This is the third position paper Hate Matters has published on the subject of single-hate spaces. The first appeared in 2023. The second appeared in 2024. This is the 2025 edition. We have, on each occasion, considered carefully whether the paper required updating. On each occasion, we have concluded that our position has not changed. The paper has been rewritten regardless. We are committed to clarity and we are committed to repetition.
Single-hate spaces are a legitimate, simple, and ordinary category of space. They should be formally recognised. They are not currently recognised. We would like them to be. This is the position. It has not changed.
Readers may, on encountering the third paper on this subject, ask: why now? We have considered this question. Our answer is that the absence of formal recognition for single-hate spaces is a present matter. It was a present matter in 2023, when we first wrote on this subject. It was a present matter in 2024. It is a present matter in 2025. We do not anticipate that it will cease to be a present matter in 2026. We anticipate writing again.
The 2024 paper was criticised, by several readers, for being insufficiently distinct from the 2023 paper. We considered this criticism. We have, in this 2025 edition, attempted to address it. The principal differences between this edition and its predecessors are: a new title; a revised introduction; this paragraph; and a closing paragraph. The substantive content is, by design, unchanged. The substantive content is the position. The position has not changed.
We refer the reader to the Manifesto on Single-Hate Spaces (June 2025), which sets out the argument in detail across eight pages. We do not propose to restate the argument here. Restating it here would, in our view, be unnecessary, given the existence of the Manifesto. We would, however, like to draw attention to the following key points:
This paper does not contain new evidence. The 2023 paper did not contain new evidence either. Neither did the 2024 paper. We note that some readers consider this a weakness. We have considered this view. The view is grounded in an evidentiary tradition different from our own. Our position, as articulated in our other publications, is that the absence of new evidence is consistent with the position not having changed. We continue to consider the position correct.
We commend this paper to readers familiar with the 2023 and 2024 editions, who will, we hope, find that the position has been clearly maintained. We commend it to readers new to this subject, who will, we hope, find that the position has been clearly stated. We commend it to readers familiar with neither edition, who will, we hope, become familiar with both in due course. We will be writing the 2026 edition shortly.
Footnote 1: A complete archive of all three editions is available on request. Comparison shows the substantive content to be substantially identical. We do not consider this a problem.
Footnote 2: The Manifesto on Single-Hate Spaces, also available in the Hate Library, contains a fuller treatment of these arguments. It is eight pages long. We consider eight pages sufficient.