These Are Not Our Crimes

Which examples are we talking about?

There are undoubtedly plenty of young women who support trans people because they want to be inclusive and likely because they know young trans individuals personally (as opposed to the 'middle aged perverts with AGP' stereotype we usually see on here). Whether or not they're misguided, I doubt they hate women.

If that were the case, they'd change their tune when confronted with the reality of Karen White. They don't.

Then where do they draw the line? You can’t realistically say that the nice, non-threatening ones should be accepted as women and the nasty ones shouldn’t.

Well, that’s kind of what happens in many cases. Even Julie Bindel apparently uses female pronouns for the transwomen she’s friends with.

Then where do they draw the line?

This has always been the problem since it was decided that a man could become a woman in the eyes of the law.

The GRA2004 was passed in order that a man who had made all the body modifications possible to make his body resemble that of a woman could marry his male partner. No doubt homophobia amongst many MPs was responsible for this route being taken rather than the alternative of legalising same-sex marriage.

Obviously, although this one person was responsible for taking their case to the ECHR, the law would have to work for others who wanted to take the same route, and it was decided at the outset that genital surgery, or other physical modifications, wouldn't be a requirement for changing sex in legal terms.

Since there was no clear line drawn, we are now in the situation where a rapist can become legally female, and a woman can become legally male and a couple of weeks later become pregnant via IVF.

There is only one sensible place to draw the line, and that is that nobody can change sex. Live how you want, but biology is real. Repeal the GRA.

But many believe transwomen to effectively be women. Certainly in the way they should be treated if not ultimately in biological terms.

Agreeing that men should take over women's sport, that violent rapists should be imprisoned with incarcerated women as part of their sentence, and that women have no right to withhold their consent to be touched, looked at, etc, by the opposite sex, is certainly woman hating. And is, of course, not treating transwomen like women at all, but treating them like entitled, privileged men.

But many believe transwomen to effectively be women. Certainly in the way they should be treated if not ultimately in biological terms.

The point of the video by TheUterati is to demonstrate the serious consequences of mandating/colluding with a belief that TAWAW. These are consequences which vulnerable women in prison have suffered.

It is not an academic exercise.

OP EmpressLangClegInChair wrote,
'These Are Not Our Crimes

TheUterati, who was one of the first FWR women to be banned under the New Rules, has made a video listing over 70 male prisoners who claim to be women and their crimes. It's not an easy watch but it's a very important one.

I don't believe in magic, fairies or make-believe. Wishing doesn't make something come true. I believe in truth. Bullies and liars have always got my blood up. I am over the age of 5.

I'm not a huge fan of the TRA movement but it's a bit of a claim to say that people who don't share the GC stance hate women.

Putting violent male offenders in women's prisons shows a complete disregard for the safety of the female prisoners. Why would anyone who doesn't hate women think this is a good idea?

But many believe transwomen to effectively be women. Certainly in the way they should be treated if not ultimately in biological terms.

So do you believe it's right to treat the male prisoners in the OP as women, send them to women's prisons and record their crimes as committed by women?

There are undoubtedly plenty of young women who support trans people because they want to be inclusive and likely because they know young trans individuals personally (as opposed to the 'middle aged perverts with AGP' stereotype we usually see on here).

Are these young women keen to be inclusive towards the male prisoners mentioned in the OP? Are you?

You know exactly what you can do with your froth.

But surely if a view cannot be explained rationally it runs the risk of being regarded as irrational?

I'm not a huge fan of the TRA movement but it's a bit of a claim to say that people who don't share the GC stance hate women.

This is a thread about a very specific subject which deserves a proper discussion. Please have the courtesy to take your "FWR is awful" derail to a different one, if you must.

They may not hate women but they put them second.

But many believe transwomen to effectively be women. Certainly in the way they should be treated if not ultimately in biological terms.

Tbh I find the 'if you disagree with GC feminists you're a misogynist' argument very similar to the mirrored argument that 'if you disagree with TRAs you're a transphobe'.

They may not hate women but they put them second.

I was perhaps little unfair as some posters on here are undoubtedly very involved and knowledgeable around these issues. It's all the petty Twitter bickering that puts me off.

a movement which is led by men and supported by women who hate women.

I'm not sure this is entirely accurate. There are undoubtedly plenty of young women who support trans people because they want to be inclusive and likely because they know young trans individuals personally (as opposed to the 'middle aged perverts with AGP' stereotype we usually see on here). Whether or not they're misguided, I doubt they hate women.

Of course, some posters are active in real life but I think many just froth about trans people on here and don’t really accomplish much else.

Even those who just discuss these issues on here are not 'frothing about trans people'. They are discussing women's rights and the removal of women's rights by a movement which is led by men and supported by women who hate women.

Some of those people who hate women identify as trans, some do not. If you think people on here are simply 'frothing about trans people' you haven't been paying attention.

I’m sceptical whether these insular discussions with all the self referential FWR lingo actually help much. Of course, some posters are active in real life but I think many just froth about trans people on here and don’t really accomplish much else.

The video in OP is an important piece of work done by theUterati former regular FWR poster.

The clear & distinct sex-based offending patterns were recognised a long time ago.

The government has a specific sex-based female 'Offenders Strategy' in order to better recognise, manage and meet the needs of women in the criminal justice system.

Published June 2018:
Female Offender Strategy
Ministry of Justice Female Offender Strategy for women in the criminal justice system.
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719819/female-offender-strategy.pdf

See also policy paper published 28 February 2019 :

'Management and supervision of men convicted of sexual offences'
The action plan in response to the thematic inspection of work with men convicted of sexual offences by HMI Probation Inspection.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/management-and-supervision-of-men-convicted-of-sexual-offences

In that case, how about walkin the walk and not taking any and every opportunity to divert this discussion. First TV Licences and now, apparently, shopping?

I didn’t bring up either of those topics. In fact, I think you mentioned spending. My point though was that it just becomes the boy who cried wolf when we have a new thread every time a TRA so much as farts.

Most people now see it as a ‘terfs vs TRAs’ thing and I don’t think that’s helpful to the cause as this is an issue which affects a much broader spectrum of women, many of whom probably dismiss it as online bickering atm. I’m sceptical whether these insular discussions with all the self referential FWR lingo actually help much. Of course, some posters are active in real life but I think many just froth about trans people on here and don’t really accomplish much else.

RabidChinchilla said:

"My main frustration with the GC debate is that key concerns like this [the OP] often get lost (and diluted) . . . I think the avoidance of housing male sex offenders with vulnerable females is enough justification"

In that case, how about walkin the walk and not taking any and every opportunity to divert this discussion. First TV Licences and now, apparently, shopping?

It’s an interesting claim that decisions around spending will be male-centric. You’d expect it to reflect the principle customer which is us women in terms of spending.

OldCrone - I am beginning to wish I had never mentioned TV Licences but thank you for that info and link - very interesting!

I will second Ereshkigalangcleg''s suggestion that further discussion of TV Licences is better taken elsewhere.

Perhaps better still, held in check until Government publishes the outcome of the recent Closed consultation on decriminalising TV licence evasion - 5 February 2020
www.gov.uk/government/consultations/consultation-on-decriminalising-tv-licence-evasion/consultation-on-decriminalising-tv-licence-evasion

R0wantrees - thank you for the "Key Facts" from the "Women in Prison" website.

A recent publication and video by the Women's Budget Group "Commission on a Gender-Equal Economy" are relevant both to the main reasons why women are imprisoned and to the decisions made to house violent male offenders in women's prisons:

Spirals of Inequality
Tuesday 21st April 2020

"Unpaid work is at the heart of gender inequality. Women do 60% more unpaid work and earn 43% less than men.

- On average, women carry out 60% more unpaid work than men.
- Women aged 26-35 do the most unpaid work (34.6 hours per week compared with 17.4 hours for men aged 26-35)

wbg.org.uk/analysis/spirals-of-inequality/

Institutions, policies and laws continue to be based on men’s needs

"The pace of change to address gender inequality has been slow. In some cases, such as with austerity policies, inequalities have even become more entrenched. With men over-represented in senior decision-making positions in politics, the civil service, business, law and the media it is not surprising that institutions, policies and laws are still failing to address the needs of women and progress on gender equality is slow. At the start of 2020, women accounted for 34% of MPs and 30% of Cabinet Ministers, 21% of senior civil servants participating in the Civil Service Board, around 25% of senior Judiciary members, 21% of national newspaper editors, 29% of FTSE 100 directors and just 6% FTSE 100 CEOs. Fawcett’s Sex and Power 2020 report found that women of colour are even more grossly under-represented. It showed that there are currently no women of colour in the highest levels of the civil service or among FTSE 100 CEOs, and there has never been a person of colour on the Supreme Court since its formation in 2009.

A number of factors contribute to the ongoing under-representation of women in senior roles. Unpaid caring by women plays a role by slowing career progression and constraining opportunities for involvement in public life. Women also face discrimination as a result of conscious and unconscious bias, with those in positions of authority making assumptions about women’s likely caring responsibilities, behaviours and leadership potential. This can lead to women being overlooked for promotion and senior roles. Finally, harassment and network effects remain barriers to women participating at senior levels. Without concerted efforts to address these barriers in order to increase women’s representation at senior levels in business and public life, it is unlikely that we will see change on the scale that is required to address gender inequality in the UK. Decisions around policy, laws and spending will continue to be informed largely by the perspectives of men and, therefore, address, first and foremost, the needs of men."

From: "Spirals of Inequality - How unpaid care is at the heart of gender inequalities" April 2020
wbg.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Accompanying-paper-FINAL.pdf

Video: "Spirals of Inequality"
vimeo.com/409866367

That video is a very good short "cartoon" illustration of the "spiral of inequality".

When some people, usually men, blame the current insanity on feminism while at the same time other people, usually men, wail, "How have the feminists allowed this to happen!? Where are the feminists opposing this!?" they need reminding:

"With men over-represented in senior decision-making positions in politics, the civil service, business, law and the media it is not surprising that institutions, policies and laws are still failing to address the needs of women and progress on gender equality is slow. . . . Decisions around policy, laws and spending will continue to be informed largely by the perspectives of men and, therefore, address, first and foremost, the needs of men."

You get offered a payment card with fortnightly payments now, instead of being prosecuted. I got caught a couple of years ago, the guy didn't even come in. I used to pay at my local paypoint , when I topped up my electric key. No one should be in jail now for not having a TV licence.
My mate is terrible for not paying bills, she got caught wiring her key meter. She just has to pay a small amount off the arrears each week.