Private Eye

Sounds like C Clarke would agree with Ruth Hunt’s view that ‘men are always going to rape women’ so why bother to do anything about it?

The letter says "self-identification won't give anyone a free pass" and "The mythical future where trans sex pests are untouchable is absurd".

The simple facts of the Jess Bradley scandal are that JB did get a free pass because the NUS wouldn't act and as such this did make JB untouchable. (Well, except by JB.)

I'd hope that even the minor coverage in Private Eye will have encouraged some people to search for "Jess Bradley". The set of search results this gets is a thing of beauty. JB may well want to ditch that name.

Oh ignore that. I'm in a weird mood this morning.

Its private eye. Keep it short and sardonic.

Something like 'self identifying as anything you like is available to anyone now, just as it's always been. Moving to being legally treated as the sex you're not, a biological impossibility giving access to all single sex spaces including being invited for smear tests when a prostate checkup would be more to the point, should be something that requires a process, just like most lifelong legal changes such as getting married'.

What is a self-identifed radical feminist! I think the point that the author is trying to make us that people who are predators will always be predators regardless of their identity and this shouldn't hold back laws on self ID. But why should even one woman or girl be assaulted in this rush to self ID if these predators are allowed access to female spaces. It is already happening, I believe there is a web page documenting trans crimes you could link to this and pick some examples.
What is the trans community doing to call out the predators in their community? It seems to me they never condone the behaviour and often victim blames instead.
Good luck with the letter.

It’s hard to reply to that latter because it’s hard to tell what their actual point was. Was the letter writer responding to anything in particular about Jess Bradley?