Comments criticising women online to be made illegal in the UK
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
Comments (65)
sorted by:
Define woman you bigot.
DM me.
I agree--they're anti-tranny (or at least making some moves in that direction) because of the pressure exerted on their establishment by feminists in the TERF war.
obviously anything you post from the koran that muslims don't like you talking about they'll claim was taken out of context.
like how the entire Talmud is "taken out of context"
It's all so tiresome, isn't it.
Religion of Peace, spread by a conquering warlord.
How to shitpost in 2 easy steps.
Define 'misogyny' to include any and all criticism of women.
Include peer reviews in STEM and watch the whole thing backfire spectacularly.
Let the keks flow.
how about you fix the paki problem first
The pakis provide a service deemed absolutely necessary to the ruling class. Without children to rape, the average lifespan of these bureaucrats can be measured in weeks and months, rather than years. Death is caused by organ failure and mental breakdown.
Yep. Expecting the stasi to come for me soon.
The UK is fast turning into a fascist dictatorship in the image of Australia.
Did you get this screenshot from Twitter or some other place? I looked up the article, and I see why the original poster did not include a link. You're a good guy, so I don't suspect you of dishonesty.
Current government plans are as follows:
The term cyber-stalking is rather concerning, and I guess it depends on how it is defined, but banning revenge porn is a no-brianer.
The problem is with the retard Tory peers.
Yeah, this doesn’t exactly match the headline, I must admit…
Nonetheless, “cyber stalking” is dubious AF, though…
It’s as nebulous as current definitions of “sexual harassment” (staring, a fucking wolf whistle, etc.) or “informed and active consent” (which changes at the whim of the accuser, and has been completely weaponized)…
A can of worms that I absolutely think would be best not to see opened…
Yeah, that could potentially cover creating a new account in order to say something to someone who has you blocked. I think people are mature enough to distinguish between direct contact and stuff that happens online, but these are not people, these are politicians.
Whenever I see that, I wonder how in the world you are supposed to prove otherwise.
I don't like "it wasn't rape because she never said no", but this creates a bigger problem than it solves.
And if you did, you could join Chickens for KFC.
I got it from twitter. Even bloomberg is saying misogyny is going to be criminalised now (repeating the telegraph’s claims though):
https://twitter.com/business/status/1621875329160646656?s=21
https://archive.ph/YQgyD
Having read just the title, it seems to me that they may talk about the crazy amendment that the Tory peers are pushing. After all, it says that it "May Also" Tackle Misogyny.
Now let's hope sanity prevails.
Explain why. If someone recorded a video with permission then it belongs to them and they should be able to do what they want with it. In the case of sex videos you might say the video belongs to both parties. Couldn't violations of that be handled under existing contract laws? A magistrate can even rule that there was an implicit contract that it was not to be shared unless otherwise stated. If there was already an attempt to claim damages against someone with that argument and they failed, I could maybe see the need for new laws but I'd have to read the specific judgement.
No, that's absurd - which is why release forms exist.
You could, but contract law is very cumbersome and difficult to enforce for individuals. You'd have to pay for an expensive lawyer. Moreover, you would only be able to sue for damages, against someone who let's be fair is probably a broke loser, rather than jail time.
Why not clear up this by codifying this?
Some more info -
https://twitter.com/ukpapers/status/1621788901852446720?s=21
These are all valid concerns. Obviously, the law should be objective. And I'm not saying that this law is good or whatever (though I obviously do support bans on revenge porn).
Not having read the law, but having read this article, it is my understanding that this law does not talk about 'misogyny' - and that this is how the media is framing it.
That is certainly what the Tory tards who want to amend it want.
I am thinking the wrong side won WWII
As far as I can tell the UK is an insane asylum, veering from one woke over-reaction to another, with the net effect of becoming a dystopia in real time right before our eyes. Like Canada.
I've been reading and highly recommend Theodore Dalrymple's essays, some of which are collected in "Our Culture or What's Left of It," for a first-hand commentary on deteriorating conditions in the UK, from adoption of the welfare state to about 2010 or so. He wisely moved to rural France a few years ago.
Once a critical mass of idiotic sheep swallows the lie that words are weapons, it's the end of any degree of so-called "free speech." It's also a slippery slope that will generate an endless series of punishments for a potentially limitless number of thought crimes, given that some pussy who takes offense at an utterance is now considered a victim of so-called "violent speech." (Just using that phrase boggles my wee little mind. Edit: It reminds me of the voice-weapon thing the good guys use in the movie "Dune.")
If the US is the lab where neo-Marxist wokeism was born, the UK is an ongoing project of practical application.
You guys are royally screwed.
Soon coming to the N of N America. Turd bucket has passed his online speech control law.
Why is the Canadian Parliament (or whatever it's called) so passive?
Parliaments in parliamentary systems are almost always like that (ironically).
However, in this case, they're not passive. You don't get into a position of power without being beholden to someone. It's just not to the voters.
Thieves of a kind
Good thing dogs in wigs like herself aren't women.
considering how the word woman is being twisted around you will be jailed to post in a subreddit about dinosaurs quite soon.
As a fellow woman, I'd like to say I think women shouldn't be allowed to vote or hold any political office. Women clearly abuse their power. Since I'm a woman I understand how bad we truly can be which is why as a fellow woman I'm suggesting men take our political power away.
If any of you guys need someone to be racist or misogynistic for you just hmu
Lack of archive link means OP is a lying faggot until proven otherwise.
see a bad law break it
The Queen fostered a douchbagery of feminazis, fembots, femboys, femens, and other actual-but-child-killing females. ALL British women - pretenders and otherwise - are thereby douched by her majesty's postumous issue. King Charles is a pedo femboy product of such, her long-long Angleman fem-rule. Disgusting bloody lot, at every class.
Nobody needs you, your products, or your Phœnician culture. The WHOLE NATION can get stuft. Enjoy Astarte and Moloch, to societal death.
Just identify as a woman. Nobody can criticize anyone. Ever.
That's unfair. They believe in plenty of things. Power. Money. And stomping on your face.
Genius move, you 'told' people something discussed in the media.
You also told us that 90% would die from the vaccine.... which is a higher percentage than actually took the vaccine.
Interesting to see the Pfizer director of research and development being caught saying: "Like, I had to get the vaccine otherwise I would have gotten fired, right?"
As bad as things are in Europe, I don't think any country forced ordinary workers to get vaccinated, or even allow companies to force vaccination.
I hope folks in America realize that 'at will' employment isn't exactly great either.
Austria had a mandate for everyone over 18, IIRC.
Correct, and then abandoned it as unenforceable. Seemed to me that they were just trying to scare people.
lol, she's just the first woman you found in that government. Everyone else dindu nuffin.
BTW, how come the womens repealed the vaccine mandate you were sure was going to be the Holocaust of the 21st century?
If you mean that they rejected making 'misogyny' a hate crime, this doesn't do that. In fact, government proposal seems to be very limited.
Banning revenge porn and 'cyberstalking' is not banning criticism of women.
You'll be sure that women are plotting to end your life even when you're 80, in a nursing home, and debilitated by self-inflicted heart disease.