Jump to content
People

Woman ordered to pay $10,000 to transwoman for facebook posts

Recommended Posts

People

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-09-09/canberra-radio-newsreader-told-to-pay-transgender-activist-10000/12642722

I was a little shocked at this report that a woman has been ordered to pay $10,000 to a transgender person due to some posts on her facebook account. To me it seems an excessive penalty and I think it will only result in stifling the discussion around transgender issues.

Does anyone know of any similar cases where men have been ordered to pay damages for hate speech toward women, and if the amount is comparable?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Percival

I think the amount was due to the fact she was encouraging hate speech on a court ordered apology. I think the amount was fair. 

  • Like 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DirtyStreetPie

I think I side with the trans woman on this issue. The matter would have been resolved after the initial apology and $700 payment if the radio person had 1. removed the comments from her post and 2. refrained from liking them. By liking the comments, she essentially dis-endorsed her own apology. Liking the comments was an act of aggression to the person she apologised to, and to the people who made her apologise. Let her pay the 10 grand.

  • Like 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
born.a.girl

I agreed with the fine.

The fine wasn't ONLY for 'some posts on Facebook'. She was obliged to post an apology, then 'liked' some or all of the vicious comments others made about the person. There are several degrees of transgression there.  She not only didn't delete them, she 'liked' them.

If you are required to issue an apology, you have to mean it. Not agree with everyone who makes vile comments about the subject of the apology.

  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cherubs

Ms Rep had the opportunity to apologise and move on, but chose to further inflame the topic by posting and accepting offensive comments, $10000, is the consequence for doing so. My take away from this article is  Ms Rep had no  intention of sparking discussion, merely scoring points for her own agenda.

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sandra

I agree with the fine, especially in light of the fact she is a media person, whose comments and actions reach a greater audience than any other person would. “Liking” a post is passive aggressive in this instance, a way of saying something she should not be saying. 

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
South Coast

I don't agree ! I think she should get a spine personally, get over it !

Catherine McGregor has had hideous things written about her yet she holds her own, takes it on the chin and moves on with dignity.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bam1

Agree with all the agree with the fine posts. You never get fined for just a facebook post, its only after the wrong has been pointed out and a reasonable resolutions refused that a fine occurs.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DirtyStreetPie
7 minutes ago, South Coast said:

I don't agree ! I think she should get a spine personally, get over it !

Catherine McGregor has had hideous things written about her yet she holds her own, takes it on the chin and moves on with dignity.

 

If someone called me a curry muncher and a snake rooter, would I not be entitled to get upset about it? Must I grow a spine strong enough to bear bigotry? Why can't I have a soft spine for insults?

Edited by DirtyStreetPie
typo
  • Like 31

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sandra

I do not think we should ever be fine with comments that discriminate, demoralise, create hate  etc. Taking something on the chin is what many marginalised groups did for years, suffering hugely.

  • Like 20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DirtyStreetPie
3 minutes ago, Sandra said:

I do not think we should ever be fine with comments that discriminate, demoralise, create hate  etc. Taking something on the chin is what many marginalised groups did for years, suffering hugely.

Yep, my chin is tired and overburdened. And the fact that Catherine McGregor is able to tolerate bigotry is not an argument for letting it continue. I wager she would love it to stop, regardless of how well she is able to bat it away.

Edited by DirtyStreetPie
typo
  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
~Jolly_F~

Seems fair... people need to start realising that their right to an “opinion” comes with consequences.

Telling someone to grow a spine when it comes to racism, bigotry, homophobia and so on is crap!! 

  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Soontobegran

I would not have been disappointed if it was more than 10k. 

 

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People
1 hour ago, born.a.girl said:

I agreed with the fine.

The fine wasn't ONLY for 'some posts on Facebook'. She was obliged to post an apology, then 'liked' some or all of the vicious comments others made about the person. There are several degrees of transgression there.  She not only didn't delete them, she 'liked' them.

If you are required to issue an apology, you have to mean it. Not agree with everyone who makes vile comments about the subject of the apology.

I guess I disagree with the term 'vicious comments'. From the article:

The comments ranged from "Bridget Clinch is a male bully" to "I hate Bridget and I don't even know who he is" and the use of the hashtag #istandwithbeth. 

I wouldn't call these comments villifying or vicious.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DQMission

And here we go again....

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nori_roll

Is there any further information about the comments she’s been fined for? If it’s what is included in the article I don’t understand what the fine is for?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Froyo
1 hour ago, gruidae said:

In answer to the OP's question, yes late last year Sarah Hanson Young was awarded $120 000 against David Leyonjelm.So she should have been, as well.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/nov/25/sarah-hanson-young-awarded-120000-damages-defamation-david-leyonhjelm

 

 

This immediately came to mind for me as well.

Edited by Froyo
Because I can't quote properly, apparently.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Froyo

"Further, she said, 'liking' a post only highlighted the comment and did not imply approval of it."

This is utterly laughable. 

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nori_roll

Am I correct in understanding that Claire has been fined for liking comments on Facebook? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nori_roll

And the comments were the ones included in the article? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cherubs
On 10/09/2020 at 10:09 AM, People said:

I guess I disagree with the term 'vicious comments'. From the article:

The comments ranged from "Bridget Clinch is a male bully" to "I hate Bridget and I don't even know who he is" and the use of the hashtag #istandwithbeth. 

I wouldn't call these comments villifying or vicious.

 

From the bottom of my heart , I pity you, you are lacking in human compassion and warmth, if you do not understand why using these terms are cruel and intended to cause emotional  pain.  It is the exact same form of abuse that sees young women called fat and s*uts, to shut them down, shut them up and to make them feel less.

Edited by Cherubs
  • Like 18

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spr_maiden
19 minutes ago, nori_roll said:

Am I correct in understanding that Claire has been fined for liking comments on Facebook? 

No,  it sounds as though she was fined for continuing to inflame a situation that had already been settled in court, thereby ignoring the terms that were agreed upon.

 

  • Like 17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kadoodle
10 minutes ago, nori_roll said:

Am I correct in understanding that Claire has been fined for liking comments on Facebook? 

Liking comments refuting the apology she was ordered to give, therefore nullifying the apology.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IamOzgirl
42 minutes ago, nori_roll said:

Am I correct in understanding that Claire has been fined for liking comments on Facebook? 

Yes you are correct. context is important though. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...