TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Student diversity officer who tweeted 'kill all white men' to face charges

JohnKimble111

October 6, 2015
736 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/bahar-mustafa-charged-with-sending-malicious-message-after-tweeting-kill-all-white-men-a6683241.html
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Student diversity officer who tweeted 'kill all white men' to face charges
Author

JohnKimble111

Upvotes 736
Comments 171
Date October 6, 2015 3:05 PM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/3npqei/student_diversity_officer_who_tweeted_kill_all/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/student-diversity-officer-who-tweeted-kill-all.969964
https://theredarchive.com/post/969964
Top posts by JohnKimble111

Women Should Have to Register for the Draft, Congressional Commission Says

6700 upvotes
March 25, 2020
/r/PussyPassDenied

BBC admits its viral “women write better code” story was fake news

6298 upvotes
December 28, 2016
/r/MensRights

Gender pay gap in modelling sees men paid 75% less than women

6153 upvotes
February 8, 2018
/r/MensRights

Toxic Masculinity

5904 upvotes
March 10, 2018
/r/MensRights

After feminist cry sexism over BBC pay, official review uncovers more underpaid men than women

5789 upvotes
January 31, 2018
/r/MensRights

Controlling girlfriend, 22, who starved and stabbed her partner, banned him from her bed and took over his Facebook account is jailed for more than seven years

3826 upvotes
April 16, 2018
/r/PussyPassDenied

'If you tell anyone I've cheated, I'll ruin you': Cambridge don is cleared after his PhD student fiancee accused him of assault 'to get back at him' for calling off their wedding after she had affair in Galapagos Islands

3770 upvotes
September 16, 2017
/r/MensRights

Amber Heard loses bid to get $50 million defamation suit by her ex Johnny Depp thrown out

3737 upvotes
March 28, 2020
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]aokusman 123 points124 points125 points 10 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Fact that she is still in that job is amazing, in a bad way.

[–]eletheros 42 points43 points44 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I believe her "job" is student voted, and the administration has claimed that they can't fire her.

Which of course, to use the local colloquialism, is bollocks.

[–]boringcarpets 37 points38 points39 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

which is weird considering universities are investigating real-world crimes like sexual assault and rape and expelling students on trumpery and nonsense

[–]Wargame4life 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

only in the US not the UK

[–]tothecatmobile 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Student unions aren't part of the universities that they serve.

Asking the university to sack her would be like asking a school to sack a spokesperson for the teachers union.

[–]NoGardE 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Well, the school can say "we won't meet with the union while this person is a diversity officer." It's not the cleanest, PR wise, but it's perfectly legitimate.

[–]tothecatmobile 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

But why would they bother?

As you said, the university could possibly face a backlash for it, and get nothing in return.

If anything the university has more to gain by allowing her to tarnish the reputation of the student union.

[+][deleted] -49 points-48 points-47 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Pee your pants to stand for women's rights!

Surely someone will get that reference and upvote me.

[–][deleted] 19 points20 points21 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

I got the reference and downvoted you.

/r/MR has a reputation for being a bunch of whiney asshole MRAs. don't help perpetuate this false stereotype.

[–]Black_caped_man 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

What's the reference?

[–][deleted] 20 points21 points22 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

4chan is trolling tumblr feminists into pissing themselves, taking pics and posting it online in solidarity with.... people that piss themselves i guess??

I think it's hilarious, but the comment is out of place in this discussion.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

People are actually doing it?

God 4chan

[–]Chernoblie 42 points43 points44 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

"because racism and sexism describe structures of privilege based on race and gender and therefore women of colour and minority genders cannot be racist or sexist, since we do not stand to benefit from such a system."

How do these people even come up with this shit.

[–]redditorriot 21 points22 points23 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Encouragement from demented academics who need some way to stay in a job and keep funding. Has the double whammy of in-built censorship and removal or responsibility. Clever, eh?

[–]freedaemons 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Making a pseudo-academic field of it helps.

Racism and sexism are when one person is an arse to another person on account of the second person's race or gender, the qualities of the person being racist or sexist don't matter at all.

[–]HugeSaladFork 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

By assuming the conclusion and rationalizing to fit.

