crimes are…
Any crimes that are targeted at a person because of hostility or prejudice towards that person’s:
- Disability
- Race or ethnicity
- Religion or belief
- Sexual orientation
- Transgender identity
This can be committed against a person or property. Anyone can be a victim of a hate crime.
Seems pretty straightfoward, right? In terms of trans hate crimes, the site defines them thus:
“Any criminal offence which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by a hostility or prejudice against a person who is transgender or perceived to be transgender.”
So the debate among the naysayers appears to be whether the TERFs’ Twitter hatred constitutes a “hate crime” or a “hate incident”.
The same website says this about hate incidents:
Hate Incidents can feel like crimes to those who suffer them and often escalate to crimes or tension in a community. For this reason the police are concerned about incidents and you can use this site to report non-crime hate incidents. The police can only prosecute when the law is broken but can work with partners to try and prevent any escalation in seriousness.
The Citizens’ Advice Bureau also features plenty of information on the law surrounding hate crimes and hate incidents. Transphobic hate incidents include:
- Verbal and physical abuse
- Physical violence
- Teasing
- Bullying
- Threatening behaviour
- Online abuse
- Damage to property
So, the $64 million question: when is a hate incident so serious that it becomes a hate crime? You’ll like this. :o)
When a homophobic or transphobic hate incident becomes a criminal offence, it’s known as a hate crime. There are no specific homophobic or transphobic hate crimes. Any criminal offence can be a hate crime, if the offender targeted you because of their prejudice or hostility against LGBT people.
When someone is charged with a homophobic or transphobic hate crime, the judge can impose a tougher sentence on the offender under the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
Putting it simply, a hate crime must be a “crime”. So yeah, I accept that calling a transwoman a man hardly is unlikely to be classed as a crime. It’s just being annoying, stupid and bigoted.
But when you cross the line and start targeting people with stuff like this…
… then that’s constitutes hate mail – and that’s a crime under the Malicious Communications Act 1988.
The Malicious Communications Act 1988 (MCA) is a British Act of Parliament that makes it illegal in England and Wales to “send or deliver letters or other articles for the purpose of causing distress or anxiety”. It also applies to electronic communications.
Electronic communications. So we’re not just talking about handwritten letters delivered in sealed envelopes, like in the good old days. This means hate messages sent by, for example, email, SMS, Twitter, Facebook Messenger and Whatsapp.
If you’ve been targeted in this way, make sure you keep copies of all the harmful messages, as the police and CPS will need them as evidence should they take action.
In my personal case, some of the messages about me are in the public domain, such as Twitter. Others were sent privately and I have not published them.
Hate mail aside, you could even argue for a case of Harassment, Alarm or Distress under the Public Order Act 1986. This states…
“A person is guilty of an offence if he… displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening [or abusive].”
The only thing with this charge is that the harassment must be sustained. In the Joanne Gullon case, there needed to be three occasions in which she suffered abuse. Although magistrates convicted, this was later overturned at appeal.
As well as my own hate mail case, I know of others in the pipeline from other transgender people and allies – but I can’t report details here. I will try to find some older case studies later.
Why aren’t there more convictions of internet trolls, whether transphobic or not? I guess it takes a fair amount of courage to go the police and be willing to stand up in court to testify against bigots.
That’s what I’m prepared to do, and I hope more people will do the same because, unless people stand up to bigotry, it will continue to grow and flourish in this ridiculous era, when hatred almost seems the norm. If pricks like Trump and Farage can spout bile and get away with it, that legitimises the actions of other people.
At the end of the day, whatever the law says, why can’t people just live and let live? Stop judging people just for being brave enough to stand out and be different. It’s hard enough coming out as trans without all the hassle from bigots.
Hate – however you define it – is not OK.
