"Trans Criminals are not Women" says Priti Patel

I would hope they might do this but I can foresee legal challenges over supposed discrimination and invasion of privacy.

Discriminating by actually treating them the same as everyone else? As to privacy - dna records being made and kept for defined groups and periods of times is already established.

Unfortunately the experiment of 'we can give a small number of sincere and fully or in the process of fully medically/surgically transitioning males access to women's spaces and that'll be fine' has been proven to be unworkable. Largely because of the behaviours of male people as a class, not to mention the utter disrespect of males believing they got to choose who could and couldn't use female spaces without ever considering impact on females as a sex class, their needs, or bothering to consult them first.

It's been proven:

• gatekeeping is impossible in practical terms; if it's one male allowed then in reality it's all males allowed.

• degree of transition is impossible in practical terms to gatekeep (unfair to make dangerous surgery a requirement, medical intervention a requirement, to require a set amount of transition, or to have anyone on the door of every women's loo to check plus all the privacy stuff about no formal ID) so again, any male, fully male presenting

• if male people as a class are given the slightest inch to dominate and control resources for females, they will force it to as many miles as can possibly be achieved.

• regardless of how sincere and lovely a TW may be, or the degree of transition, their presence will still exclude some vulnerable females from the female space, leaving them without any resources to provide male people with more respectful freedom of choice. Which is obviously wholly unacceptable because females are tax payers and equally entitled to equality and access, unless we're saying that sex definitely does exist despite all the 'sex is complicated' waffle, and that being born with a penis means choice, while being born with a vagina means subordination.

GRCs force self ID to happen in reality. This genie is never going back in the bottle.

The only option is to re establish that all female spaces are female only, and provide additional and more inclusive options for males who would prefer alternatives to male single sex spaces. Their needs can and are going to have to be met without removing women's sex based rights. However male people feel about this, their rights are not greater than female humans.

@Mummyoflittledragon , we women have had enough of being mansplained into believing that women can have penises,

If we were being honest though, a woman would have to be
(i) hiding her truthful belief (from kindness or fear), or
(ii) be a credulous simpleton
if she states that any male adult is actually a woman.

Maybe the fear/kindness thing is because it is demanded or there is coercion that she profess that belief; with consequences if she doesn't.

@Needmoresleep oh yeah, I know there aren't many GRC holders so it's theoretically a small problem in terms of numbers, but it is still a problem. The legal fiction of sex change is a massive part of why we are in this crazy situation now. I think all this bad legislation needs repealing.

Good point re DNA @ErrolTheDragon and I would hope they might do this but I can foresee legal challenges over supposed discrimination and invasion of privacy.

If the T was only added to LGB in 2015 by Stonewall, a lot has happened 'under the radar' really quickly under 3 different Tory PMs whilst everyone was distracted by Brexit (2016).

Good point, Dotoall. Looks as if Stonewall slipped that through cleverly. But it was the Labour government under Tony Blair that slipped the Gender Recognition Act through in 2004, when everyone was distracted by the invasion of Iraq. I don’t recall even hearing of the GRA back then.

DH has studied a little bit about the historicity of Jesus, gnostic and various other gospels... I think his general answer to WWJD is 'nobody has the faintest notion but not necessarily anything nice'.

Be that as it may - what we do know is that at this point in time there are various religions which are deeply misogynistic and exert various forms of control on women. If there are no single sex spaces, women who are in such communities may believe they shouldn't use mixed spaces or not, but regardless they may be prevented from doing so by their husbands/fathers/other family.

I've just read the Home Office response to the perition to parliament linked uptrend. It's horrific! It says they can't record biological sex of criminals because this would involve physical examinations. WTAF? Did Stonewall write the response for the Home Office? They also use 'sex assigned at birth' and 'legal gender' is there such a thing as legal gender?

I am currently reading 12 Bytes by Jeanette Winterson - it's about AI but the chapter Gnostic Know How covers this idea, and how it was pushed out of religion in favour of a male only view.

I haven't rtft so apologies if someone already asked, but how will police forces do this?

Thanks to the GRA - which prioritised the privacy of GRC holders - we're all meant to pretend we don't know what sex people are unless they tell us...

I don't know if there's a dna record for all criminals but I'd be surprised if there wasn't for violent and sexual abusers. So in most cases they would know, unambiguously.

@GoodieMoomin yeah this is what I was wondering..

Once someone has a GRC is there any record of their actual sex? Or is it deleted from history?

