The quotes below appeared in one thread:
https://www.morrissey-solo.com/thre...hat-morrisseys-saying.144519/page-12#comments. From page 11/12 onwards. Homophobic hatred is not limited to this thread. Far from it. My intention was to email it in order toto retain the format but I couldn't find an email address. I did have one a one point. Anyway ...
The comments below relate to homophobia, although race hatred is also obvious, as there is a consistent cross-over of hatred to ethnic groups and Muslims.
The quotes below are but a tiny sample of the hatred that is currently generated within Morrissey Solo.
You may be able to accept these comments as ‘free speech’ that is your opinion. However, professional LGBT and anti-racist organisations in the UK who have assisted me in this endeavour support my concern that the comments below (and other comments made by these and other registered users) do represent hate speech. Furthermore, they agree that the comment which identifies the 3 men as paedophiles is potential incitement to hate crime/violence.
I could also collate all of the comments that Reelfountain, Stephen Hofmann et al have posted in regard to racial hatred but that would take an extremely long, long time. I expect you are more than aware of some of the comments anyway – you are a moderator, after all.
Your latest response further illustrates your ignorance of homophobia and racism. Ignoring homophobia and racism doesn’t make it go away. The fact that you would suggest this as solution to the problem is telling and speaks to your abject disinterest to the increasing level of homophobic and racist rhetoric engulfing your website. If you are not clear what hate speech is, and it’s all a little vague to you, perhaps you should familiarise yourself with a defintion of hate speech (see below) or perhaps you shouldn’t operate a public forum that allows minority groups to be so readily abused by your registered users.
From:
https://www.morrissey-solo.com/help/terms
"You agree to not use the Service to
submit or link to any Content which is
defamatory, abusive, hateful, threatening, spam or spam-like,
likely to offend, contains adult or
objectionable content, contains personal information of others, risks copyright infringement, encourages unlawful activity,
or otherwise violates any laws."
I'd suggest that some of the above have been violated. Why no action?
I am not advocating suppression. I am advocating duty of care. I am not advocating closure of this website. I am advocating for better regulation from it's owner.
Online anti-LGBT+ hate speech is any online communication or expression which advocates, promotes, or incites hatred, discrimination or violence, against any individual or group, because of their sexual orientation, or gender identity.
Examples of online hate speech include:
• threats to an individual or group
• online abuse and cyberbullying
• words, images and videos that call for or glorify violence against a group
• encouraging others to commit hate crimes
• grossly offensive posts or comments
• trolling (posting offensive, upsetting or inflammatory comments online in an attempt to hurt and provoke a response)
• other online communication which could incite hatred towards a particular group or person.
Hate speech can happen:
• publicly, for example on public social media posts and comments, websites and forums
• privately, for example through social media, messaging apps, dating apps and emails.
Hate speech does not necessarily involve a crime being committed, but all of it can be harmful regardless of whether it is illegal or not.
Isn’t it just free speech?
Abusers often hide behind the idea that all they are doing is expressing an opinion or a belief, but no-one has the right to behave in a way that is abusive towards others. The Human Rights Act 1988 protects our rights, including the freedom of expression. This freedom carries with it a duty to respect other people’s rights. Everyone has the right to be protected from discrimination and violence. Use of offensive language or expressing an offensive opinion or belief itself is not unlawful, only where it causes alarm and distress, such as a threat of violence. The freedom of expression does not cover speech and expression that incites violence, hatred or discrimination.
User: Reelfountain
“ …. f*** PRIDE. ….. and the fact they're
1 getting the kids in on it now is like something from Gary Glitter's
2 handbook”.
"What a shower of creeps. .... the paedo element is getting more pronounced each year."
"These people
3 don't go away. They will get in there surreptitiously wherever they can and they've obviously infiltrated the Pride movement. You watch. The schools will be officially celebrating Pride each year soon."
"Gays used to enjoy the shadows - now it's all so extroverted and crudely in your face."
"but to be honest nobody knows the reason for the row anyway"
4
"Muslim gangs have form for this kind of thing in London, whites don't."
5
“Every Londoner knows this was the work of an ethnic gang. Just like every shooting and stabbing is always one ethnicity only - and it's currently happening at a rate of at least one street murder per night now.”
6
“If this really was a homophobic attack (rather than a row that
turned into a row with homophobic insults) it has 'muslim ignorance' written all over it.”
7
“But how do we know that one of the women didn't strike first? How do we know one of the women didn't throw insults first? Perhaps the women might have even started the row.”
8
User: Stephen Hofmann
"There was a picture on Twitter earlier (can't find it now) of a naked man and a small roughly 6 year old boy with his jaw dropping as he's faced with the mans penis starring at his face.
9
"God knows what the parents were doing taking him to something like that.
" 10
"No, kids shouldn't be indoctrinated with "diversity"
11
“Expressing your sexuality? What exactly does that mean? Being naked in public? Dogging? Cottaging?”
12
1LGBT people
2A convicted paedophile
3Paedophiles. A photo accompanied this post. A photo that identified the 3 men as paedophiles. Men who have potentially been put as risk of actual physical violence or online trolling because they have been perceived and promoted as paedophiles.
4An attempt to cast doubt on the testimony of 2 lesbians assaulted on a London bus. Who had made it clear they were victims of homophobic violence
5An attempt to point blame at young Muslim men without a shred of evidence anywhere to support it.
6Re: attack of 2 lesbians on a London bus. The blame shifts from Muslims to ‘ethnic’ gang without any evidence to support either assertion.
7Re: attack of 2 lesbians on a London bus. Intimating that the 2 young women, victims of an homophobic assault, were lying about the homophobic attack; with the blame for the attack shifting back to Muslims.
8Re: attack of 2 lesbians on a London bus. We know this because the 2 young woman explained about the nature of the attack clearly and methodically in several tv and press interviews. Again, a slur on the character of 2 victims of an homophobic assault.
9Re: Pride in London. Another attempt to depict LGBT people as child abusers. The much vaunted photo was never posted.
10Re: Pride in London. LGBT parents are bad parents.
11Re: Pride in London. Suggesting that LGBT parents are brainwashing their children with something that is disapproved of / questionable. Note the parenthesis around diversity.
12Negative, homophobic connotations ascribed to gay men.
