I wonder if this is more of a pre-cursor to allowing bans of content and entry to the UK for the likes of Andrew Tate etc.
Re: Misogyny legislation
Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2024 1:33 pm
by noggins
Isnt thia a budgetary/admin (good) thing, to funnel more resources at the problem?
Re: Misogyny legislation
Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2024 1:47 pm
by Tessa K
noggins wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2024 1:33 pm
Isnt thia a budgetary/admin (good) thing, to funnel more resources at the problem?
Resources need to be targeted where they are most effective. It is a good sign but will legislation just make offenders more covert? I'm not feeling very positive, I know.
Re: Misogyny legislation
Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2024 2:13 pm
by noggins
surely the issue inst tracking down alphamale468 for posting a horrible message on gammonincelforum.com , its about tracing andrew tate’s funding back to wherever.
Re: Misogyny legislation
Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2024 2:43 pm
by dyqik
Tessa K wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2024 12:22 pm
If they can make this enforceable - which is doubtful, especially online - the prisons would be overflowing.
And how extreme is extreme?
Education is a better solution but that would take a lot more effort.
It's already enforceable for every other protected characteristic. If you want to know how this will play out, look at prosecutions etc. for racial or religious extremism.
Re: Misogyny legislation
Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2024 7:35 pm
by discovolante
I'm a bit confused about the posts in this thread. The article is talking about categorising misogyny as a form of extremism and looking at different policy options to tackle it along with other forms of extremism. Which I'm sure will include plenty of criminal justice stuff but not necessarily exclusively that. It isn't talking specifically about making misogyny a hate crime, it's broader than that.
Re: Misogyny legislation
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2024 8:46 am
by Woodchopper
discovolante wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2024 7:35 pm
I'm a bit confused about the posts in this thread. The article is talking about categorising misogyny as a form of extremism and looking at different policy options to tackle it along with other forms of extremism. Which I'm sure will include plenty of criminal justice stuff but not necessarily exclusively that. It isn't talking specifically about making misogyny a hate crime, it's broader than that.
Definitely. 'Prevent' is the UK's most high profile part of the UK's counter-terrorism strategy, and Prevent focuses upon identifying individuals in schools, universalities and youth groups etc and then organizing interventions which are aimed at getting the person to choose a different path. Belief in extremist ideologies isn't a crime in its self (though such people may also commit associated crimes) and IMHO countering extremist ideologies should focus upon using strategies outside the criminal justice system.
As dyqik wrote, it seems likely that misogynistic ideologies that could encourage politically motivated violence could be handled in a similar fashion to, for example, racism, homophobia or religious intolerance.
discovolante wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2024 7:35 pm
I'm a bit confused about the posts in this thread. The article is talking about categorising misogyny as a form of extremism and looking at different policy options to tackle it along with other forms of extremism. Which I'm sure will include plenty of criminal justice stuff but not necessarily exclusively that. It isn't talking specifically about making misogyny a hate crime, it's broader than that.
Definitely. 'Prevent' is the UK's most high profile part of the UK's counter-terrorism strategy, and Prevent focuses upon identifying individuals in schools, universalities and youth groups etc and then organizing interventions which are aimed at getting the person to choose a different path. Belief in extremist ideologies isn't a crime in its self (though such people may also commit associated crimes) and IMHO countering extremist ideologies should focus upon using strategies outside the criminal justice system.
As dyqik wrote, it seems likely that misogynistic ideologies that could encourage politically motivated violence could be handled in a similar fashion to, for example, racism, homophobia or religious intolerance.
The phrase "Making misogyny a hate crime," also, I think, gets used in a rather misleading way. It's tempting to read it as a proposal to make it illegal to hold a particular opinion. This isn't, so far as I can see, something that anyone has seriously suggested. In general what is being proposed is to add misogyny to the list of factors that would aggravate acts that would still be criminal even if they weren't motivated by misogyny. That's a perfectly sensible thing to do, so it's unfortunate that it gets described in a way that makes it sound more draconian than it is.
Re: Misogyny legislation
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2024 11:41 am
by Tessa K
It's not yet clear to me how the legislation will differ from the law against discrimination on the grounds of sex which is also based in misogyny. Does it have to involve violence or the threat of it?
