Why the hate?

that thread has plenty of posts that are simply documenting crimes committed by trans people

The continued misunderstanding of just why 'that thread' exits seems very determined. The analogy with lesbians is flawed because of the very reason why that thread exists.

Why does that thread exist?

If transitioned males did not insist their crimes be recorded and reported as female crimes, to be indistinguishable amongst female crime statistics and articles reported in the media, there would be less need for 'that' thread.

If transitioned males did not continue to commit sex crimes at a similar rate as other males, and nowhere near the rate of females (who some of their crimes are being recorded as) while denying that this is the case, there would be less need for 'that' thread.

If some males were not attempting to insist that for safeguarding purposes they were treated as females, when they are in reality males and therefore there is the same risk that they as males, will commit sex crime at the male rate, there would be less need for 'that' thread.

If some males did not then wish to be placed into a female prison and even sharing cells with females, there would be less need for 'that' thread.

If all those four things were not happening, 'that' thread would not exist on this feminist board.

But keep on bringing up the lesbian analogy like it is relevant.

Let's see how it doesn't really work.

Are lesbians insisting on being counted as a sex class that they are not? No?

Are lesbians insisting on being considered as a lower risk than their general sex class? No?

If lesbians are a greater risk in a female prison to other females or lesbians, we need to deal with that. Not use that increased risk as a wedge to get males into female prisons.

By framing this subset of males as being a 'minority' seeks to section off their risk profile as being less than other males. We learned from history that no males should be treated as a sacred subset and yet.... here we are.

What is even worse is we are being told to disbelieve what we can see from the evidence that we are supplied with.

The answer is contained within the piece you linked to - and it still doesn't say quite what you claim.

There is disproportionate incarceration, mistreatment, harsh punishment, and sexual victimization of sexual minority inmates, which calls for special public policy and health interventions.

In short? You misunderstood what you read.

You made assumptions, the data is not fully disaggregated an so won't support your claim.

I also don't understand how/why ploppers can repeatedly plop, prompt us to explain our rational and evidence-supported views (which I'm happy to do in the interests of discussion and debate, hearing others' views, revising my thoughts, and for any lurkers) - and not see (presumably) that the fact that they can't make an argument for theirs could be a problem?

I have the same thing with the TRA in my family. I try to keep things calm and rational and state my logic-informed opinion and ask questions/for evidence. They can't answer. They just say things like "I'll have to get back to you" or "It's just not like that" (in response to actual evidence and pointing out of logical fallacy). How do they not think "hmm my position is internally inconsistent and is not supported by any evidence?" I mean I'm fine with that, as with religious belief, if that's understood and they leave other people alone. I just don't think I should have to have it imposed on me when it makes no sense and there's no evidence for it. How can anyone not get that?

Oh. I saw the title and thought this thread was going to be asking why there’s so much hate against women in society: why so many male people hate female people so much and why so many women are so full of internalised misogyny.

That’ll be an interesting discussion, I thought.

Imagine my surprise to open the thread and find out it was yet another thread by a person unknown characterising women’s defence of their own human rights in the face of male appropriation and destruction of those rights as “transphobia”!

Colour me shocked! And deeply disappointed of course.

Although I note there is one poster on here who’s giving a very good demonstration of the internalised misogyny side of things.

What is it that makes otherwise rational women so deeply prejudiced against their own sex? So desperately determined to prioritise male people over and above female people, even at the cost of denying the reality that’s right in front of them? And yet still claim, in a truly absurd plot twist, to be feminists?

That’s the kind of (self) hate it would be really worthwhile exploring here on FWR.

ons not ins.

I am struggling to find figures which split female and male gay inmate numbers. However, it seems that contrary to the us, where gay people are represented in the prison population at numbers far higher than the general population, 1.4% of U.K. prisoners declare their sexuality as gay or lesbian, 1.5 as bisexual (HMPPS offenders equality report 2021). This compares closely with an estimated 2.7% of the U.K. population identifying as lgb (ins figures).
I conclude that any greater propensity for lesbians to be found guilty of committing crime is a cultural phenomenon linked to attitudes in the us.

It has been repeated on this thread about the context of collating the crimes of transitioned males. It seems like some posters like to forget why.

If there wasn’t the forced dishonesty about recording these crimes into the sex category of human that is not the group that rarely commits sex crimes, the threads, the web sites would not be needed.

Why aren’t poster’s understanding how hateful it is to females to have males being recorded, reported and incarcerated as females?

Or do some posters think it is ok in anyway for crimes that are rare for a sex class, to be recorded and reported and viewed as that sex class.

And that males should be ever incarcerated with females?

Why do posters think allowing people to believe that females are now becoming more likely to rape someone, when the people are viewing the statistics, but also through media reporting, is ok?

Why does anyone think it is ok to not highlight that males do not stop committing particular crimes at the same rate as other males when they have transitioned? Who benefits from a sub group of males being viewed as ‘safer’ than others when there is no evidence to suggest they are not?

To address the lesbian crimes. If lesbians, or any group of females, ARE committing sex crime more frequently than any other demographic of females, let’s have that collected and analysed. What would be the point of hiding it?

If people think collecting the data is ‘hate’, what do you think the future victims will think? If the crime against them could have been prevented because a new pattern of crime was identified clearly and steps taken to address that pattern so that crime against that person never happened, I doubt they would call it hateful.

