So, Bahar Mustafa has been charged with RMMC (according to the Guardian)

[one squirrel]

Fuck Bahar Mustafa. But she shouldn't be facing a prison sentence for saying something stupid on twitter,assuming that that is even the thing that she is being charged with. I like my free speech, so I have to defend others when they get into trouble for stating their opinions. But really, fuck Bahar Mustafa.

 

[Tono Makt]

To go with what Milo said, freedom of speech should apply to everyone, even those you disagree with. However, others have been arrested for threatening tweets and social media posts before her. So, the consequences of what you say should also apply to all people, even those you do agree with. In other words, there is a precedence for this that has been set and she should have no special treatment.

Yep.

It's time for the UK to change that law. Just because the law is being used against someone who I dislike doesn't make the law a good law, or a law that I feel needs to be enforced - it's a law that should be stricken from the books entirely. I'd prefer it if it were someone other than that particular person (or an SJW in general) who was the flashpoint for finally changing the law, and I wouldn't be too perturbed if she turns out to not be that flashpoint. But I would very much like to see that law changed.

 

[runic knight]

Outside of actual threats or harassment, people's twitter garbage shouldn't resort in legal action. #killallmen is sort of a bit too close to that to ignore completely though, especially with the general sincerity toward that belief her actions help demonstrate. The joy at possible violence also does not help matter there. I'd still err on the side of free speech though and say legal action for that isn't appropriate.

Her use of segregation and open racism and sexism in her professional conduct though, I think there might be actual laws violated there. And both her actions and her tweets should certainly be gauged by her employers to be sure that is what they want tied to them professionally. So any sort of legal or professional backlash there is probably deserved. All in all, it is sort of nice to see a proponent of such hatred disguised as social progress get hoisted by her own petard here. Still don't like it being because of the tweets, but considering how long this sort of crap has been allowed to go on, I can see possible justification to investigate further. She is certainly a hateful bigot.

 

[Bat Vader]

For all the complaints people have about America at least people in America aren't arrested for saying something stupid online. I disagree with Mustafa's views but that doesn't mean she should be arrested for them. She should have as much right as the next person to spew their opinions online without fear of being silenced or arrested.

 

[elvor0]

Hrm...I'm not entirely sure how I feel about this. On the one hand, I'm glad she got some comeuppance. On the other, it's not....entirely for the right reasons. She was promoting racial and sexual segregation and genuine misandry; in her original media spotlight, she refused to allow white, male or "cis" people to attend her diversity rally(hrm, yes good one there), then stuffed a poster up of the meeting room and took a picture of herself taking the piss when people complained:

Spoiler

And also posted this up:

Spoiler

And of course the famous, "minorities can't be racist" quote.

Frankly the fact that she didn't lose her job then was insanity. She's the diversity officer, supposed to promote diversity, not segregate people and the picture she posted up is so unprofessional it's beyond belief. And what she did there is illegal unless I'm very much mistaken, that falls under discrimination laws. It's entirely possible this could have some sort of martyr like effect. If she was done for discriminatory actions at work, that would be great, but instead it can be turned into a free speech impediment regardless of her being a fuck head.

And as an aside....what is the purpose of putting only minorities in a room designed to promote diversity? Surely you want people outside of the victims to be there to help raise those issues outside of the room? You're not having a debate or engaging in anything useful, it's just masturbatory slacktivism. Luther King didn't just sit in a room complaining how hard done by he was, nor did the people leading the charge of the gay rallys in the 80s. They fucking went out there and did stuff.

I'd be curious to hear from any older LGBT members of the escapist who experienced the official sanction of discrimination against them, from the times when it was illegal or participated in the marches that were pivotal in getting rid of the sexuality laws. Because Mustafas actions from my point of view seem to be working against what they worked for. Especially here in the UK where we have the Brighton Gay Pride every year, which in the year I went was barely even about homosexuality, it was about everyone just getting along and having an awesome party where people didn't care about what you did in the bedroom and everyone just got along as human beings. Surely they worked to make sure that people didn't care whether you were gay, straight or anything in between, not foster an environment where it's okay to segregate based on your sexuality in the other direction.

 

[Arctic Werewolf]

snip

I would like to note that I used that as an example of the attitude of people like her. That they view something as extreme as saying "kill all white men" is somehow an acceptable joke is something that I personally find abhorrent. It will be something stupid she said online in the same vein but because I don't know I felt that tweet exemplified it best.

