Hate Crime- What Do Trans People Think About It?: A UK Analysis

Compassion is one of the buzzwords I have been using rather a lot during my blog's existence. It's one of the qualities I look for in a Bessie buddy, work colleague or employer. More often than not we are wrapped up in trying to satisfy our own egos that we forget to demonstrate compassion to our opponents/enemies as well as to our friends. It can be difficult to be level headed when someone hurls a "you look like Mrs Brown but in Norwegian troll form" insult down the local bar but how you respond I believe shows your true nature. Yes, most people wouldn't batter an eyelid if you only heard this insult once in your life, being uttered by an ill dressed stranger who's probably on his way to get absolutely bladdered to try and forget his own reprobate life back home. Yet what happens if you suffer from daily systematic bursts of name-calling from your so-called "friendly" neighbours? What happens if the name-calling leads to vicious emails, deliberate social media trolling and shaming, veiled death threats or wild paedophilic accusations? Heaven forbid, what would happen if that name calling that you ignored from neighbours lead to actual physical and sexual abuse, such as oral rape by those neighbours concerned? If you had only spoken up and reported the name-calling to the police, surely it would have put the local beat PCSO/PC on notice to check up on you to make sure you were alright and warn the neighbours about their poisonous, vile behaviour? You'd think any rational police officer/PCSO would do this for any of his/her/their residents? After all his/her/their duty is to "protect and serve" the local population. So why are so many trans people afraid to report hate incidents? Why don't they understand the nature of hate crime means some hate incidents will be classified as an actual crime? Why don't PCSOs encourage more trans people to report hate incidents/crimes?

What IS the difference between a hate incident and a hate crime?
Luckily for "hate crime" deniers there is a common, relatively easy to understand set of definitions that have been agreed by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and UK Policing bodies:

Hate incidents:
Something is a hate incident if the victim or anyone else thinks it was motivated by hostility or prejudice based on one of these characteristics:

• disability
• race
• religion
• transgender identity (as opposed to Gender Reassignment protected characteristic in the Equality Act)
• sexual orientation.

If you feel that something is a hate incident it must be recorded as such by the person you are speaking to. All police forces report hate crime based on these five characteristics.

Hate Crimes:
Any incident which leads to breaking the law which has been motivated by prejudice/discrimination based on one or more of the five characteristics stated above will be classified as a hate crime.

Here's a simplified table to show some links between hate incidents and hate crimes:

Type of Hate Offence	Can it be recorded as a Hate Incident?	Can it be recorded as a Hate Crime?
Verbal abuse- e.g. name calling	Yes
Harassment (as defined under the Equality Act – see my post on HR- trans people protected under transsexual label within Gender Reassignment protected characteristic)	Yes	Yes
Bullying/Intimidation in public- (e.g. Section 4-Fear or Provocation of Violence, Public Order Act, 1988)	Yes	Yes
Physical Abuse-hitting/punching/spitting (e.g. Section 3, Affray under Public Order Act, 1988)	Yes	Yes
Sexual assault	Yes	Yes
Damage to home/car- e.g. transphobic graffiti	Yes	Yes
Burglary	Yes	Yes
Hate Mail (as defined under the Malicious Communications Act, 1988)	Yes	Yes
Online Trolling/Abuse- e.g. on Twitter/Facebook social media platforms	Yes
Fraud	Yes	Yes
Coercion and Control by a partner because of trans status (covered under the new DVA regulations which came into effect from Dec, 2015)	Yes	Yes

There are no specific transphobic crimes currently identified under the law, but certain incidents will be considered hate crimes if they break an existing law- e.g. if there is a sustained level of verbal abuse by a number of individuals who are local to you (neighbours) and they do not desist from these activities when asked to do so by the police, they could be given an ASBO (Anti Social Behaviour Order) where they have to abide by a set of rules for 2 years or face a fine of £1,000 if they are a young offender or up to £5,000 and 5 years in prison if they are an adult offender).
or end up being prosecuted under the Public Order Act, 1988 or for breaching the Equality Act, 2010, dependent on the nature of the offence and evidence provided by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). As well as reporting the abuse to the police, you can get your local authority/landlord to take action against the neighbours concerned using their anti-social behaviour powers. You can also take the perpetrators to civil court to be compensated for your experience and to get them to desist from carrying on their behaviour using the Protection from Harassment Act, 1997 (which can led to ASBOs being awarded too).

