“Jo Cox. You ain’t seen nothing yet…the people will rise” began a tweet I came across last month. It ended in the name of a prominent woman MP, along with the command “adding to that!”.
I reported the tweet to Twitter, because it sounded a lot like a death threat. The man’s account was suspended until he deleted the tweet. And now he’s back, retweeting abusive comments about other women MPs that’d make you feel sick, with a couple of Katie Hopkins videos and memes suggesting one Muslim politician is a terrorist. This troll is very excited about the upcoming election.
As for the MP whose life he suggested should end so prematurely and brutally as Jo Cox’s? She’s leaving politics, and is one of a growing number of notable female MPs, many of them not even five years into the job, doing the same. Most have cited abuse like this man’s as a factor in their departure, including cabinet minister Nicky Morgan and Heidi Allen. Meanwhile, Anna Soubry, who will seek re-election, has spoken of how her 85-year-old mother was sent a letter “threatening her safety”. And earlier this week, women MPs from across the house sent a letter to Meghan Markle following negative treatment by the tabloid press and its flying monkeys (i.e. its third-party abusers, heavily influenced and encouraged by the tone of certain reports). In this note of solidarity, these 72 women described how “we share an understanding of the abuse and intimidation which is now so often used as a means of disparaging women in public office from getting on with our very important work.”
The go-to debate after women politicians report harassment, intimidation and abuse is as binary as our current political hellscape. Will they brush it off and keep on going, or let it get to them? Surely there’s another way through, though, where focus is firmly on the trolls and harassers, rather than the victims, to change their behaviour or face the consequences?
Rather than Twitter’s temporary sin-bin, where offenders like the above are free to return to their lairs, we need statutory measures. Because this scumbag, and too many others, simply don’t deserve to vote. Of course voting is a right, rather a privilege to be earned. But what is anyone’s vote worth when our democracy is sullied by the inclusion of people like this man, who are willing to scare and threaten the very elected representatives - and families, and pets, even, of these representatives - that our democracy depends upon? Why should these few nasty thugs get to make MPs - some with stunning majorities - so shaken up that they give up?
And what is the point in the rest of the decent electorate dutifully putting a cross in a box every year or so, as it now is, when others are hijacking that process by bullying people, disproportionately on the basis of their sex and/or race, out of standing for their constituents?
While Priti Patel wants to introduce a points system for immigration, any upcoming Home Office, regardless of how this election turns out, needs to implement a penalty points system for online abuse. In this, points could be awarded on the basis of severity and frequency of trolling, and rather than being treated as a badge of honour - trolls tend to boast of all the people who’ve blocked them - will result in fines and eventually, a suspension of voting rights. Unlike the DVLA’s driving points system, it should circumvent our overstuffed courts, and therefore result in speedier consequences for those who think it’s just a hobby to tell MPs the vilest, most invasive and scary things. Three strikes and you’re out at the next count.
To make it work, we’d need certain members of our political class to not encourage such foul behaviour, and face proper sanction from the Parliamentary Standards Commission for inciting hatred in the house. Our online crime team, the recently-disgraced Action Fraud, also needs to be cleaned up and amped up so it can set to work tackling other online crimes affecting the public such as cyberflashing, revenge porn and bullying.
We’d also need social media companies onside, both obliged and able to refer abuse and harassment externally to relevant authorities. Positively, Twitter has just announced it will ban political adverts. While it’s the right solution, it’s coming from the wrong company - political parties spent £3.2 million on Facebook ads at the last election, compared to just £56,000 on Twitter adverts. Yet the company is still one step closer to acknowledging its own major problem; allowing trolls like that guy above to escape with a mere slap on the wrist. Because why should he get the same chances, the same voice, as the rest of us?
Our online crime team, the recently-disgraced Action Fraud, also needs to be cleaned up and amped up so it can set to work tackling other online crimes affecting the public such as cyberflashing, revenge porn and bullying. We’d also need social media companies onside, both obliged and able to refer abuse and harassment externally to relevant authorities.
Positively, Twitter has just announced it will ban political adverts. While it’s the right solution, it’s coming from the wrong company – political parties spent £3.2million on Facebook ads at the last election, compared to just £56,000 on Twitter adverts. Yet, the company is still one step closer to acknowledging its own major problem; allowing trolls like that guy above to escape with a mere slap on the wrist. Because why should he get the same chances, the same voice, as the rest of us?
Sophie Wilkinson is a freelance journalist.