More than one “woman” a week prosecuted for rape?!?!

Sorry, Bat.

It is very confusing to try to have a conversation about data collection and data management on this thread.

Suddenly there are discussions about unicorns, we are accused of some weird conspiracy and we are accused of not believing in transpeople - they are part of the data we are discussing fgs.

This is worse than doing 11 + with my 10 year old. At he doesn’t suddenly involve unicorns in his comprehension answers. And he may say that I am mean but he doesn’t accuse me of being part of some weird conspiracy I’ve never heard of.

In your case, you know full well you can't be all "i hate the wierdo trannies!!" because it's not 1994 and you understand that this is unacceptable.

I don't believe this at all. I don't think I have even ever used the term 'tr*nies. I find it repulsive.

So you frame your prejudice another way. You've got no problems with trans women, no siree. It's entirely to do with the "safety of women

It is actually. As a parent, I am also very conscious of what is happening. In fact, as a close family member, a young woman has been imprisoned, I am also directly worried about her safety.

But, please continue your complete character assessment on what you believe I think. Because, after all, you have called me a transphobe a couple of times now.

But, you might say, I genuinely am only concerned with the safety of women!

And I AM.

To which the response would be then why this issue? Why is the issue so important to you?

Many issues are important to me. I am not a single issue person. Why on earth would suppose I am?

Even if you're 100% correct and all trans women are secretly men looking to get unrestricted access to women's prisons, it's a miniscule issue compared with other problems facing women.

I have never said that all transitioned males are 'secretly men looking to get unrestricted access to women's prison'. I have also never said that these statistics are the most important compared with other problems facing women.

That is you lying and attributing hateful beliefs to me.

Even if you're correct that every single one of these 436 cases is as you say, there were 400,000 reported rapes in the same period.

Because, accuracy of data is vitally important. AND some of these males are likely to be included in the numbers of males in the female prison estate.

If you cannot understand the issues behind having reliable and accurate data and be able to enable experts such as Prof Alice Sullivan to draw conclusions, that is your issue. I can understand why it is important and its wider implications.

finally decided to break cover and admit their issue actually has nothing to do with statistics but is rather predicted on a belief that transgender people don't exist at all.

That's 'predicated', robin. I presume. Unless you think we're all fortune tellers on here. I don't have any crystal balls.

Nobody here has suggested that transgender people don't exist - that would be absurd. Even more absurd than the belief that people can change sex.

And where are the ‘posts that are "so extreme that they likely cross the threshold into criminal offense’

Thanks, Rufus. Hands are getting quite sore here tbh

Nobody @BatmansBat

It's a supposed Gotcha! that many people who want to be seen as allies use. It is bandied about by many, hardly ever challenged and is based on absolutely fuck all.

What IS said is that human beings cannot change sex and that transwomen are male - though that last has not long been acceptable here on MN. We still have to mangle the language to say the obvious without being naughty!

But nobody here that I can remember, over about 6 years, has ever said that trans people do not exist!

It's just another of the lies told to silence us!

I'm seeing lots of posters saying that transwomen haven't changed sex, but I don't think anyone's saying they don't exist.

I mean, I generally don't worry about unicorns getting into the vegetable garden, because I'm fairly sure there aren't any.

Whereas men who identify as transwomen ending up in female prisons, for example, does actually seem to be A Thing.

So I'm not sure how we are simultaneously being Big Meanies to transwomen whilst also not believing that they even exist...

It was exactly the same with gay people in the military. It was no longer acceptable to be homophobic and claim it was a mental defect so the argument shifted to "unit cohesion".

This is homophobia, and is nothing to do with the collection of statistics relating to the sex of a prosecuted rapist.

Same with women in the military - it's not acceptable any more to say that women are inferior to men. So you make the argument that it's about "strength and personal safety".

Actually, I have quite a number of female friends that are ex-military of all forces. I am pretty up on what is and isn't possible with females in the military and the horrific discrimination, abuse and sexual assault they suffer.

Females ARE not as strong as males. Or do you believe that military women are super heroes in their strength (I think they are super for other reasons!). Because again, I am happy to post those studies for you to consider.

