UK Society has become unsafe due to a lack of strong leadership and a rise in oppressive rhetoric and actions.
Why No One is Safe Anymore
Attending a labour LGBTQ history month event on 29th January and listening to a speech by a leader of the opposition and Labour party Sir Keir Starmer, it became apparent that one of the most important labour objectives in terms of Government has to be safety. The safety of everyone.
Standing in a room of mainly LGBTQLGBTQ LGBTQIA+ is an inclusive term that includes people of all genders and sexualities, such as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, queer, intersex, asexual, pansexual, and allies. While each letter in LGBTQIA+ stands for a specific group of people, the term encompasses the entire spectrum of gender fluidity and sexual identities. https://abbreviations.yourdictionary.com/what-does-lgbtqia-stand-for-full-acronym-explained.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT people, allies and friends, it is evident in the current political climate that the majority of those people feel safe. They might feel safe in that space, they might feel safe in some other spaces, but as people in their daily lives, and certainly on social media, they are not safe.
This aspect has again been brought into sharp focus with the row over the publication of tweets surrounding the introduction of the Scottish Hate Crime Bill, enacted on 1st April 2024. This row merely reignited previous tensions surrounding the balance of hate speech, free speech and people’s right to exist as they truly are.
The current culture war debate simply builds on previous altercations that have allowed the Prime Minister Rishi Sunak to stand up at #PMQs (07.02.24} and used trans people and their very battered standing in society as a cheap political points scoring exercise AND whilst Brianna Ghey’s mother, Ester, was in the public gallery.
When I spoke to Sir Keir afterwards and discussed this with him, he said that safety should be a human right. It is not something that needs to be fought for. Every episode of culture war hatred serves to make this more important.
Safety isn’t a weapon that one particular group can use against another. In December 2023 when Chris Bryant MP stood up in the House of Commons and said He feels less safe than three years ago, people should listen.
Everyone should have the simple ability to go about their daily lives feeling safe. I don’t just mean safe from the perspective of being safe in buildings, in a work environment, in the home environment or in a vehicle; but safe as a person, an identity and safe from other people in society.
For so long, and for so much of our history over the last 50 years, safety has been used as a political weapon to divide society to gain power and enfranchise one group against another.
The safety of individuals is paramount to a cohesive society; the lack of safety is everywhere in terms of the ability of people to go about daily life without fear. The feeling of safety has been eroded. It is certainly worse now than even two years ago and definitely worse compared to 14 years ago.
Why should it be acceptable for people to be able to cross the street to abuse other people verbally or physically because of how people look, present or appear to another person?
Why should it be acceptable for two men or two women to be assaulted on public transport merely because they appear different?
Why should anyone be abused for an opinion?
As has been said many times before, freedom of speech is an important building block in the fabric of society, but it should not be abused. Freedom of speech is not freedom to hate. It is not a mask to cover up and deny other freedoms or rights. Freedom of speech has boundaries, boundaries that are being eroded where freedom of speech is being used as a weapon.
Using freedom of speech as a weapon erodes safety.
Under current legislation, certain groups of society have protection, whilst others do not. There is protection against racist and homophobic abuse, in as much as there is criminal sanction. There isn’t the same protection against transphobia. Transphobia that is openly used by political leaders, ministers, politicians, the media and many in positions of power or influence but something which isn’t necessarily an offence unless other offences are committed.
Why is it acceptable for school children to be murdered by other children because of who they are? Brianna Ghey felt unsafe. She spent most of her time at home but was essentially lured from her safe place to be murdered. The perpetrators were rightly found guilty, but it was not considered to be hate crime because they targeted other people. However it was Brianna who suffered.
In the sentencing and summing up, The judge did consider that transphobia was part of the motive. That much was clear from the horrific evidence in WhatsApp message between the two killers. However, it wasn’t considered to be a trans hate crime.
Even that didn’t stop well know GC’s taking to social media to deny it was related to transphobia, essentially ignoring the quotes from the judge. Apologies for perpetrators are thin on the ground it seems.
MPs and political candidates have been targeted, assaulted and murdered because of their opinion. Society is divisive and has been allowed to become like this due to a lack of proper leadership and of encouraging a cohesive society.
I am told Margaret Thatcher didn’t believe society existed. That explains a lot about the individualist culture that has developed in the last 40 years and the damage it has done to ‘society’.