My view is a little different. I personally think "killallwhitemen" is an acceptable joke, and it might even be funny in some contexts. My complaint is not that people are joking, my complaint is that you can tell by their actions they are using the joke as an excuse to wallow in man-hating. "killallwhitemen" makes sense as a joke at the expense of people who are trying to demonize you unfairly by calling you a man-hater. The catch is, the joke only works if you're not a disgusting man-hater. Saying "killallwhitemen" when you actually do ooze hatred out of every pour isn't really joking, is it? It's still not a threat or incitement, either. All it is, is wallowing in hatred.

I can't be the only one to notice that the "killallmen" crowd usually are actual big-time man-haters. If they could convincingly claim that accusations of man-hate are overwrought, that would be one thing, but that's not the world we live in.

 

[Cryselle]

My view is a little different. I personally think "killallwhitemen" is an acceptable joke, and it might even be funny in some contexts. My complaint is not that people are joking, my complaint is that you can tell by their actions they are using the joke as an excuse to wallow in man-hating. "killallwhitemen" makes sense as a joke at the expense of people who are trying to demonize you unfairly by calling you a man-hater. The catch is, the joke only works if you're not a disgusting man-hater. Saying "killallwhitemen" when you actually do ooze hatred out of every pour isn't really joking, is it? It's still not a threat or incitement, either. All it is, is wallowing in hatred.

I can't be the only one to notice that the "killallmen" crowd usually are actual big-time man-haters. If they could convincingly claim that accusations of man-hate are overwrought, that would be one thing, but that's not the world we live in.

I'm going to have to agree with this right here. In the circles I run in, there are a lot of people (including myself) who get accused of being a man-hater on a regular basis... and there are some people who truly legitimately hate men. The former group joke about it, the latter group are not joking. Bahar uses the same kind of speech and terminology that you see from groups like white supremists and neo-nazis, where they don't openly say "Kill this person" but go around loudly pronouncing how nice it would be if someone would do something final about the people they dislike. I think at the point that a group of people is lifting tactics from those sources, it can't be hand waved away as 'just joking' anymore.

 

[Tilly]

I know it's kinda crossing some legal lines in the UK (where I live). But personally, I just think she should've been fired. This shouldn't be a legal issue at all. The problem was she was using her bigotry to actually influence a university. Remove her from that position of influence and then let her say what she wants.
Racial segregation on a university campus should not be allowed.

what is the purpose of putting only minorities in a room designed to promote diversity? Surely you want people outside of the victims to be there to help raise those issues outside of the room? You're not having a debate or engaging in anything useful, it's just masturbatory slacktivism. Luther King didn't just sit in a room complaining how hard done by he was, nor did the people leading the charge of the gay rallys in the 80s. They fucking went out there and did stuff.

If that's sarcasm, you nailed it, mate! If not... Which planet are you from and how long have you been here?

Seems like a fair point to me, what's the problem?

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

What I hear of the UK makes it sound like way too much of a controlling nanny state. Arresting soneone for tweets is fucked up. One thing America has right is free speech. Even if it means you have groups like Westboro Baptist Church or KKK rallys. Sure that stuff sucks but I also hate the idea of the government being in control of what you can say.

Keep the government out of it I say.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

Hoisted by her own petard. One should be careful not to set standards of behaviour that they themselves cannot themselves live up to.

What goes around, goes around, goes around, comes all the way back around.

 

[Jake Martinez]

Im kinda with Milo here. I agree that she should not be arrested for tweeting. Instead i think she should be arrested on racial segregation while performing her duty as diversity officer, which is an actual crime.

I'm not even positive about the "arresting" part of that.

Undoubtedly she acted in an exclusionary and racist way when performing her official duties. She was let off the hook essentially via a vote, but that still doesn't change the fact that what she did was racism. Despite what Ms. Mustafa might like to claim, principled people do not arbitrarily designate racial or ethnic groups as "acceptable" targets for bullying or racism. This is one thing that really annoys me about people like this - They seem to have the jargon and phrases down, but ultimately lack any sort of ethics or principles which ultimately means that they are just couching their expressions of hatred in what they think are socially acceptable terms.

Anyway, I think she is unfit for her job and has demonstrated that she cannot ethically or professionally deal with the obligations. If it was me and I really could not bring myself to allow white people to attend diversity events at my university over some sort of deeply held belief, then I suppose I would feel obligated to resign my post (much like how I believe Kim Davis ought to have resigned her post when she refused to grant marriage licenses to homosexuals over her religious beliefs, that is to say - your personal beliefs do not give you carte blanche to go derelict in your responsibilities). This seems like something someone with some principles would do, rather than claiming that being pro-diversity means being exclusionary and divisive. I honestly see little to no difference between Bahar Mustafa and Kim Davis. To me, these two women are identical in their obvious disregard for their jobs and low standards of principled or ethical behavior.

