FPFW: conclusive evidence that transwomen retain male patterns of offending

What depresses me about this (well one of the things) is that the Home Office will see the fact that this research has been done as being the problem, the potentially embarrassing irritant. The question asked will be ‘how do we handle publicity about this?’ rather than ‘what the fuck have we done?.’
Useful report to bring out if your employer tries to push mixed sex toilets on you.

I could be wrong, though.

Perhaps best to just add the fact that if anything, this data is conservative and likely an under-estimation of the problem.

even the Geneva Convention requires male and female prisoners of war to be segregated!

Exactly. Does anyone know if this is in any kind of UN human rights declaration too?

(The fact the UN too has gone over to the dark side notwithstanding.)

Any idea if all of the 125 female sex offenders were born female, given that male crimes can now be classified as female crimes if the male prisoner identifies as female?

you've got me bang to rights TalkingtoLangCleg

Female prisoners may not be a group commanding much sympathy with the general public but no excuse to deny basic human rights such as privacy and dignity. Our prisons have gone beyond that not only are privacy and dignity thrown under the bus of trans ideology / fashionable queer theory but woman are being put in physical danger.

Ickabog - even the Geneva Convention requires male and female prisoners of war to be segregated!

X-post NewlyGranny

Female prisoners may not be a group commanding much sympathy with the general public but no excuse to deny basic human rights such as privacy and dignity.

Of course not and they're a highly vulnerable population. Background from the prison reform trust demonstrates that:

•	Although women are less than 5% of those in prison, they account for over 19% of self harm incidents, an indication of the traumatic impact of imprisonment on many.
•	Women entering prison are more likely to have been imprisoned for non-violent offences.
•	Women in prison are highly likely to be victims as well as offenders. Over half the women in prison report having suffered domestic violence with 53% of women reporting having experienced emotional, physical or sexual abuse as a child.
•	Many of them have dependent children - an estimated 17,000 children are separated from their mothers by imprisonment every year.

A society should be judged by how it treats its 'criminals' and all that. What does it say about the UK that we're putting the needs of male sex offenders above these women?

Equality law is there not just to protect nice, well-behaved women; it's there for all women, or it might as well not exist. Women who end up in prison are among the most vulnerable, most inarticulate of all. Many have already suffered violence and abuse at the hands of men. The law must protect them from intact, penis-having people infiltrating women's prisons.

@ByGrabtharsHammerWhatASavings

Avery valid point. Women are more likely to be attacked by men who have access to them in their personal spaces.

@TalkingtoLangClegintheDark

Agree - incarcerated women should be in single sex units. Naive as I was I thought this was exactly the kind of scenario single sex exemptions in legislation were designed for.

Female prisoners may not be a group commanding much sympathy with the general public but no excuse to deny basic human rights such as privacy and dignity. Our prisons have gone beyond that not only are privacy and dignity thrown under the bus of trans ideology / fashionable queer theory but woman are being put in physical danger.

I do not care how many Risk Assessments are done - it’s appalling. Can you imagine a dystopian novel where they find neglected and vulnerable women on the periphery of society and lock them up with a few male sex offenders who have requested to be in there? Problem is it’s not fiction.

We shouldn't be legislating to make it EASIER for the bad things to happen and give bad people MORE access to women and children......

That argument makes far too much sense to be admissible in the debate over all this, gardenbird. Don’t you know it’s transphobic to have a rational argument with which to back up your opinions? A deliberate act of hostility towards people who aren’t similarly endowed with rational arguments to back up their perspective!

We shouldn't be legislating to make it EASIER for the bad things to happen and give bad people MORE access to women and children......

It's almost like we've learned nothing about access from the major sex abuse scandals of the last few decades. Dame Janet Smith's report into Jimmy Saville highlighted, among many other failings and in other institutions, that Saville had access to girls and young women at the BBC via TOTPs. Male sex offenders identifying as women in prison (and let's assume it's a decision made because they know they will receive privileges as a result) should not be allowed anywhere near female prisoners, it's so obvious.