[–]full_control 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Imagine if a black man or woman was the president of a prestigious University and made a stand that no women or people of color would be admitted. Would that still not be bigoted? I would love to hear the argument about that from someone that believes this.

[–]dangerousopinions 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Even if we accept that that's true, it necessarily must be followed by "what I said was just hateful and prejudiced". I'm not sure how their redefining the word "racist" or "sexist" absolves them of wrongdoing.

[–][deleted] 162 points163 points164 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

But she added the uses of hashtags such as "#killallwhitemen" on her personal account were "in-jokes and ways that many people in the queer feminist community express ourselves".

Given that this is from a woman who'd "trigger warning!" any man immediately to HR or to the police for an "in-joke" fuck you you bitch.

[–]GimletOnTheRocks 53 points54 points55 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

In-joke or not, I am certainly triggered by #killallwhitemen. My feelings can't be denied.

[–][deleted] 33 points34 points35 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Dude, don't you know by now as a man your feelings don't mean shit?

[–]Manakel93 22 points23 points24 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Conceal don't feel?

[–]eaton80 15 points16 points17 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Let it go.

[–]Jolcas 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ok, now it's stuck in my head and I hate you with the fury of a thousand badgers being poked with sticks

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Just get by.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

B-b-b-b-but men don't has feelz.

You can cut them and they won't bleed !

They don't feel pain ... not like real people do, anyways.

/sarcasm

[–]Consilio_et_Animis 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"How do you write women so well?"

[–]Azothlike 60 points61 points62 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Ms Mustafa explained that she could not be guilty of sexism or racism against white men "because racism and sexism describe structures of privilege based on race and gender and therefore women of colour and minority genders cannot be racist or sexist, since we do not stand to benefit from such a system."

this white girl lol

women of colour

LOL

minority genders

LOLOLOLOL

[–]bertreapot 28 points29 points30 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

She's part Arab or Persian so she claims minority status. Though she grew up in Britain, in a well-off family.

[–]Azothlike 22 points23 points24 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I know why she's doing what she's doing.

It doesn't change the fact that she's wrong. She's white. If she called herself white, nobody would question her, or be suspicious. If she goes to an open house, she isn't going to encounter any of the supposed 'racial prejudice' that plagues america

Maybe she's not caucasian, per racial identity. But she is white, by color. Maybe she is one twelfth arab by racial identity, but she is not 'a person of color'. The only color she has is white.

The idea that she is a minority is an insult, and thinking she can somehow represent, or speak for, minorities and what they experience or need, because she isn't pureblood scandinavian, is a laugh.

This, ontop of her hilariously ignorant statement that women are a minority gender, means I can't listen to her and keep my sides on at the same time.

[–]bertreapot 11 points12 points13 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh I agree. She looks white, acts white, has a strong British accent. She has blue eyes, for christ's sake. No one on the street would ever suspect she is a minority.

But, ironically, she wants the privilege that comes with being a minority on campus. So she pulls the minority card when it suits her.

In reality her parents are wealthy, so there's a good chance she had more opportunities in life than a working class, white british male. Yet she claims to be the oppressed one.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]bertreapot 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah. Looks white, talks white. No one would have any clue that she was a "minority" if she didn't use it as an excuse to discriminate against white men.

[–]redditorriot 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh the humanity.

prayformustafa

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She looks white though. She should stop appropriating minority struggles when she is benefiting from white privilege.

Their own arguments apply more to them than anyone else. It's really astonishing.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

minority genders

MINORITY GENDERS

WHAT

WHAT THE FUCK

[–][deleted] 39 points40 points41 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Can you imagine if a white male tweeted #killallblackwomen?

[+][deleted] 10 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Shit. Third time today.

[–]manicmonkeys 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Calm down bro, It's a prank!"

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points19 points 10 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Good I am glad that she is going to be charged. If a male diverstity officer had tweeted "kill all white women" they would also have been rightly charged.

This is good news that she is going to be charged. What about all the feminists over at "againstmensrights" did they not have a logo of "kill all men".

I suspect that some of the things that Jessica Valenti and other feminists have written could also get them charged in the UK. She is based in the USA but I suspect that if someone complained Jessica Valenti would be banned from the UK due to her misandric views.

This has made my day!