That being said, arrested and charged with crimes for being an idiot on Twitter is quite ridiculous. As for her job - undoubtedly she should have apologized for being racist and resigned, or the University ought to have removed her from her position since she obviously acted in a way that brought them a great deal of shame and against the intentions of her post.

 

[EyeReaper]

Now, I may be wrong, because I know little of US law and even less of UK laws, buuut from an outsider's view, I think the idiot got what she deserved. Last I knew, Free Speech as a legal term was not "You can literally say whatever you want" Hate Speech isn't covered, and the shit she spews seems pretty hateful to me.

I don't think it being tweets matter either. If you're going to put your real name and face to a quote, then you shouldn't be surprised if it comes back to bite you in the ass.

 

[teh_Canape]

This is the person that said that "women of color" can't be racist or sexist, right?

To be honest it'll take pretty severe consequences for me to feel sorry for her.

she kept claiming she could not be racist herself, as non-whites cannot be racist
ironically, she is white as fuck

 

[Jake Martinez]

Now, I may be wrong, because I know little of US law and even less of UK laws, buuut from an outsider's view, I think the idiot got what she deserved. Last I knew, Free Speech as a legal term was not "You can literally say whatever you want" Hate Speech isn't covered, and the shit she spews seems pretty hateful to me.

I don't think it being tweets matter either. If you're going to put your real name and face to a quote, then you shouldn't be surprised if it comes back to bite you in the ass.

I am not in favor of "Hate Speech" codes because they are entirely subjective. In the US we have very few exceptions to an individual's free speech rights and generally any sort of "speech code", if it gets challenged in court, gets overturned. Love or hate America, it is the one country in the world that gives the utmost freedom to people to speak their mind.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

I think the whole "people of color can't be racist" thing misses the point that the reason racism is bad is because it leads to discrimination.


Even if you're not racist by your crazy definitions in your own imagination and we were to grant you that you're not racist, if you discriminate unfairly as this woman did you're JUST as bad as someone who is racist. Actually no, if someone is racist but doesn't actually discriminate actively like that, they're less bad than you are.

Yes, you're not racist, you're the essence of why racism is bad. You're just plain EVIL.


I don't get how someone doesn't understand this.

 

[Leg End]

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Did she actually do anything that would constitute a proper criminal act or did she seriously just get arrested for being stupid?

 

[Jake Martinez]

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Did she actually do anything that would constitute a proper criminal act or did she seriously just get arrested for being stupid?

The U.K. doesn't have as strong free speech protections as the U.S. does, so she did infact get charged for breaking a law over there. I don't think this would have qualified in the U.S. under one of the few speech exemptions we have (incitement to violence is not a protected form of speech) because I don't think anyone would have reasonably believed she was trying to incite actual violence. Instead, they'd probably just think she was an asshole for her public behavior.

 

[Leg End]

The U.K. doesn't have as strong free speech protections as the U.S. does, so she did infact get charged for breaking a law over there. I don't think this would have qualified in the U.S. under one of the few speech exemptions we have (incitement to violence is not a protected form of speech) because I don't think anyone would have reasonably believed she was trying to incite actual violence. Instead, they'd probably just think she was an asshole for her public behavior.

So she basically did get arrested for being an idiot.

Tax dollars, everybody.

 

[SecondPrize]

Your freedom of speech will only ever be as strong as hers is now. Whether you like or loathe her, you need to understand that if you're standing up for her only because you agree with her politics or condemning her because you don't, your agreement or disagreement with the speech itself is immaterial next to everyone's right to say what they wish. This isn't an issue of a law working because it applies to your enemy because where freedom of speech is concerned the only two sides are a government seeking to restrict speech and the people.
Do not be short-sighted in either your support or condemnation here. Laws against cyber-violence will always be used against those who championed them in the belief they would be only used against their enemies, just like the guillotine was always going to take Robespierre.

 

[Jake Martinez]

Your freedom of speech will only ever be as strong as hers is now. Whether you like or loathe her, you need to understand that if you're standing up for her only because you agree with her politics or condemning her because you don't, your agreement or disagreement with the speech itself is immaterial next to everyone's right to say what they wish. This isn't an issue of a law working because it applies to your enemy because where freedom of speech is concerned the only two sides are a government seeking to restrict speech and the people.
Do not be short-sighted in either your support or condemnation here. Laws against cyber-violence will always be used against those who championed them in the belief they would be only used against their enemies, just like the guillotine was always going to take Robespierre.

I generally agree with this sentiment. I think people often forget that the foundation of a free and open society is the willingness to extend to others the rights that you covet for yourself. It's a shame that so many people are so short sighted that they cannot extrapolate that todays "tools for justice" have historically often turned into tomorrows tools of oppression.