By preaching division, leaders have created fear and weaponised safety. Creating the division they wanted has allowed the erosion of the boundaries of freedom of speech which, essentially, created the circumstance where no one is safe. No one is safe because of an opinion. The prolonged and angry Brexit debate massively divided the country and perpetuated the division the Conservative so enjoy in their politics.
Social media is a hideous cesspit of hatred for anyone who has an opinion different to certain self-entitled people that hold a different and “right” opinion.
People either famous or otherwise are targeted because of how they look, how they sit, how they speak, how they dress, how they act or react. None of those things may be negative or bad, but they are targeted by those who feel it is acceptable to target them. Why? probably because of the degree of isolation between the perpetrator and the victim.
This situation has been permitted to escalate. The owners of Social media platforms have allowed this to happen under the guise of ‘free speech.’ Why should abusing someone on-line because of the colour, style or choice of clothing be any different from abusing them because of the colour of their skin? That is not free speech that is hate.
This is low level targeted bullying perhaps but nonetheless hatred. Comments made purely for that purpose. The use of technology allows bot accounts’ to be created at will purely for the purposes of targeting individuals, companies or businesses with hatred.
The owners of of social media platforms appear to lack motivation or responsibility to address human rights violations on their platforms, favouring profit of hatred over safety under the guise of “free speech”.
I was walking through Brixton recently, and remembering the riots in the 1980s and thinking why?
Circumstances were similar to now, with one group being targeted and oppressed. Oppressed as being different, lower, single out as a member or group of society to allow that targeting. Oppressed people and groups rise up against that oppression because they have no other choice.
It becomes a matter of individual survival if everything else is against you. In a positive cohesive society, which is inclusive and welcoming, and not divisive, groups don’t rise up because they are not oppressed. Everyone should be able to contribute to society in the same way. Society will always have those who have need, compared to those who don’t, but to simply embellish those who have everything with more whilst restricting access for those who need assistance merely divides society still further. It creates oppression to the benefit of one group against another. Ultimately, everyone loses. Not because of money, but the ultimate breakdown of society.
In so many sectors, such as the police, fire brigade, The Army, The Navy, the Football Association, cricket, and now, the music industry we hear of a culture of bullying, misogyny, and abuse which ultimately makes some people feel unsafe compared to others.
Everyone should have the right to be able to go to school or work without being bullied. In the USA, going to school gives no guarantee that a child or teacher will even return home after the school day. There is no place for bullying in society, there is no place for bullying in the work place or in the home.
If those who seek to oppress have escaped justice and feel that the legal system assists them due to its inaction or the lack of ability for victims to access legal support, it merely emboldens that oppression further.
We need leaders who support inclusion
To change things starts with leadership, REAL leadership. Leadership from inclusion rather than leadership from division.
Treating everyone AS equal and not “that some are more equal than others.” There will always be differences, but differences should be inclusive not divisive.
Why should it be acceptable to pay females less than males for the same job? Why is it acceptable to pay someone with one skin colour more than someone with a different skin colour for the same job? That simply creates division where no division is needed. It divides society, divides individuals, and creates unhappiness and distrust. It allows a power imbalance to be created which leads to oppression and bullying
Leaders need to understand and state that it is acceptable to be who you are and that it is unacceptable to rail against those who are different. Basic human Safety as individuals should be an expectation and not a privilege.
People’s safety should not be party political. ALL parties should be governing to make people safe, equally safe, not one group safer than another group. All political parties have GC groups within them working to undermine and resist any trends or policy towards inclusion. Some parties are just outwardly hateful and divisive.
The current schools consultation guidance is built on division of safety. It implies that being a trans child makes others feel unsafe – why? Why create fear in one group because of the existence of another group?
In reality and in society none of that is the case, it is manufactured to create a division and give the impression that one group is being made to feel safe merely because of the existence of another group.
Why is it those who struggle with the LGBTQ community feel unsafe from merely seeing flags representing that group painted on a wall?
Why is it acceptable for members of the same group to burn and tear down LGBTQ flag because they feel ‘unsafe’ that is merely creating fear when none is needed.
Good governance is governing for everyone. Politics is about how you govern but everyone should be able to feel safe. Whilst safety cannot be imposed, it can be implied which will supress the desire of some to make others unsafe.
Everyone can feel so much better with the right government, the right leadership. Perfection isn’t attainable, but division for the sole purpose of power and oppression is not necessary.