What I find particularly insulting and hard to believe is that panels of apparent "experts" can conclude that a collection of visual stereotypes makes a male sex offender a woman if he says so. And the fact of having committed a sex crime, something extremely rare for women, does not count against his application in any way.

You can be the most violent misogynist, but pop on a skirt, heels & long hair and you are a woman.

Am I understanding the data correctly that MOJ has categories: women (includes transwomen with GRC), trans (males without GRC who say they are transwomen) and men? That must skew the women's sex crime data quite significantly if so?

We always have to ask ourselves: cui bono?

When one group of people has been historically disadvantaged by another group of people, when it has been oppressed, controlled and abused to a truly inhuman degree by that other group, and when that oppression, control and abuse is still ongoing, who benefits when the first group is denied the right to set its own boundaries that exclude all members of the other group, to access spaces and services specifically set aside for this group only, to meet with other members of the same group with none of the oppressor group present, the right even to name itself?

Who benefits?

Women - the ones who are not closing their eyes to reality, at least - know only too well how it feels to belong to a group whose members are actually, verifiably, vulnerable, disadvantaged and marginalised in a plethora of ways, to a greater or lesser extent all over the world, still now. And these things are never intended to benefit us, now, are they?

Does it never occur to them as more plausible that men are actually engineering opportunities for themselves to gain access to victims?

this is exactly what bothers me - we know that bad things happen, and they will always happen but normally we take steps to try and prevent these bad things happening again.

The Ian Huntley case brought about the DBS checking as I understand in order to try and minimise the risk of the terrible thing that happened to those two poor girls happening again.

We shouldn't be legislating to make it EASIER for the bad things to happen and give bad people MORE access to women and children......

Agree with the poster who said this is Human Rights abuse - locking vulnerable women up with predatory males is not right. Somebody needs to take legal action.

Glad you agree but just to be clear on where I stand, I believe locking vulnerable women up with any males is not right. Obviously there’s a signifiant added risk and outrage when they’re predatory, but the assault on the human right of women to be held in a single sex facility persists even if the male in question is a mild-mannered individual whose sexual orientation is towards other males.

Sasha That's what pisses me off most when people come on here to say "Dont you know you're more likely to be attacked by a man in your family than a stranger on the street or whilst using a toilet etc". Like, what do they think is going on there? Do they think that there's something about having children/ being married/being a family friend etc that makes men suddenly more likely to offend? Does it never occur to them as more plausible that men are actually engineering opportunities for themselves to gain access to victims? Do they really think its men with wives/girlfriends/children etc who are most likely to attack us, rather than men with access and opportunity? And the fact that we don't have more attacks in spaces like toilets is precisely because we've limited male access and opportunity, not because men who use these spaces are just magically less likely to want to attack us. I mean, any one who has given it even 5 seconds thought should be able to figure that one out.

I'm skeptical that all of the people born male who are counted as female actually have a GRC and female birth certificate.

AFAIK, you don't need a GRC to change the sex markers on documents such as passport or drivers licence. Does anyone know if the prison system asks for a female birth certificate before recording sex?

I really hope the Judicial Review puts a stop to this. There should be a transgender wing on the male estate for these male criminals who suddenly realise they're women.

and I would bet that once the option of being moved to the female prison estate is removed the numbers of those suddenly deciding they are women will drop dramatically.

There's an article in the DM today about the number of transgender staff at the Bank of England, and in the article there's a section stating that there are 20 murderers now saying they're trans. (Weird article to hide this is, should be its own article.)

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9047753/Bank-England-three-times-transgender-staff.html

Article is boring so here's a screenshot of the section.

The Ministry of Justice figures will intensify suspicion that some violent criminals may be identifying as trans in the hope of getting better treatment in jail or being transferred to a women’s prison.

I really hope the Judicial Review puts a stop to this. There should be a transgender wing on the male estate for these male criminals who suddenly realise they're women.

Yes I would concur with number 2.
Same as scout leaders or catholic priests (for example) are not more likely to be sex offenders than other roles just that sex offenders can exploit easy access to children by becoming a catholic priest or a swimming instructor or whatever. Or could in the past until safeguarding came along.