[–]Huitzil37 -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

No, it is not right that she be criminally charged. She should be fired, because the fact that she's a bigot made her bad at her job. But criminalizing speech, no matter how abhorrent, is never ever ever acceptable.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There is no totally free speech in the UK or USA it is "degrees of free speech" we have.

[–]Supernumiphone -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

criminalizing speech, no matter how abhorrent, is never ever ever acceptable.

Agreed. This is what feminists do. I'm very disappointed in the downvotes you're getting on your comment.

[–]7478 16 points17 points18 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

She will never do a day of time for this. Instead she will be given some sort of plum position at the EU or something.

[–]bertreapot 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Ms Mustafa explained that she could not be guilty of sexism or racism against white men "because racism and sexism describe structures of privilege based on race and gender and therefore women of colour and minority genders cannot be racist or sexist, since we do not stand to benefit from such a system."

I wonder if she'll try to use this bullshit argument in court? Saying a woman can't be sexist is like arguing it's impossible for a women to stab a guy, because the man is privileged.

[–]eletheros 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I wonder if she'll try to use this bullshit argument in court?

Not in the UK, but that exact argument was made in Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action to mocking response from the justices.

[–]bertreapot 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Do you have the quote of the actual mocking response? I'm not finding a lot via Google

[–]eletheros 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303680404579139601418956802

You're going to have to search for the title in google and click from there to get the full article.

[–]bertreapot 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Dang. That is drawdropping that someone actually made that argument before the Supreme Court. Thank god they didn't buy it.

[–]DrDoSoLittle 25 points26 points27 points 10 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Good to see equal treatment, and I still disagree with the law and charges. Crap like this needs to stop or free speech will cease to exist.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

UK is not The Land of The Free.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

In the UK free speech is by degrees. We can say largely what we want but one cannot call for harm to another person or group of people. This could very easily escalate to mob rule. Inciting violence is and should be a crime.

[–]Lonemango -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Inciting violence is not protected in the U.S. either, however while I think this sort of behavior is distasteful, I don't think it should be illegal until it becomes a credible threat.

[–]DrDoSoLittle -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I understand. Does anyone really think she was calling for mass murder?

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

it is the underlying build up which one cannot monitor. If men are treated as disposable in the media and comments, they become disposable in reality.

Crimes against men are not treated with the same seriousness.

[–]tio1w 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I do and no, I'm not joking.

The only reason people don't take it seriously is because they think she's joking and she plays that card.

Give her power and see how playful she becomes.

[–]eletheros -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

We can say largely what we want...

...so long as nobody in power disagrees with you.

UK subjects have no free speech. You have approved speech.

[–]tio1w 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

We can say largely what we want...

...so long as nobody in power disagrees with you.

It's like this everywhere, what changes is where the line the powerful draw is.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Partly true. We do not have written down laws as such in the UK. We have case law and juries so you do not know if you have broken the law until after the event! In her case other people have been charged for similar tweets so she should have known it was wrong

[–]MattBD 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

UK subjects

Wrong.

[–]CornyHoosier -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

UK subjects

This concept makes the American in me shake with rage. No man or woman should ever be held as superior simply due to birth.

[–]MattBD 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Contrary to what some people seem to believe, we aren't British subjects, we're British citizens, and that has been the case since 1981. The category of British subjects now includes only those people formerly known as British subjects without citizenship and people born in Ireland before 1949. There will never be any more people added to this category and once the current people in this category die out the term will be redundant.

[–]eaton80 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Comments disabled? Hey Guardian what happened to "comment is free"?

They don't like it when it's one of their own.

[–]devious29 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Er, it's not the Guardian it's the Independent (marginally less bad, but working hard to catch up).

Needless to say the story in the G (here ) doesn't have comments either.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She shouldn't be legally charged, she should have just lost her position for being unqualified for it and being soooo unapologetic about her bigotry.

[–]JohnKimble111[S] 21 points22 points23 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Worth remembering that Lib Dem executive committee members also share these views: https://hequal.wordpress.com/2015/04/01/kill-all-men-fk-men-die-cis-scum-says-lib-dem-executive-committe-member/

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Not current ones. Hequal contacted their leadership and got her suspended.

https://hequal.wordpress.com/2015/04/16/liberal-democrat-executive-committee-member-suspended-over-kill-all-men-hate-tweets/

[–]JohnKimble111[S] 15 points16 points17 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

She got kicked off one committee, a temporary suspension from another and zero action in relation to her two other roles. I.e. she still sits on three out of four committees.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Well, two out of four--she's suspended until the investigation is completed.

