AIBU to think the media should report people’s actual sex—not preferred gender—in legal cases, courts, and crime reporting?

That's the one, one D. Thomas was more than enough.

Did you mean Dianne Thomas?

Who published a Men's Rights activism book under the name 'David Thomas' before finding the inner woman ? And who relished in Thomas's own euphoria at growing breasts that breasted boobily going down the stairs.

I think after the push back on the highly misogynistic writings of that particular columnist, the Telegraph might have taken notice.

In that link there's mention of 'Lisa' Hauxwell prominently figuring as an example in a 'women do it too' piece by the Daily Telegraph.
IIRC at around that time the Telegraph had a regular column by a bloke who was 'transitioning' and taking great delight in his newly-grown boobs. They've got a bit more in touch with rationality since then I think.

This link works for me.

https://transcrimeuk.com/2017/10/31/lisa-hauxwell/

Something wrong with that link @AlisonDonut. It take me to hugedomains this domain is for sale.

It was the Derby Telegraph that published 'have you seen this woman' when this rapist escaped from prison. They said he might be dressed as a man.

http://transcrimeuk.com/2017/10/31/lisa-hauxwell/

A few years ago articles appeared about a criminal on the run, described IIRC as a woman presenting as a man. It was, in fact, a male with a trans identity. I do not remember whether he was legally 'a woman', but because he was trans the police reported as though he was female - even though he was a man on the run in men's clothing. Being told to look out for and keep away from a violent woman in men's clothing does not protect you from a violent man.

Language matters.

Honesty matters.

Truth matters.

Reality matters.
Safeguarding matters.

Women and girls matter.

Zizians: What we know about the vegan 'cult' linked to six deaths https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy83958r2d0o

The insistence of using pronouns makes this article impenetrable. This Zizian gang seems to be male people being reported with female pronouns. While female people can no doubt be violent, these attacks are horrendous and people shouldn’t be led to believe that female people are the perpetrators.

I mean, one of the victims was stabbed 50 times!

I have never seen anyone looking less like a teenage girl than the pictures I have seen of Barbie Kardashian. At least, no one that's actually human.

That case was a little complex as his past under 18 history is covered under the Childrens Act (his name cant be published)
And the public were never "warned" the police leaked the BOTLO after he was found to be legally sane by the High Court
so the Child Safety Agency wrote takedown letters to all the media outlets.
And he was then arrested on assault / threat to kill.

Agreed. The public (Ireland) was warned that a 'violent teenage girl' would be at large. This in fact was 'Barbie Kardashian', a deranged male so dangerous his own mother was under protection. The truth came out via a leak, with proper mugshots, reminiscent of the Joker. Reporting should be factual and informative, not a farce.

What do people have against recording accurate information? 🫠

Keeping accurate statistics helps us understand patterns in crime, who's at risk, trouble spots, build profiles.

Honestly, it's like scientific progress and the enlightenment never happened for some people.

You often get more crimes come out when people see court proceedings though. It's one of the reasons court reporting will sometimes say "John Smith also known as John Doe." Courts should be about clarity and showing ALL of the truth, not just some.

Well that's not true is it?

We still need to know accurate statistics in terms of which sex commits crimes, and of what kind.

Also accurate statistics in terms of sentencing - is one sex treated more harshly/leniently than the other.

Similarly trans identity. Are trans identified people convicted of more or fewer crimes in relation to the overall population. Ditto the kinds if crime.

And are trans identified people treated more harshly/leniently than the rest of the population.

The sex should be reported where relevant to the crime, their gender identity should be reported if relevant to their crime but other no, their name will suffice. Whether it's a natal male, trans woman, natal female or non binary is irrelevant for a large percentage of crimes

The exact same argument, a fucking weak argument at that, of 'why should we segregate by sex when any male person who wants to rape can just walk right in' means that those male people who entered the female single sex spaces for 'protection' are not safe either! So why should they come in at all?

The reason I hate that weak argument myself is that no, rapists won’t just ‘walk in to a female space’ and rape. It’s all about opportunity for these people. That’s why 90% of sexual abuse or rape is perpetrated by someone the victims knows - because they have easy access to them. If it starts becoming the norm for males to enter women’s spaces, they can hide in plain sight.

If someone was to send their daughter in to the women’s toilets for example, let’s say she is 12 - old enough to go in on her own, and you were to see a man walking in after her you’d want to go straight in and check she is ok because it would seem strange to you. If it becomes a regular occurrence for men to enter women’s spaces - it becomes a normal thing for people and therefore it wouldn’t seem as strange.

oh, I know this, and you know this and many of the MN regulars know this.

But we do keep getting, as you say, what about the safety of this special sub group of male people? And the answer should have always have been, women and girls are not the human safety shields or the comfort humans for male people who feel unsafe.

The exact same argument, a fucking weak argument at that, of 'why should we segregate by sex when any male person who wants to rape can just walk right in' means that those male people who entered the female single sex spaces for 'protection' are not safe either! So why should they come in at all?

It is bonkers and twisted logic and fuckwittery, and I am very glad that we are seeing less and less of these arguments. Because they never were a valid argument at all.

I think you are 100% right, @ErrolTheDragon - the people pushing this agenda don't give a damn about the safety, rights or dignity of actual women and girls - at best, we are props for their validation, and at worst, human shields (to the extent that they consider us somewhat human).

The first is, what exactly is the difference between a male who has had their penis and testicles removed due to injury or disease and a male person who elects to have them removed for their identity?

What exactly is the difference between then and intact men?

The only difference is that they cannot commit rape. They retain all other male and masculine attributes, both innate and learned. Including misogyny and capacity for violence and sexual assault.

The reason for asking this is because to get access to single sex spaces for female people, it would be an expectation that the group in question would have the same or less risk than female people.

You'd have thought this should have been a consideration but I don't think it was at all. Iirc the 'safety assessments' were entirely about the safety of the male, not the women.

You are right. There is that aspect of what is not recorded or prosecuted as well.

There are two questions that never get answered despite me asking again and again.

The first is, what exactly is the difference between a male who has had their penis and testicles removed due to injury or disease and a male person who elects to have them removed for their identity?

Not that this should ever be an expectation for a male person to be able to fulfill a brutal requirement to get access to female single sex spaces.

The second is, where is the evidence that a group of male people at any stage of transition has statistically the same risk of committing sex related crime as a female person or lower risk? The reason for asking this is because to get access to single sex spaces for female people, it would be an expectation that the group in question would have the same or less risk than female people.

No one answers these questions. They deflect and obfuscate.

There is another question as well.

How many female people of any age are acceptable to be harmed before sex is again prioritised above gender identity ?

Because the current numbers must already be large when you consider the women forced to have these male people in prison, rape crisis support groups or any support group, changing rooms, sports and on and on and on. Just the sports aspect, for medals and podium places that have been reported someone calculated over 800 female people have lost medals and podium laces as a conservative count.

My answer to that was zero of course. Zero women and girls harmed. We are obviously well passed that.