Let me spell this out very clearly for the hard of thinking

They do and women should not be blamed when men have engaged in male pattern violence.

@chipontheoldtable you're not taking into consideration all the men who are aggressive and violent who are not in prison.

I personally don't know a single woman who hasn't been assaulted by a man at some point in her life.

In the UK that's classed as 'assault by penetration' because there's no penis involved. There's also the crime of sexual assault which involves sexual touching but no penetration and the crime of causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent (this could be used against a woman if, for example, she helped pin someone down in order that a man could rape them). So depressing that I should even know about this stuff.

I don’t disagree but what I disagree with is that it’s all men. That is always fundamentally my issue, there’s a big difference between all the crimes and all the men. I don’t think anyone ever sensibly disagrees that these crimes are committed by men, it’s statistically impossible to argue that point.
The crimes in question are overwhelmingly likely to have been committed by a man but that doesn’t mean a man you know or meet is likely to commit one of those crimes.
The government website tells me there were 86,038 males in prison in Nov 2024, google tells me 35% of them have committed a violent crime, which is 30,113.
Using population statistics (UK population, less how many children Unicef says there is in the UK and adjusting then adults to the male proportion) there’s 25,785,146 males. So that means 0.12% of men will be convicted of a violent crime. Assuming a large number of crimes go unreported we can triple that and we get 0.36%.
So my issue is always the all men vs. all crimes point. I don’t even count myself as lucky not to have come across men who commit those crimes because I don’t perceive it as particularly likely. I appreciate many will disagree with me and I’m not looking to get into an argument, it’s just my view.

OP, while I do agree with you, YABU because you've just accused the entirety of MN of being 'hard of thinking'.

Under US law, when a woman sexually assaults or rapes a child, it it can be termed rape or to be strictly accurate "statutory rape"

That point just flew right over your head didn’t it!?

How is it gaslighting? The OP is saying that the crimes that have been committed by men should never be recorded as being committed by women.

She’s not saying in that paragraph that because women only commit 10% of those types of crime that those 10% should not be recorded as being by women.

She also clarified in a follow up post that her OP was prompted by the recent mass shooting in Canada where a trans woman committed the crime and there are still some news outlets are referring to the shooter as she and her leading some people to mistakenly believe that the shooter was a woman.

If you believe that you are very delusional. Just speak to Prison Officers who work in women’s prisons.

And then you read posts like this, straight afterwards.

And compare the two.

And wonder how - how?! - the former poster thinks their posts are coming across as the more convincing ones.

Not exactly. As of 2023 data, 74% of people prosecuted for the offense of TV licence evasion are women. It's the offence with the highest proportion of female vs male defendants and accounts for 12% of all female prosecutions. TV licencing put this disparity down to women being more likely to be at home during the day when checks are carried out.

People don't go to prison for TV licence evasion though, they can only be fined...although they can be given a custodial sentence in extreme circumstances for willfully refusing to pay the court ordered fine for the original offence. It's extremely rare though. The data shows a 'zero or near-zero' number of people in prison for the offence of not paying a TV licence fine, male or female.

Shoplifting was the most common indictable (more serious) offence for women, making up 27% of all indictable offense prosecutions. In 2022 it accounted for 36% of women's prison sentences of less than 6 months, vs 13% for men.

Once more. But only once, then I've done my bit!

So...

The demonstrative pronoun "these" refers to the 90% of violent crimes committed by men - ie. the noun-phrase referred to immediately before it.

In other words, this makes perfect sense: these particular crimes committed by men should be accurately recorded as committed by men.

You wonder where to start. Is it grammar? logic? reading comprehension? maths? probability, even ("Which of these two possible meanings I think I can see here is the likeliest interpretation of what I just read?")?

Or maybe rhetoric - the basics of how to make a persuasive counter-argument?

Because they all seem to apply to posts like this one.

The worrying thing is, it's probably the rhetoric issue - they think they've found a clever gotcha - but you're never quite sure if it isn't actually a quite genuine struggle to process the OP.

The point of her response is that there are pp stating that violence is committed equally by men and women. She is pointing out it isn't

That's quite some misunderstanding you've got going on there.

"Men commit 90% of all violent crime in the UK"

"These are not female crimes, and should never, ever be reported - or recorded - as such"

"The OP did NOT say crimes committed by women should not be recorded as being by women."

That's quite some gaslighting you got going on there!😂

It’s the language reform voters understand.

Sexist low lief trying to justify being sexist low life. Nothing more.

May I refer you to my previous reply.

Particularly the last sentence.

And this is the kind of post that makes me wary of aspects of what the current Left stand for in ways I'd never expected. It used to be a tiny minority, but we see it more and more now. Dehumanising, abusive and above all reductive generalisations about vast swathes of a population, all the while masquerading as moral superiority.

I mean, that always went so well in the 20th century.

We just don't learn, do we?

The OP did NOT say crimes committed by women should not be recorded as being by women.

She was talking about crimes committed by men who identify as women - those crimes should still be recorded as being committed by men.

This is a whole new level of stupid. And there’s been a few on this thread but you win.

Wow. You really struggle with comprehension, don’t you?

(eta - here’s a clue: the OP didn’t suggest any such thing)

Actually it was very reasonably worded.

Here it is put far more plainly - people who vote for Reform are not necessarily retards or unable to grasp facts and statistics. They have indeed made an informed choice.

They are simply racist fucks who prefer to indulge their hatred rather than have a properly governed country.

"Men commit 90% of all violent crime in the UK"

So which sex commit the other 10% then?

Guess it will be Impossible to say if ( as you suggest ) these are not to be recorded....

.

I don’t understand the point of your response.