Women and crime statistics - increase in sex crimes?

"Anyone who rapes anyone has some serious mental issues, why is it so hard to believe that women are capable of it too?"

This is utter rubbish.

Most rapsists are "normal" men who act opportunistically.

This is reflected in society in all the ideas around "what did you expect". It is in fact often framed as normal for a man to rape or sexually assault a woman or girl over a certain age if he gets the opportunity.

That's horrible vegeetas and I agree that women can, and do, do some heinous things, including to children, and of their own volition. Being female does not make you incapable of committing sex crimes.
I know a man who has a similar story, except he was 13 and she was in her 20s. It messed him up, in part because he felt he should have been proud of it, and not ashamed and disgusted, which is how he felt.
So I hope noone is trying to make excuses for women who are guilty.
The thing is though, stats have DOUBLED. In 1 year. I am prepared to believe that a small part of that is increased reporting (which would be a good thing) but increased reporting would be a gradual increase.
It's so important to know if the "gender" is the thing being recorded, rather than the sex.

Quentin that report says she was jailed for manslaughter. They failed to reach a verdict on the aiding and abetting of rape. So it doesn’t look like that is one of the six cases.
The statistics are from the Ministry of Justice, so I’ve been looking at their published statistics and reporting on the government website. All their figures are for England and Wales. IE rape will mean only with a penis or by joint enterprise. The offender history for rape between 2009-12 shows the percentage of females offenders as 0. It does state that the figures are only for incidents with one offender and that incidents with more than one offender are not included, it doesn’t say where those statistics can be found unfortunately. The statistics are manifold, convoluted and I cannot find offender history stats for the period to 2016, they don’t seem to have been recorded in the same way. It is interesting to note that the stats for the period up to 2012 identify offenders by ‘Sex’ (male and female). The stats for the period to 2016 seem to all refer to ‘Gender’. They do not state whether, for the purpose of reporting, Sex and Gender have the same criteria.

Vegeetas I am sorry for what happened to you. I agree that women can do awful things too, but the point is that if In the future there is a big increase in women committing a certain crime, it would be useful to know why.

If women are becoming more violent, it would be useful to know this so the reasons could be investigated and something done in response.
Just as if the amount of fraud committed by those within a certain age range drastically increased, it would be worth investigating why.

Widening the definition of "woman" for statistical reasons will make it much harder to recognise changing patterns of behaviour and offending. What is the point of collecting stats at all if they are rendered meaningless by nebulous definitions?

What if someone told you that you weren't necessarily assaulted by a woman, because for all you know she now identifies as a man? That person would be a dickhead, and it would be an appalling thing to tell you, but some rapists have claimed to be a different gender/sex.

“It's maddening that the general conclusions that people draw is that women are perfect angels and if they did something wrong or messed up, it was because a man made them do it.”

That is not what is being said. The fact is that in law in England and Wales, rape requires a penis. So a woman convicted of rape must be a woman with a penis.

Anyone who rapes anyone has some serious mental issues, why is it so hard to believe that women are capable of it too?

I was 11 when I lost my virginity to a 17 year old girl. The difference is I never reported it, as a boy you just don't. It's maddening that the general conclusions that people draw is that women are perfect angels and if they did something wrong or messed up, it was because a man made them do it.

I'm not belittling anyone else's experiences by the way, I wouldn't. Things ARE a mess, I'm never going to argue that.

The point is we don't know so we can't look into it.

Whether this is a egnuine increase in crime by women, more women getting reported and caught, or it's being driven by TIMs.

The whole point of stats is analysis. If you throw away the male / female definition, then you are unable to do analysis by sex.

Who does this benefit is the question, it was obvious this was going to happen, feminists have been flagging it for years.

I do wonder if some of the increase is driven by women assisting men in e.g. making pictures of child abuse

I've been looking into it a bit.
One of the six was www.expressandstar.com/news/crime/2016/12/09/susan-whiting-murder-killer-jailed-for-seven-years-for-manslaughter-and-helping-in-rape-of-her-friend/

Jailed for rape under joint enterprise for helping her husband rape someone.

Davina Ayrton and Lisa Hauxwell were two TIMs convicted of rape in 2016 but I don't know if they would be under female or male stats. On the law pages, there are 18 convictions of women for sexual offences in England and Wales in 2016, but Ayrton and Hauxwell are recorded as male

All 6 of these could be women without penises convicted in Scotland. Unlikely I admit. But we need to be clear how to use these stats
Just wanted to point out, as the other deleted thread kept saying they might all be Scotland or NI offences, areas of the UK where rape definition is different, these stats are from the Ministry of Justice. A check of the government website for MOJ shows their sexual offending stats are for England and Wales. IE rape with a penis or by joint enterprise.