Should they be excluded from the forces because of their body's disadvantages? No, of course not. Should accommodation be made so that they can contribute to their fullest capacity? Yes. Of course. And they are now doing so, or well on their way.

So... again, this is another personal attack and is nothing at all that forms the basis for my beliefs.

I am so confused. Who has stated that transpeople don’t exist? I haven’t seen a single poster do that.

I have seen several posters saying that you cannot change your biological sex. The same posters argue transwomen are biological males who believe they have a female gender identity. This belief is protected in law.

But the problem is that we cannot really say what a transwoman is. Apart from that it is a biological male who claims that they are a woman. So it is very difficult to separate the transwomen from any potential predators who claim to be transwomen.

Now the problem with the statistics is that they confuse sex and gender. We need crime statistics for biological men, biological women and for transpeople- defined as people who stare that their gender is different from their sex.

Based on this data, we will be able to estimate risk profiles.

The data we have so far indicates that transwomen commit crime at rates corresponding to their biological sex. If this is incorrect, the data will show this. And if the data is obstructed by predators claiming trans status, we need to know this as well.

Then we can discuss data samples, data processing and conclusions.

I have never heard about a systematic error which always occur in one direction. If this is the case, the people responsible needs to be replaced.

I still don't get how the tenet of how woman exists (as in immutable and oh so bad), and yet anyone can declare themselves to be a woman (so a fluid identify) works.

Back to the data, and we're none the wiser which form of woman was noted.

I have no particular axe to grind on this, but I work with data and social statistics Any time one of my analysts comes to me with something that makes me go “wow!” the first thing I ask them to do is go back and check the data for errors.

So my mind would immediately be going to data input errors here - or “fat fingers” as it has been described.

Ultimately, there’s four potential explanations for these numbers:

1. biological women prosecuted as an accessory to rape
2. trans-identifying biological males prosecuted with rape (or as an accessory), with sex deliberately recorded as female
3. non-trans-identifying biological males prosecuted with rape with sex mistakenly recorded as female (“fat fingers”)
4. Other data recording errors - eg women prosecuted for another crime but mistakenly recorded as rape (more “fat fingers”)

All four of these are almost certainly represented in the data, the problem is there’s no simple way to determine which category makes up the majority.

Because of the parallel. Prejudice follows the same patterns. Always has

Nope! Blatantly not so. Nobody has said that black people do not exist... Given that this is the major outcry from TRAs I think we can safely say that 'transphobia' has found a new pattern!

And it's useful to take someone's position on one controversial issue and extrapolate that to another that is much more black and white - tends to focus the mind when people realise that their arguments against transgender rights are exactly the same arguments that racists make against racial equality...

Do you mean that if I don't like cats I must also hate lesbians, transwomen and small children?

And again, as per the previous paragraph, we have now ascertained the fact that the comparitor is false!

>Sometimes segregation IS important, to right historic inequalities or protect the vulnerable for instance.

And erm, women compared to men?

Interesting point. I'm struggling to think of a legit example where that could be justified as a long term policy position to maintain segregation though.

Erm, women compared to men?

>A parallel analogy would need to be when the segregation is of benefit to the more vulnerable class. Women are not the whites in a racial analogy.

No, we already agreed that!

A parallel analogy would be closer to white people identifying as black in order to claim a scholarship only open to people of colour.

Or men identifying as women to claim a business award open only to women!

The point you're making here is about pretence though. You're talking about white people pretending to be black to get a benefit (although Chris Rock does an excellent routine on why this doesn't happen).

Again... I can repeat myself all day if neeed

So are you saying that transgender women are pretending to be women?

Yes!

Apologies, it was actually you (and a half a dozen other people now) who finally decided to break cover and admit their issue actually has nothing to do with statistics but is rather predicted on a belief that transgender people don't exist at all.

And you know that is a lie. Nobody has 'broken cover. Many/most of us know transpeople in real life. Why would anyone claim they don't exist? That's the really weird lie that so many TRAs rely on.

You MUST do better than that if you want to persuade anyone that you have a point!

I call it a "belief" because that's what is - like a believing in unicorns, anyone who rejects scientific fact in favour of their own personal option isn't being rationale.