[–]redditorriot 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's taking an incredible amount of time. It's almost like they're trying to sweep it under the carpet.

[–]DavidByron2 56 points57 points58 points 10 years ago (46 children) | Copy Link

Well being a racist sexist asshole made her a bad fit as "diversity officer" but it shouldn't be a criminal matter. Although ironically she's the sort of authoritarian nut who would be in favour of criminalizing speech.

[–]JohnKimble111[S] 42 points43 points44 points 10 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

I'm guessing it's the wanting to have people killed aspect that has got her in trouble.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

Yeah but threats have to be specific and actionable in order to be illegal. At least in the United States. That's the way it should be. Of course other countries have much less tolerance for freedom of speech (unfortunately IMO).

[–]MagicalPowerfulEvil 16 points17 points18 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

'Kill all men' is incredible specific and actionable.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Not at all. It is absurdly hyperbolic. By specific, we're talking about an individual or a group of individuals. Not 3.5 billion people comprising half of humanity. And by actionable we're talking something that is in the realm of possibility - which it obviously isn't.

[–]MagicalPowerfulEvil 14 points15 points16 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Lets try an experiment then. How about you post #KillAllCops on your twitter and we'll time how long it takes before the police show up at your door.

[–]Consilio_et_Animis 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Agreed. Free speech in the USA is something I really think they get right. And it's amazing to see how many citizens, corporations, government entities & politicians will try and chip away at it, only for the Supreme Court (and lower courts) to just cut them off.

Well done USA on that one. Keep it up.

[–]bertreapot 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

UK has much less stringent free speech protections. The U.S. really is the gold standard.

[–]eletheros 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

At least in the United States.

Except that it's the UK, and they have no freedom there. Just what the crown allows them. The criminal charges are listed in the article:

Ms Mustafa will face two charges, one of sending a threatening message between 10 November 2014 and 31 May this year, and one of sending a menacing or offensive message via a public network, between the same dates.

[–]the_leander 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

Except that it's the UK, and they have no freedom there. Just what the crown allows them.

Actually we have a system of Common Law, whereby anything not explicitly deemed illegal is considered legal.

It's also the basis of the US legal system.

From looking around, it seems that she made some tweets advocating violence (in proper sense, not the "I disagree with you" version being pushed right now) toward a political party and its members. As I understand it, advocating this sort of action would likely end in a similar situation in the USA.

Edit, if you're wondering why the authorities are taking a relatively hard line stance on this particular point, I would suggest looking into the Brighton Bombing. We get very twitchy when people start advocating violence against politicians, political parties etc.

[–]eletheros -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Actually we have a system of Common Law, whereby anything not explicitly deemed illegal is considered legal.

And speech is deemed illegal.

It's also the basis of the US legal system.

Combined with constitutional guarantees of freedom and rights, yes. that guarantee is what you are missing.

As I understand it, advocating this sort of action would likely end in a similar situation in the USA.

You understand wrong. Only calls for imminent lawless action are criminal in the US.

[–]CatManDontDo 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

UK hate speech laws are weird

[–]192873982 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Where I live (Switzerland), it is a criminal matter.

Stgb 259:

Any person who publicly incites others to commit a felony is liable to a custodial sentence not exceeding three years or to a monetary penalty.

Public incitement to commit genocide (Art. 264), where the intention is for the act to be carried out exclusively or partly in Switzerland, is also an offence if the incitement occurs outside Switzerland.

This means that she should be jailed for exactly 3 years, if she ever enters Switzerland. It wouldn't happen in real life I guess, because no one cares about this women.

[–]eaton80 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yes but Feminists didn't pass laws like Lifetime Alimony by being reasonable. Why should we?

[–]Anarchistnation 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why should we?

Because then we'd be stooping to their level, we'd be no better than they are. Nothing would get done.

[–]ThePigmanAgain 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Encouraging mass murder should be a crime.