Goodie, there are only 5,000 GRC holders, and several hoops need to be jumped to get one. TRAs have long complained that the process is too bureaucratic and expensive, though someone quite high profile and litigious was claiming that the process can be gamed, I assume via the use of sympathetic doctors. I have no issue with a small number of people with gender dysphoria of whom only a much smaller number will end up as offenders, who can be considered on a case by case basis, taking into account any danger they might pose to women.

Its self ID and the ability of male sex offenders to play the system that is very obviously wrong. And the impact on statistics.

I haven't rtft so apologies if someone already asked, but how will police forces do this?

Thanks to the GRA - which prioritised the privacy of GRC holders - we're all meant to pretend we don't know what sex people are unless they tell us...

We all know that a person's sex isn't actually a secret, but if a man tells the police he's a woman, what will the police do? It won't be enough for them to simply disagree, 'because, well, we can see you're a man'.

They can ask for ID but it's now possible to have documents that lie. Will they insist on only using a birth certificate so that it's only GRC holders who are counted as women?

Anyway, good news in theory. Let's see it implemented properly and get men out of women's prisons, too.

Just would be great if the ONS would say something really robust about the need for this, but IIRC didn’t they have to have some threat of legal action about the 2021 census and making sure there was going to be accurate biological sex data collection?

Fair Play For Women took the ONS to the High Court and the ONS lost.

And obviously the brilliant research and lobbying from FPFW and others. Nic, pour yourself a well earned drink

Yes. Her FPFW speech at the 2021 Conservative party conference was so well put.

This was an interesting point she made:
"Lately the home secretary is calling for the police to take crimes like indecent exposure more seriously – while at the same time any man can be naked in the women’s changing rooms at my local gym, because he might be trans. And I can’t be sure I won’t be arrested for a hate crime if I question it."

Fascinating about the paired disciples.

There's so much history air brushes out isn't there?

Such as the history of how trans came about. (See Helen Joyce, Trans.)

@FinallyHere I just googled 'Priti Patel Daily Mail' and the article came up near the top of the search results.

Not happy to be relying on DM articles but it sounds promising. Maybe another news outlet will report on it later.

There is a lot of evidence that the disciples were actually male and female pairs and that there were 12 pairs. The women went to spread the word to women and the men to men. Men to women would have been disrespectful and absurd. This was whitewashed out of history during the 1st to the 4th century AD when men chose which biblical texts to include and exclude.

That's really interesting! I've sometimes wondered about that!

Oh Hooray! (If true). Well done all.
Now, fingers crossed Maya can encourage a review of judges rule book so that female rape victims etc don't have to refer to their rapists as 'women'.

If it is indeed true, this would be very welcome news.

Has anyone else tried googling for the source of this story and found only one tweet (with identical wording) and the MN version?

Puzzlin'

Interesting post Mummyoflittledragon I need to look into the pairs thing.
Like Purgatory, I have read the Old and New testaments - one of the (many) things that Jesus did that was radical in his time and place was to listen to and value women. This did get rather forgotten as later Christians reverted to their ingrained patterns of behaviour, but it is there in the gospels.

Just responding to the OP. That’s brilliant news. The degrading of the trust we can have in accurate statistics and record keeping by recording subjective gender instead of recording sexed reality is unforgivable. Providing individual gender validation satisfaction at the cost of imposing sweeping negative effects for women and children on their safeguarding, their dedicated services, the funding for those, any evidence-based consideration of their specific needs, is one of the most under discussed and sinister aspects of genderism dogma. It’s permanent data falsification. It allows all sorts of untrue claims to be made using our public data, which belongs to all of us, because it doesn’t reflect reality any more.

It’s so unbelievably selfish and destructive to insist that nobody has a sexed reality just because some people don’t want to acknowledge their own. It messes up data collecting for everyone especially including the very vulnerable people who rely absolutely on public services to survive . Which are allocated in response to public statistics. And it will have negative affects on trans identifying people themselves if their needs are misrepresented by performative ‘affirming’ data collection. Sex change is impossible. Biological reality and sexist gender hierarchy creates specific physical and social need affecting women and children.

Nobody in government has seemed to GAF about this before now so if Priti Patel will stop the falsifying, at least in the criminal justice system, then that is a great start. Please could Sajid Javid also do it for health and the NHS? And the relevant ministers in Education, Business, DWP etc etc? Just would be great if the ONS would say something really robust about the need for this, but IIRC didn’t they have to have some threat of legal action about the 2021 census and making sure there was going to be accurate biological sex data collection? Apologies to them if I have misremembered that.