It's interesting to note that according to the Citizen's Advice Bureau (CAB website, "when someone is charged with a homophobic or transphobic hate crime, the judge can impose a tougher sentence on the offender under the Criminal Justice Act 2003." However, regardless of how the incident may look within the prism of LGBT hostility/prejudice/discrimination, the offence may still be seen as a crime even if it was not motivated by your transgender identity.

With so much legislation and guidance in place, why have there been so few public prosecutions reported by the mainstream media? Why do victims who report hate crime feel unsupported?

My Survey:
According to The Independent article written by Peter Yeung in July 2016, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/transphobic-hate-crime-statistics-violence-transgender-uk-police-a7159026.html
there has been a 170% rise in transphobic hate crimes being reported to police, yet there were only 582 offences reported in total in the year and reports only came from 26/45 UK police forces. Yeung concluded that the "low prosecution rates  (19 in 2015, falling from 22 in 2014 according to 15/26 UK forces) and "lack of police training on trans issues" were to blame for such low levels of reporting.

So I wanted to see how a small group of trans respondents (not assorted by gender or sexuality preference) reacted to a series of hate offences being offered as potential hate crimes to see whether they would report such crimes to the local police force if they became a victim themselves of that crime. I carried out a poll with Facebook Trans-Rights group to see what trans people thought about denotations of hate crime. Some examples I gave are currently perceived as hate incidents whilst others are firm examples of hate crime. I reprint the poll results below: (conducted 13-14th September 2016).

Which of the following would you say needs to be reported to your local police force as a hate crime? (feel free to add any suggestions- no suggestions were added):

Type of Hate Offence	Number of respondents
Receiving daily targeted, hate emails/letters from a TERF (a Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist)	54
Being called "tranny" or "shemale" in the street by a stranger	49
Being told you cannot use the bathroom that corresponds to your chosen gender	47
Distribution of discriminatory trans literature by a Christian group- e.g. Westboro Baptist Church	45
Having a drink thrown over you in a (cisgender) nightclub	33
Trans on Trans Insults -e.g. lookism/passability related.	7

Analysis:
Most respondents believed hate emails/letters from feminists who identify openly as being anti-trans should be classified as a hate crime, along with stranger verbal abuse and employers/colleagues/strangers blocking bathroom access. The high response rate tallies with common views espoused by the trans community irrespective of transition status, gender preference or sexual orientation.

However trans-on-trans insults/verbal abuse doesn't seem to figure as a hate crime towards trans people, which is rather shocking considering the recent Body Positive and anti-lookism movements within transfeminism aimed at helping trans people be proud of their bodies and appearance. With this being such a contentious issue and needs covering in its own right (after further investigation) I shall deal with it in my next blogpost.

It came to my attention that some respondents felt the current police quality standards system were ineffective. For example, Colin, a trans- guy in Guildford, Surrey contacted me to say that he'd reported more than 20 examples of hate crime to his local police station but received no responses; they had "disappeared into silent bureaucracy". Strangely, Colin was only following advice given on the Citizen's Advice Bureau (CAB) page to report all hate crime/incidents in an attempt to prevent them escalating into more serious incidents. It transpired that he'd met with the local chief of police to discuss his experiences, yet nothing actually changed as a result of that meeting. All buzzwords and compliments but no concrete action to address the direct concerns that he had outlined in the hate crime reports that he had submitted. The fact no action had been taken has led to him deciding not to "go out" anymore. We often forget that victims of hate crime can become reclusive as a result of receiving sustained abuse from local residents. Colin even linked his experience to that of social class: "I have a saying about surrey ive lived here most of my life born here its a saying 'the poorer you are the more acid is going to be thrown at you' seems true around here!" This seems to have been compounded by the fact that Colin informed me that there had been no LAGLO (Lesbian and Gay Liaison Officer who is designated by a force to help LGBTQIA people) representation at Croydon Pride; you see them in abundance in Manchester and at the main London pride events so I shall be seeing whether a Lincs LAGLO turns up to Lincoln Pride on the 24th September so I can ask them specifically about hate crime prevention and prosecution in Lincolnshire.

Joanne, a trans lady told me she was so afraid of the police as a result of her experience of hate crime that she can't bring herself to report it (she has now been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and is now recovering slowly). Ryan, a trans male teenager told me he gets called "tranny" on a daily basis by his neighbours but he feels there is no point reporting them to the police because his concerns wouldn't get taken seriously. His family are equally unsupportive so he can't wait to move out and attend college where he hopes he will be valued and treated with compassion.

Jacqueline told me that she was trying to find out who had send hate mail to her estranged parents about her because of her transgender status. The perpetrator was successfully prosecuted but she never found out who they were because her parents refused to tell her (despite "taking great delight" in revealing the contents of the letter) and the police refused to tell her, citing "confidentiality" as the main reason. This shows that trans hate crimes may end up with a perpetrator being prosecuted but without the intended victim ever finding out about it. Could this be considered a miscarriage of justice?

Finally there were trans people who wanted to reduce the hate crime label down to specific areas. Sophie suggested that most of the verbal abuse reports would be "petty", including any relating to trans-trans insulting. Toilet/bathroom wise Sophie said it depended on "whether they were public or private"; I'd say most respondents were thinking about being barred from public bathroom use but if their parents/siblings prevented them from using a bathroom in the house once they reveal their transgender status it could be perceived as a form of abuse and thus a hate crime. Interestingly Sophie didn't mention malicious communication, which could indicate either non-interest or unsure of her answer. With this mix of understanding on what constitutes hate offences, hate crimes and whether to report them, it is clear to see the police, LGBT charities and support services have a lot more to do raise awareness. But why would some trans people think even reporting an act of physical abuse as a trans hate crime might be a "waste of time"? 

Some suggestions offered as to why transgender hate crime legislation seems so ineffective:

• Belief that there is "no such thing as hate crime"- that it has been created by "Luvvie Lefties" to hamper freedom of speech using "Political Correctness" banner. (That may be true when it comes to verbal abuse/online abuse but what about intimidation/sustained harassment/physical violence?)
• Lack of education within the police force about hate incidents and hate crime generally-e.g. police and victims may not even see any hate incidents as "crimes", especially if they involve online abuse through emails/social media or is perpetrated by parents/siblings/family members.
• Lack of awareness of how hate crime legislation can be seen through the transgender identity prism.
• Is a PCSO equipped to deal with resolving hate crime alone? Should there always be a PC or senior PCSO with them to make sure they record the crime thoroughly and classify it correctly?
• Innate prejudice of police officers/support services derived from environmental factors-e.g. religious preference/sexual orientation/political ideologies. Has the police officer/PCSO ever spoken to a trans person for any length of time before? Do they know how to handle a case sensitively-e.g. making sure to use correct pronouns, talk in an appropriate tone, be reassuring?
• Not enough resources to deal with resolving hate crimes; police departments are overstretched due to budget cuts being implemented by Whitehall so there may be reductions in specialist front-line staff who are trained in dealing with LGBTQIA community issues.
• Do the CPS ultimately believe they can take the perpetrator to court to be charged in the first place?
• Will the CPS be able to secure any level of prosecution for the victim; if only 22 people were convicted under hate crime legislation, is it effective enough?
• What if one person views it as hate crime even after a successful prosecution but 99 others don't- who will the public end up believing Will they ever believe the hate crime victim?

Conclusion:
At first glance, it appears that transphobic hate crimes are starting to be taken seriously by the police.  Peter Yeung's article has shown reporting rates have increased, especially among trans female victims. There appears to be a commitment from senior political and policing figures such as Angela Rayner, Shadow Women and Equalities Sec and Jane Sawyers, the National Police Chiefs lead for LGBT issues to increase training opportunities for police officers to give them the knowledge to "challenge hate and reduce the harm that it causes". However, as my survey and personal responses to hate incidents being categorised as transphobic hate crime have shown, public confidence in the police to deal with trans hate crime is dented at grassroots level. Successful criminal prosecutions have fallen,  hate crime reports are knowingly being filed under "cannot be bothered to investigate" and trans awareness of hate incidents and hate crime hasn't necessarily led to an increase in reporting amongst trans men. The progress has been satisfactory but there is no gold rosette in sight yet. I look forward to exploring ways of improving the reporting experience for trans people, talking to individuals such as my local LAGLO about what they believe will help reduce offending rates and increase reporting rates and working with charities such as Gender Free DV to address links between trans hate crime and trans domestic violence.

"Feminism ain't cancer if you don't want it to be": The Importance of promoting Compassionate Intersectional Feminism

"Feminism is not a dirty word. It does not mean you hate men, it does not mean you hate girls that have nice legs and a tan, and it does not mean you are a "bitch" or "dyke"; it means you believe in equality." Kate Nash.

It's fascinating to see how feminists are received on social media platform these days. Advocating for equal pay rights by guaranteeing a fair pay structure for all workers gets shouted down as "sexist against hard working men", recognising the existence of a rape culture that attacks men as well as women is shot down as "illogical thinking" and even acknowledging the need for state funded gender segregated  domestic abuse shelters for those women who have survived sexually, emotionally and physically abusive relationships is seen as a waste of money.

Yet how striking is it to see the results of a January 2016 survey conducted by The Fawcett Society, "the UK's largest membership society for women's rights" who actively encourage men and women to help enact societal change to benefit both sexes. The wide ranging survey was conducted to analyse British attitudes towards feminism as a whole movement. They concluded that Britain is a nation of "hidden feminists". Here's why:

• 2/3 of Britons support gender equality but only 7% identify as feminists. (560/8000 people interviewed).
• 9% of women identify as feminists whereas 4% of men label themselves as feminist.
• However men more supportive of equality between the sexes - 86% want equality for their women but only 74% of women want equality with men.
• Younger women more likely to identify as feminist- 19% of 18-24 year olds use the word but also 18-24 year old age group more likely to oppose it. 8% expressed this view compared with 2% of people aged 55 and over.  I believe this could be partly due to a promotion of awareness of feminist issues being studied on the National Curriculum through studying feminist approaches to Elizabeth Bennett's desire to break etiquette rules in Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice for GCSE English Literature (Conservatives say this is liberal indoctrination of innocent minds).

When people were asked to ascribe an adjective to the word "feminist" when it first pops into their head:

• Just over 25% said "bitchy"
• 22% said "strength"
• 17% said "suffragette"
• 17% used gender-related words such as "woman" and "female".

A related poll conducted by the Huffington Post found that 82% of respondents believe that "men and women should be social, political, and economic equals" (the definition of feminism), but only 20% self-identify as feminists.

So what's truly going on within the feminist sphere that is putting off those who support mainstream ideas that have been espoused by various aspects of feminism and what can some feminists do to try and reverse the negative stereotypes being perpetuated by arch opponents of the movement?

Faux Feminism = Opponents of Feminism? A Social Media Analysis:

A Twitter follower and amazingly sassy British podcaster (one half of the Melanin Millennials show which I now religiously listen to on a weekly basis) and co-founder of the UK's diverse podcast company ShoutOut Network, Satia came up with a list of 4 types of faux-feminists who populate social media platforms and contribute to the creation of negative feminist stereotypes:

• #PickMePickMeFeministTwitter - these people are not a feminist except when it becomes a personal cause for them. They usually impose their ideas on other women about what is desirable to be taken up as part of the mainstream feminist cause without showing an awareness of different feminist viewpoints. Anyone who doesn't conform to their own personal ideals are seen as "defective" and should be "excluded" from feminist discourse.
• #MeninistTwitter- horned up men using feminism to pick up girls without really trying to hide their true intentions. To them "feminist" is a word they use in a sentence but fail to understand what mainstream feminists aim to achieve. It's important to realise though that there may be lesbian/bi women who try and use the feminist label to rape other women by gaining their confidence online.
• #SlutShamingFeministTwitter - Women and men who believe women who choose to dress "provocatively" (e.g. in a halter neck top and hotpants to go out clubbing) deserve to be shamed publically or online for their brazen choice. They also tend to argue that "skimpy"dressing or flirtatious actions usually leads to acts of rape being committed and it's the victims fault they got raped or assaulted or abused because they didn't take effective precautions. This sort of rhetoric is often one-sided in rape cases, as straight men who get raped are not criticised for their dress code or actions in the same way that straight women and trans women are criticised, hence why they are faux feminist.
• #ProstitutesCannotBeFeministsTwitter - This often comes from middle class Judeo-Christian bias against sex workers who they believe have sold their body illegally because they are "hooked on drugs" or "owe money to pimps". There are sex workers who are trafficked into the country to raise illegal money for their pimps and they deserve our compassion and help, especially if they are being daily exploited and raped. However there are sex workers who freely choose to engage in sex acts with strangers for money and should feminists judge those women for wanting to control how they use their own bodies when feminists generally call for legalisation of abortion without foetal limitations? Trans activist (and former sex worker) Paris Lees is currently writing a thesis looking at how mainstream feminism has failed sex workers by oppressing them through their support of draconian legislation. So do those who support curbs to prostitution still be seen as feminists or faux feminists?

 Satia then identified the key ultra opponents of feminism on Twitter that I have now added to:

• #FeminismIsCancerTwitter aka #FreeMilo/ Alt-Right Media Types who believe feminist ideology leads to the breakup of appropriate relationships, reduce the chances for acceptable men and women to "procreate" and  effectively lead to the destruction of men's confidence and natural dominant place in society. Mainly it's a bunch of bashful boys who bitch and moan about their own sexual inadequacies and blame strong, intelligent women for rejecting their sexual advances. It's quite ironic that the guy who came out with the leading statement is a conservative gay man who feels uncomfortable with his own sexuality and loves dressing himself up with gold jewellery despite hating the women that probably designed some of the jewellery he wears in the first place!
• #FeminismDestroysChivalryTwitter - these are men who argue that feminism destroys the codes of etiquette and common courtesy that has been shown towards women in the past as a form of deference- e.g. there are men who question whether they need to give up a seat on a train for a heavily pregnant or physically disabled woman because they believe full "equality" means all seats are up for grabs regardless of physical differences. These men also seem to go all "size queen" when women criticise their bank balance, penis size or shoe size, even though they regularly rate the size of women's breasts or "fuckability" with their mates down the local bar of a Friday night and don't care whether they get overhead rating those women by the women themselves!
• #YouCookOrGetFiredCavemanTwitter- These are men who argue that women still have to perform domestic "housewifely" duties even if they are the main breadwinner in the house. So there are young men who are able to cook or could learn how to do the ironing but they can't be bothered and expect their girlfriend/mother/sister to do it for them 100% of the time even if his primary occupation is baiting or masturbating fellow virgin male gamers online!
• #FeminismIsIrrelevantInTheWesternWorldTwitter- These are men and women who argue that feminist principles can no longer be applied to Western countries because these countries already have as much equality of opportunity as can be reasonably achieved. They say that voting rights, abortion legalisation has liberated Western women to the point where they now have freedom to choose their path in life and are protected by discrimination laws should their rights be violated. Therefore feminism has no application and should only be advocated for in countries where there is no women's right to vote or have access over their bodies such as the "Muslim" countries of Saudi Arabia and Iran. Most believe that Islam is an anti-feminist and should be combatted at all costs but because  the Western World is mostly Christianised, there is "less of a threat".

So what kind of feminist model do we need to follow to fully address the concerns of opponents of feminism to get the "hidden feminists" identified earlier to engage with the mainstream feminist more openly and positively to enact the radical social changes needed to make the Establishment much more representative of our diverse modern society?

Satia made an interesting point regarding male engagement and education them about women's issues during the Melanin Millennials podcast on feminism. She believes that enlightened men should take the time to educate men about "key" feminist issues such as the need to fight for equal pay or to encourage more women to stand for political appointment as a councillor or MP. Men who actively choose to own the label of "feminist" are much more likely to preach the message positively to others. Those who have a skewered view of feminism through social media engagement with ultra radical feminists or faux feminists are more likely to call for their "eradication", hence the "Feminism is Cancer" argument favoured by those #FreeMilo Alt-Right activists who see any form of feminism as a danger to the existing patriarchal world order. However, Satia believes that women should only teach their male family members about respecting women's rights and that it is then up to those men to educate their mates in the nightclubs, down the pubs and youth centres and in their workplaces about these values. I believe that what men are taught with regards to women's issues by their female family members may differ according to cultural, geographical and ideological differences. Some women are clearly transphobic and may therefore teach their sons and brothers to hate trans women even if they may never have met a trans woman in their lifetime. As my previous blogpost on the "uneasiness" between transfeminists and radical feminists demonstrated, there are women who turn their own cisgender misogyny against other women who are gender-fluid/queer and yet still describe themselves as mainstream feminists. This not only damages the reputation of feminism within the LGBTQIA community but also gives fuel to the fire of those who want to dismiss feminism as an attempt to create a new Establishment order dominated by cisgender women only.

I believe the answer may lie in adopting an intersectional approach to feminism but one which is based on compassion for all, respect for opponent's views and humility to be shown when it may appear we get our approach wrong. It is important for intersectional feminists to understand their own levels of cognitive dissonance that exist and try to change or reduce that dissonance through research, debate and compassion as much as they can. For example, I believe that intersectional feminists need to address the fact that rape culture can affect men as well as women and lead to male victims being emotionally scarred for life. Feminists need to understand the uncomfortable truth that there are women and girls out there who are prepared to rape men because they want to gain sexual/emotional power over them, to get them to bend to their will. Some women may have internalised methods through seeing how their male counterparts have used sexual abuse as a power tool. Yet much of the emphasis is placed on girls and women who are raped by strangers or older men who "should know better". Boys who rape girls are even excused as being "mentally immature" and often get away with a rap on the knuckles and left free to try and attempt rape again in the near future. Education about what constitutes rape under the law and what sentences perpetrators may receive (including being put on the Sex Offenders Register in the UK) in schools, youth centres and religious groups across the Western world is key to trying to rates of behaviour but let's not pretend it is a purely male issue!

Another key point regarding intersectional feminism is that we have to be prepared to engage with issues and movements that link and blend within the movement. There are feminists who are Muslim who are trying to change radical fundamentalist views of Islam that seek to subjugate and humiliate women and keep them within the domestic sphere. The recent "Men Wearing Hijab" movement in Iran was an attempt by Muslim feminist men to show their support against the law in Saudi Arabia that forces women to wear the burqa when in the company of non-family men outside the home. They wanted to demonstrate the fact there are Muslim women in these countries who have support to try and gain control over their own bodies. Yet in France, the burqa is banned for all women which is ironic given the supposed level of freedom of clothing choice we are meant to have within a secular democracy. There are Muslim women in the UK who freely choose to wear the burqa because they want to maintain a connection to their tradition or maintain their modesty. Yet feminists have argued Muslim women's choice to wear the burqa is because they remain indoctrinated in Middle Eastern values of subjugation.  So there are clearly conflicts between feminists who have different cultural and religious backgrounds. But it's alright to recognise that within a movement. Discussions should take place and to some extent we should allow this freedom to debate issues but only within the confines of the law. Feminists cannot excuse using phobic taboo language to defeat their enemies regardless of how strongly they feel about their point of view. Provided we try and show a level of compassion towards our ideological opponents and work together with those who are prepared to do so, we can reduce the number of "hidden feminists" and drive the social changes that are needed to make our Establishment systems diversity and feminist friendly.

Coming Out The Political Closet: Confessions Of An Independent British (English) Voter

I love #GeneraElectionMania. Whether it be a UK, US, Norwegian or even Swedish election I'm hooked line and sinker into watching endless hours of MSM coverage tempered by the ferocity of social media tweeters who have #PoliticalSatire sharpened to a finely crafted point of ouchery bordering on offensiveness. It's the time when all sorts of wacko crazy ideas and ill conceived concepts are floated about using the mouthpiece of psychedelically dressed, hooting candidates who like nothing better than to overpromise and blame previous underdelivery on the incumbent party representative or even their own party representatives in their Millionaire's Row being watched over by the far more reliable "Elizabethan Tower" in (aka Houses of Parliament and Big Ben).

Now unlike most people who bothered to take time out from their "hectic" lunch hours where queuing for a "super healthy" carrot smoothie seems to take more time than ordering a calorific Big Mac, I'm proud to talk about who I voted for at the last GE openly and honestly; I voted for Labour candidates at local council level  but for a Tory MP and then in this year's local elections I voted for 2 Labour candidate and 1 Tory candidate  (including the very modest and Lincoln City Council social inclusion Labour candidate Rosanne Kirk) and for a Tory PCC candidate, all of whom won their respective races. Why did I vote the way I did? Did I have some "Mystic Meg Third Eye" that only I know about? The answer seems so simple yet would annoy the hell out of those who feel they can only vote for one party or another based purely on internalised perceptions of party "values": I voted for the person who I believed would be most qualified to carry out the duties required of them at each stage of Government, unless a candidate  convinces me they have the tenacity, passion and will to highlight causes that have been underrepresented or ignored within my local community. So far I've never met a local politician who has sparked enough of a desire within me to ignore national policies and vote solely based on their own causes and values which is a great shame.

Can a Voter ever truly be Independent?

Whether a voter can be truly defined as an independent is a question that mostly occupies the minds of purely philosophical political pundits whose job it is to analyse the minisculeness elements of the  mindsets of potential non-party affiliated voters to see if they can label them in an appropriate way to see "whether the national political land lies" and offer conclusions as to why there may have been significant changes in voting patterns, such as an increase in first time voters from the 25 and over age groups or why more women may choose to vote for Jeremy Corbyn rather than Theresa May
and thus vote for whoever their local party puts up as a candidate for MP regardless of whether they may know that candidate's personal values or causes or what they are hoping to achieve to make local people's lives better even if it may be to the detriment of big interest lobbyists.

A myth peddled around by bitter party activists from all sides of the political spectrum is that independent voters are "closet partisans" who say they are independent to "win semantic moral high ground" should their candidate win or blame the party activists should they lose and yet regularly vote for only one party. However these voters are far more persuadable than committed members of other parties; they will swing if a party candidate for PM or MP can offer viable solutions to local and domestic issues that matter to independent voters; these will differ individually on some issues. For example, if Corbyn talked about reforming the Gender Recognition Act to scale back the need to gain a medical diagnosis to change legal gender status or advocated for changing the protected characteristic from "Gender Reassignment" to "Gender Identity" I'd be more likely to consider voting for the next Labour candidate to challenge the Tory incumbent provided they would accept the party policy stance. And the same would work vice versa (and would probably be more likely to be the case).

What General Issues Occupy The Minds of Independent Voters?

However, there are a number of issues that seem to have majority interest and support across the independent voting audience. This is because they are the issues which are talked about most online via social media platforms, via MSM leading news stories and also when I talk to family and friends on a regular basis when sitting down to a "Fish supper" from the local chippy.

 These include:

• Funding the NHS appropriately to prevent A&E partial and full closures;
• Bringing down NHS waiting times for operations across the UK;
• Ensuring taxes are lowest for those who are on the National Living Wage;
• Reducing the national debt in a sustainable manner whilst not imposing unnecessary hardships on the UK population;
• Increasing infrastructure funding with an emphasis on house building and transport hubs in the North;
• Increasing opportunities for young people in the workplace regardless of social class, gender identity race and ability;
• Reducing levels of corruption within local and national government as well as in private sector companies;
• Ensuring every company that operates in the UK pays at least the NLW to their workers;
• Addressing educational inequalities between rural schools in the North and London;
• Addressing levels of immigration from within the EU who come to perform entry level jobs;
• Increasing representation of minority groups within local and national government.

Sorry I'm not a staunch Unionist; I won't vote for someone based on their desire to adhere to an outdated form of identification where one country aims to subjugate the other three based purely on "electorate numbers" and supposed "common identity" when that country refuses to teach about the history, culture and language of those 3 countries. It may be because of my Norwegian heritage that I strongly support Scottish independence, but I'm not afraid of what might happen should a second independence referendum be granted to Scotland they vote to leave the Union at 60-40.

Why doesn't everyone become an independent voter?

As you can probably tell from my previous posts, there are independent voters are engaged with political issues that affect them on a regular basis. It is said that independents may be turned off by negative political ad campaigns and by excessive jargon use that muddy the coherency of a party's narrative. Independents want to hear solutions to existing problems and plausible preventative measures to put in place where possible to reduce the likelihood of future issues arising. For example, trying to control immigration from the EU on a par with immigration from outside the EU may reduce sentiments of racial/religious prejudice provided existing issues concerning increases in hate crime and rhetoric use in schools is addressed head-on through diversity education lessons in RE, PSHE and Citizenship.

Notwithstanding this, there is a large segment of the UK population chooses not to exercise their right to vote. According to  UK the think-tank "Vote or Vote None",  just over a third (34%) of registered voters in the UK did not vote in the 2015 GE. The figure was also 34% in the 2010 GE and 38% in 2005. "Vote or Vote None" argue these registered voters should not be silent but vote for candidates from smaller parties or independent candidates because there is a large enough volume (especially in smaller marginal cities such as Lincoln) to get those candidates elected. Voting against the main parties may be a protest vote but at least you can feel safe in the knowledge that you voted based on your principles and against the Government or main opposition parties because you want policies that better represent your views!

The Situation For Me Now:

I don't know how I shall vote yet at the next election. I've been reading and dissecting tweets from Labour, Conservative, Green and even UKIP activists to see whether they are addressing issues which matter to me at a local and national level. Whilst I am supportive of Theresa May's goal to give shareholders more power within boardrooms and the need to reform our austerity policies to reflect the economic reality caused by the uncertainty generated after Brexit, as well as the unfortunate requirement to commit to renewing Trident to act as an ultimate deterrent against North Korea et al, I have had more affinity with tweets being circulated by Corbyn supporters. I like their enthusiasm and passion for what they perceive as generating real change for working class families, especially in relation to increasing taxes on wealthy individuals in the top 1%. I also like Owen Smith's infrastructure plans- £200m for investment is far more than has been promised by George Osborne; we are yet to see what Philip Hammond's Autumn Statement will bring investment wise.

I am impressed by Green MP Caroline Lucas's call for a "left progressive alliance" including the SNP, Plaid Cymru and Labour to form the next government to rexamine Brexit procedure and generate a parliamentary debate on whether it is economically plausible to leave the EU based on current data and future projections. I also like the way they decide on organising their leadership contest; the idea of a joint leadership bid shows the desire for the Green Party to appeal to a wider slice of the electorate by emphasising values of equality, compassion and fairness for all, instead of a "narrow focus" on combatting climate change and protecting animals and the environment (which are worth listening to anyways!) Ms Lucas's recent bill proposing a lowering of voter age to 16 certainly enthused me and I hope support for this continues to grow within Parliament; I believe if you are old enough to pay National Insurance, marry, have sex and an abortion then you are mature enough to vote. If not, it's time to start making Political education compulsory alongside Citizenship so every secondary school student understands our system and about the key caveats of our political parties!

All I will say is this; Labour may appear to be an incoherent party "falling apart" to most independent voters at the moment but perhaps when the Leadership election has been concluded and the party tries to unite to against the Tory Cuts to Nursing bursaries or to overturn the draconian Bedroom Tax more independent voters may take a fresh look at what Labour stands for and how they might move forward in creating a more progressive society. After all,  what we are seeing with the Labour party is an attempt at open democracy in action, where party members as well as the Parliamentary Party gets a say in who should take them forward to represent them to motivate people like me to vote for their MP candidate for the next GE. I look forward to seeing what policies my local Labour, Green and Lincolnshire Independent candidate will offer to try and canvass my vote. Let the rhetorical battle commence!