What a sloppy evidence-free piece in the Guardian:
Belgium’s deputy prime minister, who ranks as one of Europe’s most senior transgender politicians, has urged Rishi Sunak not to join “the real bullies” after remarks made by the British prime minister at the Conservative party conference this week.
Transgender what? The fool reporter never says.
The prime minister’s comments came as it was revealed that the number of hate crimes committed against transgender people last year in England and Wales had climbed to a record high, with the Home Office suggesting in its report that the 11% rise may have been prompted by comments by politicians and media.
Climbed to what number? The 11% rise from what to what? How does the number compare to the number of hate crimes against women?
On Thursday, Petra De Sutter, Europe’s first openly transgender minister, described Sunak’s comments as “hurtful and very disappointing” on social media.
Transgender what? The name isn’t enough; you can’t expect readers to know whether “Petra” is a male name or a female name in Belgium. Sloppy sloppy incompetent journalism.
Attenders at the conference also heard from the health secretary, Steve Barclay, who promised to ban transgender hospital patients in England from being treated in female- and male-only wards.
Really? Or did he promise to keep males out of female-only wards?
Does the Guardian not have editors?
Comments
12 responses to “Spike it”
Surely there is the definition of such hate crimes? Are trans people being beaten in the streets by transphobic gangs using nailed boards? Or is a “hate crime” the sort of thing that Caroline Farrow is called to interview under caution on a regular basis?
Does the guardian even report on beatings of lesbians or gays anymore, or would that be considered transphobic? Do they report on street violence against real women, because we know they are not concerned with male violence against real women in domestic situations. They certainly don’t promote any Women’s Days of Remembrance.
11% increase is not very much when you consider that they are counting stickers that say “keep prisons single-sex” is it?
The guardian could at least have mentioned that Petra De Sutter is one of Belgiums deputy prime ministers. We have seven of them at the moment.
Why yes, it could. Where are the editors???
@Mike Haubrich:
The definition is: “any criminal offence which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards someone based on a personal characteristic”, where there are then 5 listed characteristics.
Note, first, that this is “police recorded” crime (thus the police were of the opinion that a crime occurred), not crime where there was a prosecution and conviction. This is relevant since a lot of such crimes are fairly subjective (e.g. mean words in the street, maybe just a placard).
Second, it is then a “hate” crime if any person perceives it to be motivated by hostility. So it just takes one person to suggest that, where that person could be the “victim” (aka “activist”) or the recording officer. There is no “reasonable person” test.
As a result, these statistics are heavily influenced by societal “mood music”. They are not statistics where a court has determined that some threshold has been reached. They are thus pretty much meaningless.
Since, over recent years, the number of people IDing as trans has increased a lot, and since many of them are going around making out how victimised and hard-done-by they are, it’s not a surprise that the statistics are increasing.
God what a mess.
And, as women have pointed out a bajillion times, the 5 listed characteristics DO NOT INCLUDE sex, so there’s no such thing as a hate crime against women according to the CPS and the police. The five are:
Race
Religion
Disability
Sexual orientation
Transgender identity
Source: https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/hate-crime
Unquestionably the article could have mentioned that De Sutter is a “transwoman”. It does refer to him as “she” in the text, but you need to scour the text to catch it.
I think that “one of Europe’s most senior transgender politicians” would have meant something different if “transgender” were replaced with “transwoman”; it would have left open the question of the “most senior transman politicians” or perhaps “transgender nonbinary politicians”. I’m sure there’s a reasonable way to express both bits of information, but I wasn’t sure how to do it in a non-clumsy way. Saying “De Sutter, a transwoman, is one of…” seems awkward.
If De Sutter called himself “transgender nonbinary”, I don’t know how to provide information that indicates his sex without violating the implied cult code. Perhaps even calling him a “transwoman” violates the cult code.
There’s an informative post about De Sutter by Genevieve Gluck on Twitter/X:*
The video clip is embedded in the tweet.
*The link above is to the nitter.net mirror site.
Interesting NightCrow, because most people I’ve talked to about Brave New World had the same reaction I did part way through. Burn that society to the ground and start again.
You have to admit it’s a refreshing change from the same-old, same-old dreariness of all those people taking their world-building tips from Nineteen Eighty Four. Centrifugal Bumble Puppy sounds like it would be a lot more fun than the Two Minutes Hate.