Andie xxx
Click here to report hate crime anywhere in England or Wales, here in Scotland and here in Northern Ireland.
im going to guess that this is one of the best posts out there on this topic andie, being that its well organised, perfectly clear, and sticks directly to facts. its probably one of the best posts on your blog, and it really doesnt support the claim that “nothing can be done” about any of this.
a few things seem to be said in what youve quoted– in that an incident is not a crime– unless it is– which i feel is an honest and realistic interpretation, whether ive captured it with precision or not. i feel thats probably the best summary (having not studied law myself– nice tidbit by the way, very cool.)
you lay all of this out, along with your argument, really really well– when all is said and done i think theres merit to it here. and im not saying that as a way of hastily pivoting to “but i dont really agree.” if i say theres food for thought here, i really mean it. i am going to let you down slightly and say the following, which mitigate my agreement with you:
free speech is REALLY IMPORTANT. im not saying hate speech falls under free speech, im saying free speech is really important.
hate speech seems to rest largely on the feelings of the audience, as much as the content of whats said. if not in the letter of the law, then (likely) the application.
the only way i can FULLY (enthusiastically) support limits on free speech based on the feelings of the person on the other end of it (and ive dealt with a lot of bullies, many online, sometimes for years on end, people have said things that implied death threats and ive been more or less slandered– also defended– on a public campus) is if i feel theres no danger of this creeping into silencing tactics and chilling effects.
in other words, the more you apply limits on free speech (even for a good reason) the closer the threat to free speech is. i would say that this is all slippery slope, but there are already people (from corporations regarding copyright, to individuals with an overdeveloped sense of social justice) who misuse the law to harass innocent people– i dont think that concern is entirely unfounded.
to be clear:
* i dont think it should be illegal to simply be a jerk, thats far too dangerous
* i dont think it should be LEGAL to torture people, and some of the stuff youre talking about comes down to torture (imo)
* i think the best part– not just legally but politically– is your highlighting of laws around harassment
“harassment” is a word thats going to get very mixed reactions these days, but i dont believe ongoing campaigns of harassment (like from terfs) ought to be legal. and according to you, theyre not. thats good news. i would *not* make this the only time you cover that angle, if i were you. thats one to talk to all your lgbt friends about, now and again.
ive gone out in a skirt before, and heard people behind me say things like “is that a dude?” “what the **** is wrong with him?” (i have good ears, i honestly dont think they knew i heard them.)
i dont think they should have to go to court for that– but if they did that every day, i wouldnt be as shy about calling it harassment.
i also think anonymity on the internet is important, and its not possible to have anonymity “just for people that are nice.” im not trying to put words in your mouth here, im talking about my own pov still. there are much more important reasons for anonymity than just letting a***holes be a***holes.
when people do make their identities known online, and they do participate in ongoing campaigns of hate and harassment, people should not feel helpless (even if they are encouraged to feel that way by people who dont understand the law.)
i think youre doing good work here, and i support it in part– with respect and reservations, and also admiration. keep doing what youre doing. i also doubt very much that my concerns about this are mine alone, i think i probably speak for a lot of people here– some ignorant, some, dont be too quick to judge.
the harassment angle is really good. you know youve hit gold there, when you say “this is harassment” and im enthusiastic about it. thats normally a word that makes me cringe a little, because not *all* of the men who lose jobs and promotions (and friends) to that word probably deserve it. some im quite certain do.
Hun, I ain’t claiming to be a law graduate,I AM.
I know more about the law than you ever will.
Sorry that’s threatening. I know you don’t like the fact I saw the sense and left you😂
Stop making digs at me.
Bye.
here you go andie:
http://mjpsolicitors.co.uk/blog/sending-malicious-communications
http://www.harassmentlaw.co.uk/comm.htm
“This means that any message sent, such as a letter, text message (SMS) and Tweets on Twitter or Facebook messages etc. that could be considered indecent or grossly offensive can be an offence under this act. The message does not have to reach the intended recipient for an offence to occur.”
Thanks Codey. Good to know there are so many legal experts out there! ;o) I shall definitely be looking more closely at the harassment and stalking laws, too.