Analyse the fuck out of the data.

Collect it, understand it, address it.

Why is one group of females doing this? What can be done to lower this incidence in reality not on paper, or to prevent the crimes?

Awareness is the very first step.

The entire point of women having to collect the data has been addressed on this thread.

Because the people in authority stopped doing their jobs.

Thanks to lobby groups.

All this continued discussion on lesbian sex crimes has done is…. nothing. If there is ANY group committing sex crimes at a higher rate than another group, it needs to be known. It is sparple.

However, to repeat for the nth time.

People outside the relevant authorities are now doing this collectively using the power of the internet. Because those authorities are not doing their job.

And for proof that they are not doing their job, shall we post the links to the case where the MoJ admitted they had no statistics about this? We can do this.

Or… are we just going to continue this spiral because some posters wish to ignore male crime patterns are being attributed to females ?

And some people (general) don’t want it known that males don’t magically commit sex crime as the sex they identify themselves as.

Point of note for ploppers and those that like to keep tabs on responses to ploppers - do better.

There are probably more lurkers than posters on this board. Tactics like this don’t do ploppers/observers any favours. Because the often silent lurkers aren’t learning anything helpful from your POV.

Once more for those at the back - there is nothing wrong with wanting to secure safe spaces based on sex. Most people want safe spaces for everyone - but not at the expense of safe spaces for Women.

TBH, I’ve lost track of what terminology I’m allowed to use. Hopefully the above is ok.

I've given you evidence that lesbians are statistically supposedly far, far more likely to commit crimes that straight women. What do you have to say about that?

I must be a statistical anomaly, since I have been repeatedly offended against by men but never by lesbians. Where are these gangs of violent lesbians, mugging and raping people? Where are the grooming gangs of lesbians? Where are the high profile trafficking groups with links to royalty? Where are the lesbians making me feel unsafe in the street?

I mean if 98% of sex offences were committed by lesbians, we could talk.

Its an imaginary thread full of imaginary people making imaginary posts

HELLO?! No one there - how strange.

Nobody seems to have addressed these core points, that I can see, preferring to side track instead.

Yes they have but (as you say yourself, immediately before this sentence) you don't accept what people are saying about why they engage in these discussions.

So rather than engage with people's arguments you just keep repeating the same point as if it's a gotcha. It's disappointing because your point about how the 'never happens' threads might be perceived is a reasonable one but where does that get us if we can never move forward with a conversation?

that thread has plenty of posts that are simply documenting crimes committed by trans people.

What kind of crimes would these be?

Shoplifting? TV licence evasion? Jaywalking? Speeding?

Or do we focus on the offences that trans activists keep saying no-one trans would ever commit?

I have asked if a thread here recording, collating and highlighting crimes by trans people constitutes 'hate'.

Which thread are you referring to?

Agreed!

It seems like a desperate distraction technique to me, Biology.

"I think she's suggesting that male sex offenders who are recorded as trans are more likely to end up in prison than other male offenders, due to institutional and societal discrimination.
I'm afraid that I think 100% of all rapists deserve prison. I am more concerned with eliminating any privilege that may be allowing rapists from other demographics to escape."

I'm actually focussing very directly on the original intent of this thread - which is about if there is 'hate' or not directed towards trans people on FWR.

I have asked if a thread here recording, collating and highlighting crimes by trans people constitutes 'hate'. I have asked people to consider whether a similar thread on a forum about crimes committed by lesbians would constitute 'hate' towards lesbians.

I do not accept the argument that the thread on FWR is purely about people who are claiming to be trans to access female prison estate, or to gain any material advantage by fraudulently claiming to be trans; that thread has plenty of posts that are simply documenting crimes committed by trans people.

Nobody seems to have addressed these core points, that I can see, preferring to side track instead.

That was a reply to @PurgatoryOfPotholes

I'd just like to pause for a laugh at the pivot from "collecting statistical evidence is hateful" to "none of this counts unless you have statistical evidence".

Yes, we know countries that go for self-ID don't like collecting evidence.

I only looked at the paper linked to very quickly, but couldn't see any mention of trans-identifying prisoners. Just a conclusion that "There is disproportionate incarceration, mistreatment, harsh punishment, and sexual victimization of sexual minority inmates, which calls for special public policy and health interventions."

I'm not sure that that addresses anything raised by the OP, who has disappeared after starting the thread. I'm struggling to assume good faith here.

Well, shall we look at Ireland, and the women sharing Limerick Jail?

You're very keen to emphasise that same-sex attracted women are more at risk of prison sentences, so this means same-sex attracted women are at a higher risk of sharing prison with males who want to rape them.

Limerick Jail had three or four male prisoners at one point. In order to accommodate them and keep the female prisoners safe, conditions for the incarcerated women were compromised. They ended up sleeping on mattresses on the floor of other cells, because the male rapists had to be given cells to themselves.

At what point does a male who happens to identify as a woman come out of the 'high risk' class of male? When does that actually happen?

I think she's suggesting that male sex offenders who are recorded as trans are more likely to end up in prison than other male offenders, due to institutional and societal discrimination.

I'm afraid that I think 100% of all rapists deserve prison. I am more concerned with eliminating any privilege that may be allowing rapists from other demographics to escape.