The point about 'trans crime' as distinct from say 'black crime', is that the main determining factor in crime is not race, it is sex.
Males commit most crime, and nearly all sexual crime. That's true across cultures.
'Black crime' is committed by black men, just as 'white crime' is committed by 'white men'.
The thing about transgenderism is that it is not 'to be', but 'to identify as'. In other words, while, say, Samuel L Jackson IS and has always been black, Caitlyn Jenner was not transgender in 1976.
Transgender ideologists will always claim that they always were female, but firstly their claim to be female now is one that has no meaning, and secondly their claim that they were always female is unverifiable.
If you look at say Bilal Hassani
www.instagram.com/iambilalhassani
He is a he. A gay man.
He does not claim to be a woman.
BUT if someone told you that Bilal was actually a she, having transgender identity, and gave you some pictures of Bilal as a child and said 'she first knew she was a girl as a small child', then it would be wholly uncontroversial, and everyone would accept that Bilal was a transgender woman.
We know that most transwomen are 'non-op'. They have male biology. They have always had male biology. Male hormone levels.
As such in terms of criminality it's reasonable to assume that they are male. Because we know very well that men commit most crime.
In terms of the post-op TW, while they are a minority, firstly we can look at people like Dr. Berlin who actually treated paedophiles with female hormones to keep them out of prison, and the treatment was often a failure with the paedophiles continuing to rape children, and say 'well we don't know what happens to a brain that has been socialised and exposed to male hormones from birth, if you cut off the testosterone'. Clearly post-op TW will not display female levels of criminality, since much of their biology, brain, etc. is irreversibly male. It might be lower than non-op TW, but whether it is or not is kind of
irrelevant as TRAs say that genitals and hormones don't matter.
In other words, a transwoman has a penis and a beard, or she has a neovagina and she has breasts, and it's none of your business either way.
Which is fine as their position, but it does suggest that when it comes to making sex-based divisions, we should treat transwomen as men, since they probably have penises, they probably display male patterns of criminality and sex offending, and so on.
A better argument in terms of 'black crime' vis-a-vis trans crime is that just as we shouldn't treat black men differently from other men, because that would be racist, we equally shouldn't treat transwomen differently from other men.
And that last statement is true in that it's clear TRA ideology - your gender identity is what you say it is. Paul Denyer says he's a woman, so he is.
Obviously we can look at Paul Denyer's history and say actually he is NOT a woman, and reject his claim, but (a) TRAs won't do that (b) in most cases we won't have knowledge of the person to the extent we do about him. If instead we assert that Paul Denyer is a woman, then clearly that assertion is meaningless because it doesn't change anything about Paul Danyer - he's still an evil murdering misogynist.
So we really have no choice to say 'ok, if you want to say transwomen are women, that's fine, but they are also biologically males, and everything we know about biological males says they are inherently more violent and criminal, and if you think that an unverifiable self--made assertion about gender identity somehow cancels that, just because, then you're a bit thick, frankly'
Clearly it's not necessary to 'mispronoun' transwomen in general, though when they behave like Jane Fae or Rachel McKinnon, it's certainly tempting to do so, but at least when we are talking about the set of transwomen, then we need to understand them as a subset of males, because there are no logical grounds for doing anything else.