[+]leftajar -8 points-7 points-6 points 10 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

Thank you. Free speech is free speech, and this shouldn't be a criminal matter.

[–]RousseauTX 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

OMG..read a book once in a while. Free speech does not mean that you're immune to legal consequences from what you say. You couldn't scream "bomb" on a plane, or yell obscenities in a crowded town square..just like you can't say kill all white men without facing legal ramifications. Grow up.

[–]eletheros 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

or yell obscenities in a crowded town square..just like you can't say kill all white men without facing legal ramifications. Grow up.

You grow up, for while you're correct that you can't scream bomb on a plane your other two examples are very much free speech issues, and furthermore would not be actionable in the US.

You can yell obscenities in a crowded town square all you want, so long as you follow noise level laws, and you can say kill all white men (or kill all feminists, etc) so long as it is not an imminent incitement to lawless action. Which your example doesn't qualify as.

[–]leftajar 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

TIL that nobody on this board understands free speech. Also, I thought we were above downvoting for disagreement.

[–]Meistermalkav -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It however does warrant an investigation.

Has she planned to attack white men?

I mean, have a look at her. she describes herself as "colored", how can I be sure she identifies me as colored and not as caucasian white?

I mean, seriously, if you have a man who tweets, kill all white women, you would like to have him investigated?

I am just saying, run her and her organisation through the same legislative framework that you would run a man who tweeted the same about inciting violence against women, and you archieve the same ammount of justice.

Of course, any men who tweeted things like "#slapabitch" or "#killthoseuppitywhores", and who admitted that he and his buddies used hashtags and injokes like this to "relax", you would run through the special process, just to make sure you did not have a potential university shooter on your hands. Hell, you would even investigate the whole lot of the organisation, just to be sure.

Just keep that in mind when you say "What she did is completely legal, and does not qualify as any kind of wrong. "

[–]eletheros -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It however does warrant an investigation.

No, it doesn't.

I mean, have a look at her. she describes herself as "colored", how can I be sure she identifies me as colored and not as caucasian white?

How is that even relevant?

I am just saying, run her and her organisation through the same legislative framework that you would run a man who tweeted the same about inciting violence against women, and you archieve the same ammount of justice.

Which in the US, is none.

Just keep that in mind when you say "What she did is completely legal, and does not qualify as any kind of wrong. "

What she did would have been completely legal in the US, and furthermore does not qualify as any kind of wrong even though the UK makes speech illegal.

[–]leftajar -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Wow, nice shaming language. I'm aware of the contexts in which speech can be legally limited, and I don't think this is one of those situations.

[–]RousseauTX 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

...Kill all white men...is "not one of those situations"? Oh really, what if she went on a rampage shooting killing 20 white males and this tweet was the only indication she gave of the attack. Would you consider the tweet no big deal then?

[–]Neo_Techni 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Threats are threats. You can't give one the ok cause of the target, and punish another one cause of the target.

[–]Vandechoz -5 points-4 points-3 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Free speech does not mean that you're immune to legal consequences from what you say.

That's exactly what it means. Exceptions are just that, exceptions. And vague, unspecific "threats" should not be one.

[–]RousseauTX 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

"If one's exercise of free speech is likely to cause the death or injury of many other people, it is not constitutionally protected." - The U.S. Supreme Court.

You're wrong, and If you think otherwise, then just say one "vague, unspecific" word next time your on an airplane: Bomb. And see how "free" your speech really is. Furthermore, who are you to make that judgement call about what is an exception? What if she followed up on here claim? Seems that she added two qualifiers, white, male. How specific does it need to be?

[–]Vandechoz -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

You just gave another exception. I already covered those. The fact that not all speech is free speech does not change anything about those things that are free speech. The entire purpose of free speech is that it makes one immune to being prosecuted for that speech.

How specific does it need to be?

Much more specific, and much less vague. At this point she holds a shitty opinion, and is vocal about it. That does not rise to the level of endangering anyone, though.

[–]emperorhirohito 14 points15 points16 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Honestly I don't want her to be charged. I just want the world to acknowledge what a shitty person she is.

[–]MrDoradus 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I'm glad that she's facing these charges, but before we get too happy about it all let's wait and see if any of them sticks.