As far as I know, newspapers are not allowed to misgender a TIM. They get round it by saying rape and/or include photos.

In the last year, I've seen at least four newspaper reports of sexual offences, where if you just read the words, you would think it was a woman. But the photo is evidently a man.

Isn't it odd how men cannot judge the age of children, even when they have children of their own. It is almost as though their ignorance is carefully cultivated. Just like the johns who suspect the children are trafficking victims but can't know for sure so they go ahead and rape them.

I know snibble

But there is no way they looked like women

No fucking way

"having sex with" aka "raping" and the issue I think was that the courts said why not? I saw one header on an article though didn't read it.

For all the oh yes we're so "civilized" in the "West" we seem to be pretty good at doing the things we merrily condemn other countries for. Men have got away with sex with under 12's here and it's supposed to be a "no excuses" crime. Thing is the judge agreed with the men that they definitely looked older... Oh, well then fair enough.

18 listed here, not including the person above
transcrimeuk.com/2016-convictions/

I registered with law pages to do a bit of research but they only have 18 convictions in 2017 and I don't know why.
One of those 18 was Gayle Newland.

I did just read something about france making the age of consent formally 15 (i just saw the headline so i may have missed something)

Because there have been 2 recent cases of men having sex with 11 year olds

Whats wrong with people...you shouldn't need to be expressly told not to have sex with an 11 year old

That is a very good point about men making the laws,

And they made them about the things that mattered to them.

Most around property theft, embezzlement etc
Plenty of laws for the type of violence men do to each other
Used to be laws around property and children "belonging" to men not women

Not so great around things that are more likely to be done to women and children...

I suspect that where sex crimes against children are under reported, it's still going to be mainly men committing the offences isn't it? If not there would be a massive online anon community around it and there just isn't.

It is very important to the male "story" to deflect / misdirect / project etc.

Oooh cross post snibble

I think we are saying similar things...but you are faster

And your words are better

Im being distracted...thats my excuse and im sticking with it

I never understand this

So men throughout the centuries have been in charge of laws (until recently

To start in government making the laws and the the courts and police enforcing the laws

So if women for centuries have been beating men and raping and sexually assaulting them at the same rates why wasnt anything done about it..

Why did the male governments and courts not put more of them in jail

(Disclaimer...I absolutely believe that there are more violent and sexually violent women around than the statistics show, and probably aimed more at children I just don't believe that its at the same levels as men)

And with a suspicion that some of the 142 are TIMs (although we don't actually know).

It's good if more men and boys are coming forward,

Generally I don't buy the idea that women are doing it as much as men (or even more! one comment claimed) as everything but everything points to sex offending being a massively predominantly male crime.

#metoo - mainly anonymous
the historical sex offence cases - sports coaches, politicians, entertainers, religious leaders, care home and school workers - pretty much all men from what I have seen
the big lists of people who have paid for child porn that the police used - men men men
people caught in stings by police / vigilante types - blokes

If there are all these women committing sex offences why are there none / hardly any coming through from these quarters?

I suspect that nonsexual offences against children - child abuse - may well be under-reported. But sex offences - when men report, when women report, when there's gangs, when it's historic, over and over and over it's just a very male crime.

Yes, it's insane isn't it.

Women: 142
Men: 10,911.

But, yeah, #mentoo and women are just as bad as men

Apart from the fact that it's a hundred and whatever women and 10K men so not really the same at all even with what is probably a combo of more reporting, possible genuine increase and TIMs.

The idea that this shows women are "as bad as men" when there are 100x the number of men just goes to show how women are supposed to never do wrong and with men it's expected so meh.

You got it in one Bewilderness.... so sad.....

This was covered on the Wright Stuff this morning.

Matthew Wright did "sadface" about how it was because more boys are now reporting female sex crimes. Some Scouse woman said something along the lines of " when it's a young girl with an older man, we think of it as a sex crime, but you know, The Graduate..." (film about a man in his 20s having sex with a woman in her 40s so not a sex crime as far as I know! Plus fictitious. ..)
I think to be fair some of the reporting is of the teacher/pupil variety ( at least that's what the Mailed focused on) and of course that IS a sex crime.
BUT. Double the normal number?Rape??
That made me wonder. Obviously the Wright Stuff didn't touch on whether or not said "women" were women.
Anyway, the gist was " Women are as bad as men it's just that men don't report".
Hmmmmmm.