Stats on attack on women by men self identifying as women?

I think this is worth repeating. We keep being told 'this never happens' and yet story after story comes out of it happening.

There are a handful of stories, the world over, over years of crimes committed by trans women in women's spaces. Christopher Harmbrook, Karen White, Dolatowski, a couple more. Women's spaces have been used billions of times by hundreds of millions of women in that period. We all know the names,and the reason we all know the names is because they happen so infrequently. Over a thousand men a year are convicted of rape just in the UK, how many of their names get known? How many even get reported outside of the local press? The reason assaults by trans people get in the papers is because they are so rare, not commonplace. An unfortunate by product of this, as with other tabloid scares, is that the prominence of these stories leads people to over estimate the problem rather than recognise it as so uncommon it was interesting enough (from a journalists point of view) to make the national press.

Saying there’s a minuscule number of incidents is on a par with saying there’s a minuscule number of trans people. Sod the small minorities, not important.

And you keep saying 'transwomen have been using the ladies forever' which again is bullshit. You are talking about a tiny number of old school transsexuals who had had full surgery and were in the ladies as a courtesy. Now we have any bloody bloke who claims to be a woman (or non-binary or whatever) kicking up a stink on social media because those mean awful cis privileged women were uncomfortable with him with them at the leisure centre.

No. Just no. Fuck off.

The word exception refers not to this being a rare event or situation but that under specific circumstances the general rule doesn't apply.

Yes that does make sense. Doesn’t apply? Or doesn’t have to apply?

Transwomen are male - they pose the same risk as other males. That doesn't mean that all transwomen are a risk, in the same way that not all men are not a risk. But in order to safeguard women we don't let any males, even males who on an individual level we are sure are safe, into women's spaces.

based on the miniscule number of assaults committed by trans women in women's spaces.

What exact definition of transwomen are you using when you make this statement?

" Miniscule number of assaults....."

Give us a break. Constantly repeating this doesn't make it true.

Transwomen can legally be excluded from female only spaces because they are human males.
Transwomen do offend against women in female only spaces.
Transwomen pose the same risk to women as other human males.

@BewaretheIckabog

I was talking about the debate generally, not on this thread which I'm grateful has remained respectful.

@jj1968

Nobody on this thread has suggested a trans woman’s trauma at male violence is less than any other persons. With respect you are implying things that have not been said.

Yes, I thought the stats showed that transwomen were actually safer than men from male violence, although I don't have a link.

The idea that transwomen are being murdered in the UK at high rates has already been widely debunked.

@FWRLurker I wouldn't dispute that men are more at risk of violent assault than both women or trans women, but I'm not persuaded that men, or boys, are at the same risk of sexual assault than either trans or non trans women. I'd be interested to read any research on that.

Boys are allowed to stay in most women's refuge, at least until age 14, and older in some places. But older teen boys I suspect would carry a risk in a way that trans women don't appear to based on the miniscule number of assaults committed by trans women in women's spaces. There's also the question about whether boys and teens would want that, and I suspect they wouldn;t despite the elevated risk.

No but the word ‘exception’ kind of implies that is what is meant. That’s what the word exception means. It’s the exception as opposed to the rule.

Otherwise what’s the point of calling it an exception?

That's statutory writing. Exception is used throughout the Equality Act to denote every specific circumstance where the general rule that discrimination is unlawful doesn't apply.

The word exception refers not to this being a rare event or situation but that under specific circumstances the general rule doesn't apply.

Look at one of the examples:

a massage service to be provided to women only by a female massage therapist with her own business operating in her clients’ homes because she would feel uncomfortable massaging men in that environment.

This is a specific case. No matter however how often it happens, no matter how many women provide this service across the country - whether 10, 10.000 or a million - in every single case that meets the specific circumstances (here condition 7 a and b) - can the sex-based exception be applied and the female service provider lawfully discriminate against males.

Transwomen are also much more likely be the perpetrators of violence than women are.

Because men sexually assault and harass trans women far more frequently than than they do other men.

Not sure this is the case.

Based on studies I’ve read, in general men are at a higher risk of assault Than women. Trans women, as I recall, fall between men and women in terms of their risk of being assaulted by men.

In any case, Teenage and preteen boys are at an elevated risk of sexual assault compared to other men. Should boys use women’s spaces until they are 18?

Nobody should be assaulted and harassed but making women even more vulnerable to male violence is not a solution to male on male violence. Men have to take responsibility for this and seek their own solutions.

What about the damage and distress to victims of sexual abuse? What about those who will be socially excluded? What about rights to privacy and dignity?

But this applies to both trans women and women concerned by trans inclusion surely? And with respect I think there can be a lack of empathy on both sides of this debate. I don't think that a trans women's trauma at being a victim of male violence is somehow 'less' than a non trans women's, or that it should be treated as less important by society.

" Men sexually assault and harass trans women more than other men"
But a lot less than women I bet!

It has happened. There is a whole thread on it. Fwiw, I would rather we had clearly mixed sex spaces than segregated spaces where some certain males were freely allowed to access the female spaces.

Nope, because that would not solve the problem

You are reverting to the idea that the problem is assault , where I think the problem is inclusion
Of women ( for clarity)

I would not feel better if i thought it unlikely that there were no cameras. I get an uncontrolled, physical panic reaction to the presence of males in the wrong place. My body goes on full alert. Unfortunately , transwomen (obviously only the ones I detect , and that doesn't happen often) set off the reaction

It’s really important to make trans people safe but unfortunately it shouldn’t be done at the expense of the safety of others.

We keep hearing about inclusivity but if including trans people in certain situations means other people (often extremely vulnerable other people) are excluded it is not ok.

What worries me most is the lack of empathy from TRAs and refusal to acknowledge or discuss the issues. People without narcissistic or psychopathic tendencies tend to think about the impact of their actions and how they will affect others.

What about the damage and distress to victims of sexual abuse? What about those who will be socially excluded? What about rights to privacy and dignity?

Neither "exceptional circumstances" nor "sparingly applied" are words used in the text of the Equality Act or the Explanatory Notes

No but the word ‘exception’ kind of implies that is what is meant. That’s what the word exception means. It’s the exception as opposed to the rule.

Otherwise what’s the point of calling it an exception?