Or better yet, let's wait and see for how much she'll sue the country, for causing her unjust emotional trauma, after she's acquitted. And given the track record, she has high chances of winning that lawsuit.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If she is charged: She can either accept the charges and probably get a caution. If she rejects them it will go to court. Then it is down to a judge. It may even go to a jury trial but i doubt it.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]MrDoradus 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I'm all for free speech, but hate speech is another matter. Kill all men falls into the latter category.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

No. "Hate speech" is very difficult to define, people get in trouble for saying things to specific ethnic groups etc. and in more trouble because of 'hate speech' like 'hate crimes' and that's a bad thing.

[–]MrDoradus 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

"Kill all men" is not difficult to label as and definitely is hate speech. Don't generalise and wash down this slogan's importance because of other less distinct examples of hate speech.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's ridiculous to start policing tweets. If she has a literal threat behind it, like "we will kill all the man at the bank today on 3rd street" then okay, but other than that, policing tweets is absurd, and creates a very scary precedent.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But men and women should be treated equally under all laws of a country

[–]TheDude41 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not that I agree with the basic premise of this law at all, but it's nice to see a prosecutor discharge her responsibilities impartially.

Amazing that this woman still appears to hold her position.

[–]fuck_ya_bud 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Omg my justice boner is so hard right now my vein might rupture

[–]duglock 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The police shouldn't be policing language. If we support her arrest then we are also supporting police arresting MRA''s for thought crimes.

[–]CatManDontDo 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She definitely shouldn't be a 'diversity officer' at a university

[–]ScooopyNATTY 12 points13 points14 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Everything is wrong here. I disagree with what she said and I believe she should be fired but I also disagree with making twitter posts criminal...things are worse than i thought in the UK.

[–]cymrich 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

well she isn't in the US so US free speech protections don't apply. I'm all for her being charged on the grounds of equality... if a man had said "kill all asian women" then they would never have taken this long to bring charges against him... instead the case would have already been to court and the judgement passed! there is no reason for her to be treated different in that regard... however in my opinion her position as a diversity officer actually makes this much worse and should be taken in to consideration as well!

[–]manicmonkeys 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I look at it the same way as a redneck posting "kill all muslims!". Stupid, immature and narrow minded? Yes.

Should it get someone fired from a job, especially if they're dealing with HR type stuff? Yes.

Should it get charges press against them? I don't think so, at very least not without that person having a violent criminal record.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

but I also disagree with making twitter posts criminal.

Yes

[–]Xemnas81 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree, she should not have been arrested and to support that would be to support our own destruction. However she should absolutely have been forced to make a public apology and resign from her role. Instead she's tried to play Jedi mind tricks with the stupid manipulative cult language of feminist ideology.

[–]apullin 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

From what I have read, it really seems like that this person is beset with rage and rancor in a way that is negatively affecting her life. This should concern everyone around her.

Consider the sometimes used definition of an alcoholic: someone who understands the negative or destructive consequences of their habit, but continues with it anyway.

That same pattern could be applied to the subject of this article, really.

[–]fappyday 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The Tumblr is strong with this one.

[–]choobster 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Man I just don't like this Ms. Mufasa

[–]Globalization101 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Bigot

[–]scanspeak 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"In law, hate speech is any speech, gesture or conduct, writing, or display which is forbidden because it may incite violence or prejudicial action against or by a protected individual or group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected individual or group."

[–]Xemnas81 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I have a quite politically active feminist acquaintance who tried to argue that

a) This quote was OK because white men are privileged #checkyourprivilege

b) MRAs are to blame for this

c) The people who hurled her abuse should be prosecuted, not her

There was the legit complaint that people like Katie Hopkins and Nick Griffin who have said some awful things didn't lose their jobs over it.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Stupid. Charging people over shit said on the internet is ridiculous. Unless there is an obvious, physically supported threat -- like saying they are going to bomb a bank or something, you should be able to say whatever you want.

We should NOT get on board with policing what people say like Feminists.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's fucking stupid, but we can definitly appreciate the irony of the situation.

[–]ThePigmanAgain 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ah, how sweet it is. And no, it isn't censorship to charge her for saying "kill all white men." Incitement to mass murder is a long way from saying, "white men are jerks and, also, they have cooties!"