Re: Misogyny legislation
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2024 1:03 pm
by Woodchopper
Tessa K wrote: Mon Aug 19, 2024 11:41 am
It's not yet clear to me how the legislation will differ from the law against discrimination on the grounds of sex which is also based in misogyny. Does it have to involve violence or the threat of it?
I'm not sure that there will be any new legislation.
From the article linked to earlier:
Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, has ordered a review of the UK's counter-extremism strategy to determine how best to tackle threats posed by harmful ideologies.
The analysis will look at hatred of women as one of the ideological trends that the government says is gaining traction.
[...]
The review will look at the rise of Islamist and far-right extremism in the UK, as well as wider ideological trends, including extreme misogyny or beliefs which fit into broader categories, such as violence.
It will also look at the causes and conduct of the radicalisation of young people.
Ms Cooper said the strategy will "map and monitor extremist trends" to work out how to disrupt and divert people away from them.
It will also "identify any gaps in existing policy which need to be addressed to crack down on those pushing harmful and hateful beliefs and violence", she said.
[...]
The work will inform a new counter-extremism strategy, which was promised in Labour's manifesto and which the Home Office says will "respond to growing and changing patterns" of extremism across the UK.
The review is expected to be completed by October. It is one of a number of policy reviews Labour has announced since coming to power in July, including the Strategic Defence Review, spending review and a review of the National Curriculum.
[...]
This is also not the first time the government has considered misogyny as a form of extremism.
[...]
A mass shooting in Plymouth in 2021 by 22-year-old Jake Davison, who killed five people before fatally shooting himself, was linked to Incel ideology.
At the time no further policy action was taken, but incidents like that one, and also the rise of social media influencers such as Andrew Tate - a self-proclaimed misogynist - may have pushed the new government to think again.
From that it looks like they are planning on integrating misogyny into existing counter-terror strategies. If so it may be a matter of new guidelines rather than new legislation.
Edit: to reiterate, an outcome might involve something like a lecturer sending a notification that a student had spoken sympathetically about a mass shooting that targeted women. Its not going to cover things like domestic violence or workplace discrimination (which are important but perhaps best dealt with in other ways).
Re: Misogyny legislation
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2024 1:11 pm
by discovolante
Tessa K wrote: Mon Aug 19, 2024 11:41 am
It's not yet clear to me how the legislation will differ from the law against discrimination on the grounds of sex which is also based in misogyny. Does it have to involve violence or the threat of it?
I'm not 100% sure what you're getting at because as mentioned above, no legislation is actually being proposed at the moment, what's happening is a review of the issue and the best way to deal with it. Woodchopper mentioned Prevent as an example which was the first thing that sprang to mind when I read the article as well. So apologies if I've got the wrong end of the stick.
But if legislation is introduced then, in terms of the criminal side of things, I'd guess it would include something along the lines of an amendment to existing legislation which allows for a higher sentence where the crime in question (whatever it might be) demonstrates/is motivated by certain protected characteristics, e.g. race or disability, but which doesn't currently cover misogyny. There is guidance on the CPS website (generally a useful resource for criminal law related stuff): https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/hate-crime - I don't think there's any need for me to go into the specifics of the legislation right now because the main info is on that page, although the relevant legislation goes a bit more into the specifics.
The law against discrimination on the grounds of sex, which arises from the Equality Act 2010, only covers civil matters and not criminal offences, so you would have to bring a civil claim against whoever had wronged you, and claim damages or some other kind of order declaring that you had been discriminated against, for example. Furthermore it only applies in particular contexts e.g. services to the public, management of premises etc - so you wouldn't be able to just sue some random person unless they were acting in one of those context.
ETA Woodchopper beat me to it, although leaving my post in as it's a slightly different take on the same point. That said I think Woodchopper is correct to highlight that the review seems to be focused more on extremism than your common or garden abuse in the street type of stuff, but who knows.
