I'm avoiding work. So I thought I would have a go at the Law Commission Consultation.

This was not a good idea in terms of my blood pressure, which is already too high.

Question 7: We invite consultees’ views on whether “asexuality” should be included within the definition of sexual orientation.

My view: How are you going to define 'asexuality'? Is this something that must be persistent over time? Or does going through a 'dry spell' count?
Question 8: We provisionally propose that the current definition of “transgender” in hate crime laws be revised to include:
People who are or are presumed to be transgender
People who are or are presumed to be non-binary
People who cross dress (or are presumed to cross dress);
Wait, it gets worse....

People who are or are presumed to be intersex
I reply:

How do you define 'cross dressing' - I've not worn a dress in 20 years, I spend all my time in trousers. Am I a cross dresser?
I can't trust myself to reply to that part about intersex people. I keep having to pinch myself to remember this is actually supposed to be a serious document.
But I had a go:

What on earth are you talking about with regard to 'intersex' people? What is your definition? This is deeply offensive to those with differences of sex development - they are either male or female and have a right to be recognised as such.
Consultation Question 10: We invite consultees’ views on whether criminal conduct based on a wrongly presumed lack of disability on the part of the victim should fall within the scope of protection afforded by hate crime laws.
I have not the foggiest what this means. So I have left it blank.
No, I've had a bash.

I have no idea what this means. But if it means someone has acted in a way believing a person NOT to be disabled, how can that actor possibly have been motivated by 'hate' for a disabled person?
Consultation Question 11: We provisionally propose that gender or sex should be a protected characteristic for the purposes of hate crime law. Do consultees agree?

I have recited the GRARG Manifesto at this point.

We invite consultees’ views on whether gender-specific carve outs for sexual offences, forced marriage, FGM and crimes committed in the domestic abuse context are needed, if gender or sex is protected for the purposes of hate crime law.
What is the point of all this? how many successful prosecutions have there been under FGM legislation? Is it one? Or possibly two? Can we please just enforce the laws we have already got?
Consultation Question 12: We invite consultees’ views as to whether sex or gender-based hate crime protection should be limited to women or include both women and men.

I reply: As you appear to think that sex and gender are the same thing, then men will automatically be included in any descriptor of any gender on their declaration alone, so this is a pointless question.
Consultation Question 13: We provisionally propose that a protected category of “women” is more suitable than “misogyny”, if sex or gender-based hate crime protection were to be limited to the female sex or gender. Do consultees agree?
What do you MEAN by 'female sex or gender'? You render this entire consultation pointless with this conflation.
Consultation Question 14: We provisionally propose a protected category of “sex or gender” rather than choosing between either “gender” or “sex” if hate crime protection were to adopt a general approach. Do consultees agree?
No, for all the reasons I have given above. The conflation of sex and gender has caused enormous harm and confusion as seen in the Gender Recognition Act. The Equality Act does not recognise or perpetuate this conflation, so why do you propose further legislative confusion?
This is getting really silly now.

Consultation Question 16: We invite consultees’ views as to whether any age-based hate crime protection should be limited to “older people” or include people of all ages.

Consultation Question 17: We invite consultees’ views on whether “sex workers” should be recognised as a hate crime category.
I reply: What is your definition of 'sex worker'? Are you going to include trafficked children in this definition? Do you understand that many people find this term incredibly offensive given the number of women and girls who are forced into prostitution?
Consultation Question 18: We invite consultees’ views on whether “alternative subcultures” should be recognised as a hate crime category.
Please share your views below

I reply: Please do explain how you are going to identify and define these 'alternative subcultures'.
Consultation Question 19: We invite consultees’ views on whether “people experiencing homelessness” should be recognised as a hate crime category.

I reply: Please explain how you are going to define this category. One week's sofa surfing? Or more persistent street homelessness?
Consultation Question 20: We invite consultees’ views on whether “philosophical beliefs” should be recognised as a hate crime category.
I reply: Again. You are creating categories that defy objective definition and should have no part in the criminal law. How much time is now going to be wasted arguing about whether or not a victim fell into one of these incredibly elastic new categories?
It's now getting into technical questions about sentencing and I don't have a scooby. So I am giving up. I will submit what I have answered so far. That was probably the most depressing 20 minutes of my life so far and believe me, there is stiff competition for that title.
this is the LAW COMMISSION. Where I was proud to work as a Grade 7 lawyer in 1997. Believing I was doing something that mattered. I don't know who is responsible for these questions, but the whole thing is shameful.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Sarah Phillimore

Sarah Phillimore Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @SVPhillimore

11 Oct
Really good discussion. Whatever the outcome, as @Transgendertrd says, a brave woman has started a conversation. What a pity we had to go to a court to have it!

Also feeling that whatever the result, this will be going to the Supreme Court.
Feeling of those at court was that Keira's barrister was fully in command of his brief and was allowed to speak without interruption. The same could not be said of the Tavistock counsel.
Mermaids and Stonewall were refused permission to intervene because the material they presented to the court was either irrelevant or repeating the Tavistock case. @Transgendertrd however was able to provide evidence of value and were therefore accepted as intervenors.
Read 14 tweets
11 Oct
How about a radical suggestion. We enforce the laws we have. Which make it clear that it is a crime to attack ANYONE.

We then improve the laws relating to online abuse so that they are clear and enforceable.

We STOP putting people into more and more smaller boxes.
Because all this flim flam about 'protected characteristics' is a distraction from the reality that the laws we have, we don't use, and the ones we use are bogus.

Rape is now effectively decriminalised. Police deny a spray painted Swastika is hate directed at Jewish people.
People like me are then recorded in secret by the police for our 'hate'. Boxes can be ticked that 'something is being done' and the people of Wiltshire sleep easier knowing that a hate monger like myself has been well and truly written up.
Read 5 tweets
10 Oct
Out of idle curiosity I thought I would see what some high profile accounts that exist to promote women’s rights had to say about the Keira Bell case or recent announcement re women’s rugby.

Nothing. They said nothing. ImageImageImageImage
Women’s Aid is particularly interesting. They issued a statement about GRC reform in 2018 and then seem to be very quiet.

But it’s clear they don’t believe in a distinction between sex and gender. ImageImage
Read 9 tweets
7 Oct
TODAY #KeiraBell

Sadly for me I won’t be there - but others will. Follow @Belstaffie and @Aja02537920 who will be there - and hopefully live tweeting.

Now we get to see whether the rule of law means anything any more.
The initial signs are good. The NHS have revised their guidance and admitted - despite Jolyon’s frantic tweeting - that we cannot claim puberty blockers are ‘reversible’ or a ‘pause button’.

Here’s one Fox you can’t just beat to death for getting in your way.
Mermaids and Stonewall were both refused permission to intervene - while @Transgendertrd will be giving the court the benefit of their clear and unbiased advice.
Read 7 tweets
6 Oct
TOMORROW. I hope to get remote access to court hearing - @Belstaffie will be there and covering.

This is a very important case.

NHS gender clinic 'should have challenged me more' over transition bbc.com/news/health-51…
Keira now talking on Radio 4. Went to GP and referred to Tavistock when she was 16. Worked by ‘affirmation model’. Her claims of being male were immediately affirmed. No investigation.
Saw them in January and by October was on puberty blockers. Bone density decreased. It was a bad time.
Read 10 tweets
6 Oct
What has been the post on my website that has got the most angry comments? That I have found referred to all over the world?
Because I say this
For two years now, angry comments have continued to be made
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!