Ah! That thing. Where you take something someone has said and use it yourself, but based on something that isn't actually the same. In this case transwomen are women is substituted for sex is dimorphic, human beings cannot change sex. The former being real and the latter being the unicorn.

Sentence makes perfect sense and some may miss the absurdity it is based on!

And I am so glad that, at this moment in time, your truly daft post stil lstands.

You know full well why you have been told to stop, that post is full of personal slurs and hyperbole. And yet it is still there... eyes wide open!

Even if you think that sex segregation is like racial segregation and women have the power so occupy the position in the former that white people do in the latter…(it’s a real stretch and makes no sense, but let’s let that go for a moment)

We still have sex segregation for completely different reasons than racial segregation ever was for. Sex segregation provides privacy around nudity, fairness in sport, opportunities for women where they have previously been restricted (all women selection lists). Racial segregation was only ever about keeping populations separate because of unfounded beliefs about race and operated only to oppress- it didn’t offer fairness or privacy of opportunities or anything positive at all.

They’re not in any way comparable. And the UK, which is the relevant country in this thread about how statistics are collected in England and Wales never had formal race segregation. It doesn’t matter at l, what happened in the US or South Africa- it’s irrelevant for this thread. It’s just a distraction.

I think people in the 60s were racist when they expressed concerns that the end of segregation would lead to a rise in sexual offences against women.

You are conflating race segregation with sex segregation. I abhor race segregation in toilets, prisons and refuges (unless woman of colour want their own spaces which I am fine with) because there is absolutely no evidence that a woman would be physically less capable to fighting off an attack by a woman of another race.

However, this is not so for males vs females. Shall I start posting not only the male sex offence statistics, but also the latest studies that show transitioned males are still very much on average stronger and would overpower females?

happy to do so.

Your assertion is pretty much still a personal attack and is not something that I actually believe at all.

Because now (as that poster outlined) the normal misogyny is frowned upon and the socially acceptable way to do misogyny has mutated to be able to say that males (if they say it) are more oppressed than women. And bad, prejudiced, transphobic oppressive women if they even think (never mind state) otherwise.

See, men (and acolytes) can now acceptably pour hate on women and women themselves can be blamed for it.

Please point out the "half dozen other people now who finally decided to break cover and admit their issue actually has nothing to do with statistics but is rather predicted on a belief that transgender people don't exist at all".

Thank you.

I suspect I may have moved from slipping mask to scurrilous non-believer.

The chanting of repentance mantras, with judicious use of maracas (as a change from the more usual tambourine) is surely not far away.

but is rather predicted on a belief that transgender people don't exist at all.

What does this mean? I haven't seen anyone say that. If transgender people didn't exist then there would be no conversation about this would there. But there is. Which has seemingly been going on for years. So transgender people must exist.

In some case, these posts are so extreme that they likely cross the threshold into criminal offences.

Gosh..... criminal offences. Please highlight the posts and educate us.

But, in this scenario, women aren't the opresssed - they're the oppressors. They're not the black people in this scenario, they're the whites. In this case, the power rests entirely with them. That's why the parallel works.

That's not true. How can women be the oppressors? When it's women who are the victims of sexual assault and rape? Women don't have the power. There's many women here trying to protect their rights to keep themselves safe, and you call them the oppressors? Why don't you support women's safety? I'm genuinely confused.

Wow, that post is stunning, and not in a good way. I hope it is not deleted.

The one poster on this thread who has insulted and smeared others with abandon has now stated that it is the recipients of such invective whose posts are possible crime scenes.

And all because other posters won't obey the diktat that they shouldn't look at things more closely. Or question the 'fat finger' epidemic explanation.

Is there anywhere more scurrilous to go? Well maybe the bit where women seem to be the cause of every bad thing that happened to everyone on earth. Well to men, 'cos they are the only ones that matter and deserve mention. Would that not be an intrinsically transphobic position though, as you would be referring to women as a discrete sex class?

I call it a "belief" because that's what is - like a believing in unicorns, anyone who rejects scientific fact in favour of their own personal option isn't being rationale.

I do love the irony of that statement, @robinr66, as you also said that "transwomen are women", when they are men.

ArabellaScott

I did mention unicorns before ....

joins in the clapping....

Thank you.