Re: Misogyny legislation
Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2024 1:50 pm
by Woodchopper
discovolante wrote: Mon Aug 19, 2024 1:11 pm
ETA Woodchopper beat me to it, although leaving my post in as it's a slightly different take on the same point.
shpalman wrote: Thu Aug 22, 2024 2:01 pm
10 minute YouTube video of a psychiatrist explaining online incel radicalization. https://youtu.be/ckjoKSjQnnk
ncels are a subculture community of men who form their identity around a perceived inability to form sexual or romantic relationships. The community operates almost exclusively online, providing an outlet for misogynistic hostility. There are growing concerns about violence from incels, who have been highlighted as an (inter)national security threat. In response to these concerns, this study stands as the most extensive primary investigation of incel harmful attitudes and beliefs to date (n = 561). Consistent with previous research, we find ethnic and political diversity, poor mental-health, high levels of suicidality and neurodiversity in this group of men. Incels showed ideological consistency, and a substantial proportion felt that violence was ‘Sometimes’ (20%) or ‘Often’ (5%) justified against those who sought to harm them. Pathway analysis predicting harmful attitudes and beliefs (e.g., displaced aggression, hostile sexism, and justification of violence) indicates that mental-health and ideological adherence have twice the predictive power compared to networking, and a bidirectional effect. Indirect pathways to these harmful attitudes and beliefs are identified, involving the dark triad, right-wing political orientation, autism, mate-value, and a history of bullying and abuse. These results suggest that interventions focusing on mental health and ideology may be more effective than those targeting networking. Implications and directions for future research are discussed. As issues of extremism, online radicalization, and mental health grow in importance, these insights become vital for policymakers, educators, journalists, and anyone concerned with the problems incels face and represent in society.
ncels are a subculture community of men who form their identity around a perceived inability to form sexual or romantic relationships. The community operates almost exclusively online, providing an outlet for misogynistic hostility. There are growing concerns about violence from incels, who have been highlighted as an (inter)national security threat. In response to these concerns, this study stands as the most extensive primary investigation of incel harmful attitudes and beliefs to date (n = 561). Consistent with previous research, we find ethnic and political diversity, poor mental-health, high levels of suicidality and neurodiversity in this group of men. Incels showed ideological consistency, and a substantial proportion felt that violence was ‘Sometimes’ (20%) or ‘Often’ (5%) justified against those who sought to harm them. Pathway analysis predicting harmful attitudes and beliefs (e.g., displaced aggression, hostile sexism, and justification of violence) indicates that mental-health and ideological adherence have twice the predictive power compared to networking, and a bidirectional effect. Indirect pathways to these harmful attitudes and beliefs are identified, involving the dark triad, right-wing political orientation, autism, mate-value, and a history of bullying and abuse. These results suggest that interventions focusing on mental health and ideology may be more effective than those targeting networking. Implications and directions for future research are discussed. As issues of extremism, online radicalization, and mental health grow in importance, these insights become vital for policymakers, educators, journalists, and anyone concerned with the problems incels face and represent in society.
Seems to be an example of research confirming the stereotype
Tristan wrote: Sun Apr 13, 2025 8:50 pm
Just finished watching Adolescence and tbh I found it pretty underwhelming. It just didn’t add up for me.
Nothing we see in it goes anywhere near explaining why he did what he did.
Spoiler alert: Spoiler:
that kid was just a wrong ‘un. Maybe elements of psychopathy or something like that there? He would likely have snapped and killed at some point for some reason. There was a brief attempt to talk about incel type stuff by the son of the police officer, but again nothing at the level that explains what happened.
I'm going to reply in here because it seems the themes are relevant to this thread.
Spoiler:
Different themes are explored, including the online bullying and rejection (we can discuss whether he was hoping to exploit her moment of weakness or whether he felt empathy for her; Jamie makes it sound like the former but then he seems ashamed to admit that he liked her), and the son's feeling of inadequacy because of his inability to live up to his dad's model of masculinity. The parents discuss the idea that he may have inherited his temper from his dad. Even Jamie has trouble explaining what he did, it's not until the final episode that he stops being in denial with himself, i.e. he can't even reconcile his actions with his own sense of self. There's a massive dissonance between his need to be accepted and approved of, and the terrible thing he did, and this in itself might be the reason for the outbursts in episode three whenever the psychiatrist gets him too close to having to confront that within himself.
But in the end we can't know what would drive a boy like that to do a thing like that because this isn't based on any particular real case in which a boy like that did a thing like that for those reasons.
Tristan wrote: Sun Apr 13, 2025 8:50 pm
Just finished watching Adolescence and tbh I found it pretty underwhelming. It just didn’t add up for me.
Nothing we see in it goes anywhere near explaining why he did what he did.
Spoiler alert: Spoiler:
that kid was just a wrong ‘un. Maybe elements of psychopathy or something like that there? He would likely have snapped and killed at some point for some reason. There was a brief attempt to talk about incel type stuff by the son of the police officer, but again nothing at the level that explains what happened.
I'm going to reply in here because it seems the themes are relevant to this thread.
Spoiler:
Different themes are explored, including the online bullying and rejection (we can discuss whether he was hoping to exploit her moment of weakness or whether he felt empathy for her; Jamie makes it sound like the former but then he seems ashamed to admit that he liked her), and the son's feeling of inadequacy because of his inability to live up to his dad's model of masculinity. The parents discuss the idea that he may have inherited his temper from his dad. Even Jamie has trouble explaining what he did, it's not until the final episode that he stops being in denial with himself, i.e. he can't even reconcile his actions with his own sense of self. There's a massive dissonance between his need to be accepted and approved of, and the terrible thing he did, and this in itself might be the reason for the outbursts in episode three whenever the psychiatrist gets him too close to having to confront that within himself.
But in the end we can't know what would drive a boy like that to do a thing like that because this isn't based on any particular real case in which a boy like that did a thing like that for those reasons.
Despite speculation, the creators of Adolescence have been unequivocal. The show is not based on a specific true story.
"There is no part of this that's based on a true story, not one single part," co-creator and co-writer Jack Thorne said on The News Agents podcast, as reported by the Daily Mail.
Graham—who plays Jamie's father, Eddie Miller—explained that the inspiration for Adolescence came from a series of tragic news stories involving teenage perpetrators and victims.
"Where it came from, for me," explained Graham in a recent interview with Radio Times, "is there was an incident in Liverpool, a young girl, and she was stabbed to death by a young boy. I just thought, why?"
A rise in misogyny and racism is flooding UK schools as pupils ape the behaviour of figures such as Donald Trump and Andrew Tate after exposure through social media and online gaming, teachers have warned.
A survey by the NASUWT union found most teachers identified social media as “the number one cause” of pupil misbehaviour, with female staff bearing the brunt. Teachers also raised concerns about parents who refuse to accept school rules or take responsibility for their children’s behaviour.
One teacher told the union: “A lot of the students are influenced by Tate and Trump, they spout racist, homophobic, transphobic and sexist comments in every conversation and don’t believe there will be consequences.”
This is explored in the second episode of Adolescence of course, as well as being generally relevant to the thread.
A rise in misogyny and racism is flooding UK schools as pupils ape the behaviour of figures such as Donald Trump and Andrew Tate after exposure through social media and online gaming, teachers have warned.
A survey by the NASUWT union found most teachers identified social media as “the number one cause” of pupil misbehaviour, with female staff bearing the brunt. Teachers also raised concerns about parents who refuse to accept school rules or take responsibility for their children’s behaviour.
One teacher told the union: “A lot of the students are influenced by Tate and Trump, they spout racist, homophobic, transphobic and sexist comments in every conversation and don’t believe there will be consequences.”
This is explored in the second episode of Adolescence of course, as well as being generally relevant to the thread.
I joined my brother's family for their last night in the Yorkshire Dales yesterday, and my 8 year old nephew and the kids in his class all sing about "sigmas" which suggests the vocabulary at least is embedded in the primary school culture even before they have any understanding what it means. I told my sister in law that she probably should try to look up Andrew Tate, as she was unaware who he was.
“Our research suggests society has overestimated the risk of the manosphere to women,” said De Ionno. “It’s not zero risk, but most of it doesn’t have the power to radicalise people who are pretty discriminating and value-driven.”