[–]JamieD86 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Right. I remember when this happened and the outrage was simply because she was a student diversity officer at the time. That's why so many people reacted the way they did to it. She shouldn't be a student diversity officer if she clearly doesn't believe in diversity.

However, charged by police? WTF? CHARGED? Over a HASHTAG???

As much as I really don't like her attitude and what she represents, charging somebody over a stupid generalized hashtag is ridiculous. People in this comment section have said things like, "What if a white man tweeted #KillAllBlackWomen", well I think if he was a diversity officer or anything like it he should lose his job in disgrace, but he shouldn't be charged, it's a fucking hashtag.

If you really want her to be charged, be careful what you wish for guys!! This was NEVER a credible threat of killing all white men, or even one white guy, it was some idiot who used a hashtag.

Yes there is an amusing irony that feminists and progressives flirt with the idea of charges over "problematic" speech about women (like, ya know, "fair criticism.."), but still, just because she is on the end of the charges doesn't make it any more palatable, to me at least!

EDIT: After reading a bit more, it isn't necessarily over the #KillAllWhiteMen hashtag that was doing the rounds, but even as just comments and not a hashtag, I still can't get behind charges here!!

[–]professorbooty25 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Hate speech is a crime in England. It's stupid, but that's Europe for you.

[–]NUMBERS2357 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

This violates freedom of speech. I know the UK doesn't have as strong free speech laws as the US, and I'm glad that if it exists it's to be enforced evenly - that said, I don't think anyone should face government sanction for tweeting something like "kill all white men".

[–]Argosy37 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yup. I think her words are appalling, but she should have the right to say them. Her words should have cost her the job but I don't see any justification for charges.

[–]fickle_fuck 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

FWIW, there are limitations to freedom of speech. You can't make death threats against someone, slander, incite a riot, etc..

[–]NUMBERS2357 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There are, but in the US this wouldn't fit any of them, and I agree with that.

[–]Xemnas81 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If you can't slander, does that mean it's only a matter of time before I'm charged of public discussion of the MRM/attacking feminism on my Facebook?

[–]scanspeak 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I think it can be considered hate speech and as such she should be charged.

[–]NUMBERS2357 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

IMO something shouldn't be illegal due to being "hate speech" (and in the US it's not, luckily. If it was here, I bet people would be gunning for this subreddit.)

[–]cymrich 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

how is it that online petition only got 165 signatures??

[–]Neo_Techni 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Cause it got 26 thousand. The article lied.

[–]cymrich 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I thought I remembered a much larger number... larger than that 165 I mean. 26K sounds about right.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It was the university petition that had 165

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

She sure makes it easy.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's my favorite NOFX song.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWrlbRdJsSE

Seriously, was she referencing NOFX? If not, then not cool.

[–]wll89a 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Not sure how I feel about this. Hate speech is bad, hate speech bans are bad.

I mostly wonder how this will be blamed on the patriarchy.

[–]professorbooty25 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They passed the laws that made hate speech a crime?

[–]Xemnas81 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It already was blamed on the patriarchy

"because racism and sexism describe structures of privilege based on race and gender and therefore women of colour and minority genders cannot be racist or sexist, since we do not stand to benefit from such a system."

[–]faithle55 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

While I think this woman's behaviour is extremely reprehensible, the fact that it may be criminalised is a very sad thing.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This person is hateable, but charges are bullshit. Everyone being treated shitty isn't the equality I'd like

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I see some people in this thread are questioning whether or not it should be ok to public broadcast #killallwhitemen . to me there are many lessons from history that say it's not ok Nazi Germany, Rwanda.. etc.. I know we obviously dont live in a climate where a mass culling or white men is likely to happen.. but I think it's she's been arrested.

I'm living in the UK.. so I believe in free speech but within reason.. Things you could never get away with saying publicly off the top of my head:

1.kill all Jews.

2 anything that compromises national security.

3.that it's ok to have sex with children.

I think these things illustrate clearly why there are boundaries to free speech and beyond those boundaries there will be arrest or a severe arse kicking..

[–]Lethn -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

"A student diversity officer who was caught up in a racism row after allegedly posting 'kill all white men' on social media has been summonsed to court to face malicious communications charges."

