"Trans Criminals are not Women" says Priti Patel

Yes, I agree. They should record both.

I think it would be really good actually of they recorded each criminal's sex and "gender identity" - if they claim to have one.

For people who do not believe in these stereotypes, the "gender identity" would be stated as "none" and their sex recorded accurately.

For people who are not trans but believe in such stereotypes so have a belief they are the same gender as their sex, both would be recorded and it is clear then that they match, and how the crime statistics by sex should be categorised.

For people who are trans they would record their sex (so that crime stats are accurate, the nonsensical idea that a woman can commit rape is no longer perpetuated, and they are placed in the correct sex-segregated prison) but they can also record their "gender identity" so that for example, if they are a transwoman, while in the male prison staff will know to refer to them as she/ her. This is so important to them that I presume they'd want that to continue in the prison environment.

Then we would, by filtering the data, have accurate statistics on how many self-declared trans criminals, and male and female non-trans criminals were committing which crimes, which is surely one of the key purposes of collecting data in the first place: to get a clear and objective picture of trends in crime and who is committing it.

Not impossible so much as unlikely/unusual. Obviously all these people are not actually biological women, but there have been biological women convicted of rape.

I have read that if a woman aids a man to commit rape, then she can also be charged with rape - is that actually true in English law?

Never mine that under UK law it is impossible for a woman to commit rape. How were they even convicted of the crime if they are women?!?

Not impossible so much as unlikely/unusual. Obviously all these people are not actually biological women, but there have been biological women convicted of rape.

If they are accurately recorded as being men presumably any "argument" that they should be in a women's prison disintegrates.

I detest the Home Secretary but if she follows through with this it will keep so many women safe from violent male offenders.

Yes, that now-hidden post was definitely WTF appalling.

I'd hope that the police and other officials deal with all victims of crime sensitively and compassionately.

The Co-Chair in question has 16-17 years as a PC behind her so I'd hope that she shares your wish. I'm startled by her lack of empathy for women that she's so prepared to use the statistics as a bargaining chip. "If you don't do [X] for this group then I demand that you destroy data collection for women. And I am not providing any evidence for my assertion that [X] doesn't happen although it's plain that it does and addresses a different topic."

First time poster!

It is hoped that this changes, trans need to sorted correctly, and sex is the only way transwomen are just men so kinda answers where the trans needs to go does it not?

As the vast majority of men would refuse a transwoman as a partner regardless of surgery then they would be safe in the cells and prisons for men!

Ah, I wondered if that would be where she'd go with this.

Well, how trans people are recorded if they are victims of crime is changing the subject. I'd hope that the police and other officials deal with all victims of crime sensitively and compassionately. But surely it's in the interests of the 'trans community' for accuracy of here too - recording both sex and gender identity - so that it can be discerned if there is an excess of crimes against them?

Demanding that women should not be recorded as VICTIMS if trans CRIMINALS cannot be recorded as women is disgusting in itself but why has she then gone on to tweet about trans victims not being recorded as the gender they identify with?

OK, her argument now makes more sense to me (NB, I don't think it's a correct argument but it is more understandable than it was).

tbh, I'd have thought TW who report incidents/crimes must be recorded in their gender by the police or how did SH manage to have Glinner interviewed/taken to court etc.? My impression is that they are recorded so the Co-Chair is making a very odd equivalence here.

I’m pleased that someone high up has finally spoken up. But the more and more I think about it, the more sure I am that this is backtracking. The police and government are both involved with stonewall, the police have been doing what they are told. We all listened to the Stonewall documentary, and I presume it’s sent some serious ripples through parliament. They’re backtracking on policies they’ve okayed to soften the blow when this comes to the publics attention. And it will end in a public enquiry, I’m almost certain.

It will, however, be funny to watch Labour and the other parties try and condemn them for it.

I'm absolutely shocked that this LGBTcopUK person has posted this, and I hope the women she is responding to in these tweets make proper complaints to her Force as a result.

Demanding that women should not be recorded as VICTIMS if trans CRIMINALS cannot be recorded as women is disgusting in itself but why has she then gone on to tweet about trans victims not being recorded as the gender they identify with?

In the space of just a few hours, she's somehow changed criminal into victim in this debate very quickly and easily.

Meanwhile, she doesn't seem to acknowledge that being a victim of a crime, such as being raped, might leave a woman feeling that her identity has been erased, or that the rapist did not see her as a person (and that's before we get to how the police, lawyers, court systems etc might make a rape victim feel like her entire identity, womanhood, and personhood has been striped away). Especially if that woman then has to start calling her rapist 'she' and watch everyone else involved put her rapists hurt feelings first.

Fucking outrageous. Complaints need to be made and this officer needs to be disciplined for these comments.

Women have been pleading for those who have the power to change things to take notice and acknowledge our concerns. Whatever I may think of some of Priti Patel's other statements and actions, she IS the person with the political clout to enforce protection for women in prisons and I welcome her involvement.

@MummBRaaarrrTheEverLeaking

twitter.com/lgbtcopuk/status/1452330003631415296?t=wm3O-etthxPdCtvh-RBRgQ&s=19

No words for the absolute bloody state of this

twitter.com/DreyfusJames/status/1452386889202348032

twitter.com/lgbtcopuk/status/1452330003631415296?t=wm3O-etthxPdCtvh-RBRgQ&s=19

No words for the absolute bloody state of this

Apologies if it was a USA reference . There was a UK health and safety at work act in 1974. ...maybe that covered toilet provision as well.
www.hse.gov.uk/legislation/hswa.htm

Good point though I don't remember them being particularly pro trans at the time

Stonewall was already embedded in corporates and government back then, but it was nowhere near as totalitarian about its agenda as it is today. They were incredibly shrewd about the way they engineered the policy capture from the inside - it's actually really impressive, in an evil genius kind of way.

Stonewall was unapologetically trans-exclusive itself until 2015 when it caved to transactivists' pressure. They basically told Stonewall it was transphobic for not including them and then took it over and told everyone the same.