“Harden the fuck up princess, the police are just doing their duty.”



Um, thanks for the advice, but actually, no.

Over the past few weeks I have had many comments like this come my way. Comments that indicate that there are people in our community who either do not understand, or are unwilling to accept, that online racist and sexist harassment is an offence – and that those who call out online abuse are not just fragile victims, too precious to handle criticism.

Anyone who has spent time on the internet knows that it can be a dark place.

Social media allows humans to build supportive virtual networks based on shared interests and beliefs. But it also allows vitriolic, uncensored cyberbullying, often unleashed anonymously.

Online trolls harass their targets relentlessly with abuse designed to intimidate and silence.

The implications for public debate – and indeed for our democracy – are extremely concerning. Online harassment undermines participation and prevents active engagement in public discussion.

Diverse voices are at an additional risk of being silenced, through fear of sexist or racist reprisals. After being on the receiving end, I can confirm that it does make you think twice about what you put out publicly. You try not to self-censor, you try not to behave differently, but it’s almost impossible not to (should I even be writing this now, will it just bring on more abuse?).

When I introduced a bill to repeal the New South Wales Drug Detection Dog Program one year on from my election as the member for Newtown, I was delivering on an election promise. The NSW Drug Detection Dog Program does not work. In 2006, the independent NSW Ombudsman recommended an end to the program.

The response to the introduction of the bill – or more specifically to a photo we posted of two police officers with a sniffer dog on a train – kicked off a Facebook furore. What began as some genuine criticism and questioning of the policy, quickly descended into offensive and menacing comments, made all the more concerning when it was revealed that serving members of the NSW police were directly involved. We have referred this matter to the police integrity commission.

Some have suggested, often in pretty base and vile terms, that the response was deserved, believing it was justified for police to “retaliate” after I was critical of them.

Let’s unpack this a bit.

As an elected member of parliament it is my role to critique, debate and amend laws in the interests of those I was elected to represent.

The Sniffer Dog Bill we introduced seeks to repeal a police program that grants powers to search citizens in public spaces without a warrant. There are legitimate concerns that the program is not only ineffective, but that it infringes civil liberties and intimidates individuals, particularly those from already marginalised communities.

People using Redfern station are six and a half times more likely to be searched than those using Central station – even though searches at Redfern are less likely to find drugs. We know that Redfern is a community that is home to a lot of Aboriginal people, students and young people.

As a member of parliament I introduced a bill to repeal a police program that intimidates and targets certain groups, particularly from diverse or marginalised backgrounds. In response, I was then subjected to personal intimidation and harassment, including from members of the NSW police.

There is a clear difference between public criticism of a police program, presented with evidence and an alternative policy position, and personal racist and sexist attacks.

It is spelt out pretty clearly in the Commonwealth Criminal Code, which states that it is an offence “for a person to use a carriage service in a way that reasonable persons would regard as being menacing, harassing or offensive.” This makes online trolling of this nature not just base and disgusting. It also makes it a criminal act.

Police, like all public servants, have a higher bar set in terms of personal conduct – and rightly so. In terms of online behaviour, this is clearly set out for members of the NSW police in the Personal Use of Social Media Policy and Guidelines.

We must recognise the impact that trolling has on our democracy by stifling – and often silencing – public debate.

It is essential that we encourage a diversity of voices and opinions in our public policy discussions. It is imperative that we do not allow thuggish online behaviour to go unchecked.

Put simply, what needs to “harden the fuck up” are the mechanisms for dealing with those who commit these offences – not the people who are subjected to the vitriolic attacks.

That seems a long way off in NSW, given that some of those who are there to prevent us from harassing behaviour appear to be involved in inflicting it.