...... They mispelled summoned.....

[–]boringcarpets 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

nope. summonsed is correct

[–]abcIDontKnowTheRest 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

She received a summons. Summonsed is correct.

[–]Lethn -5 points-4 points-3 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

o_O well I've never fucking heard of that before lol what the hell was wrong with just saying summoned though? If they deliberately used that it's like they're just trying to be clever for the sake of it.

[–]bigwillyb123 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If you're being summoned somewhere, someone is requesting that you be in a certain place at a certain time (usually now). If you're being summonsed somewhere, you can face (usually legal) punishment for not being there at that time. I summon you to the kitchen for dinner, uncle Joe was summonsed to court because of his 20 unpaid parking tickets.

[–]abcIDontKnowTheRest 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Because summons and summonsed refer specifically to the legal process.

They're using the correct terminology because they're supposed to, not just to be clever for the sake of it.

[–]Lethn 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I always thought that "They have recieved summons" was the appropriate terminology, but I guess I'm just being a grammar nazi :P

It's like when economists use the word 'monies' to describe money, it just sounds so wrong when spoken in a sentence and yes for those who don't know monies is a legit thing too.

[–]abcIDontKnowTheRest 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The actual "thing" or subpoena, if you will, is called a summons. Meaning serving someone a summons can be referred to as summonsing, and having been served a summons cand be referred to as summonsed.

And yes, monies is absolutely a legit term too.

[–]bigwillyb123 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If you're being summoned somewhere, someone is requesting that you be in a certain place at a certain time (usually now). If you're being summonsed somewhere, you can face (usually legal) punishment for not being there at that time. I summon you to the kitchen for dinner, uncle Joe was summonsed to court because of his 20 unpaid parking tickets.

[–]boringcarpets 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Are you fucking kidding?

Ms Mustafa will face two charges, one of sending a threatening message and one of sending a menacing or offensive message via a public network

is that it? why cant she be done for discrimination or hate speech?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I think they want to avoid a costly jury trial.

[–]alcockell 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Communication Act.

[–]ifelsedowhile 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

turkish people are a mixed bag, some look european like her or dr. oz, some other look middle/near eastern like Cenk Dumbgur.

[–]Azothlike 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

She has freckles.

She doesn't 'look European'. She's white as fuck.

[–]cymrich 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

how are freckles an indicator? my asian gf has freckles and she has no white blood in her.

[–]Azothlike 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Freckle

which are most often visible on people with a fair complexion.

That is why they are an indicator. She is pale. She is very white. She could be much darker than she is, and she would still look 'european'. Right now, she does not look 'european', which is a very flexible term. She looks white.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As a libertarian I am against arresting anyone for their words.

Even though I do not agree with her ideas, I do not think anyone should support violation of Free Speech.

In USA there is the First Amendment.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Ricwulf 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

So you are against free speech and freedom of thought? I vehemently oppose Feminism, but it should be taken down via challenging their ideas, not by force through some government to outlaw it.

EDIT: Oi! /u/PierceHarlan . You're not going to say anything? Just edit out the bad stuff? Good job, you intellectually weak individual. At least have the courage to admit that you were wrong when confronted with it.

EDIT 2: Well, either a mod deleted it, or Pierce did. That's just pathetic if it's the latter. I might hold some shitty opinions of my own, but at least I know I'll own up to them if confronted.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Good thing it isn't then.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I didn't, I was just joking with myself.

This isn't what feminism is. This is what a particular strain on feminism in a particular county has stooped to. You can't have notallmen, and then paint people fighting not for the rights of women in Saudi Arabia with the same brush as these idiots.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I think you'd do well never to use the phrase "school yourself" in public. I'll "spew" whatever I like, but thanks for making your cause sound like a haven for condescending people from the 70s.

If you want to rebut my assertion that feminism as a movement is still vital on the international stage by pointing to a heavily localised phenomenon in one particular area of society, then you're delusional.

There is actually a world outside the US. I'm not concerned what's happening in the US college system because, to be frank, there's a lot of far more pressing problems relating to gender internationally. Maybe there are issues with his men are treated by the legal system. In fact I know there are. But that doesn't make the problems women face any less serious.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter