CPS consultation on guidance re sex by deception.

The Gay Men's Network has responded to the CPS consultation on sex crimes involving deceptions as to biological sex. In it, we warn of Institutional ideological capture, victim blaming and inequality before the law

Read our full response here (first link in letters and responses)

We include in our response a draft email for anyone who wants to write in supporting our submission at pages 34-35. If you wish to adapt the law or arguments in the response please feel completely free to do so.

Details on how to respond to the consultation are available at the CPS website here - it closes 19th December 2022.

If you support our work advocating for the interests of homosexual males, please consider donating, our work requires infrastructure and with more donations we can make more of a difference.

Stay tuned for the GMN response to the NHS Interim Service Specs consultation and a public communication on the Equal Treatment Benchbook among our other projects.

Also a lot of people who are affected are straight men who find themselves having sex (or about to have sex) with men who claim to be women.

Other thread
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4643195-cps-consultation-now-open-consultation-on-the-deception-as-to-gender-section-in-the-rape-and-serious-sexual-offences-rasso-legal-guidance

More links
www.womensgrid.org.uk/?p=20386

www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11251801/amp/CPS-launches-consultation-suspects-gender-identity-affects-consent-rape-cases.html

www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/new-cps-guidance-will-block-rape-victims-from-therapy/

This seems to be a response to first stage of consultation but may be useful.
nottssvss.org.uk/cps-consultation-response/

Trying to get as many resources as possible in one place for when I start this.

Conservative Women
www.conservativesforwomen.org/proposed-new-guidance-from-the-crown-prosecution-service-promotes-more-gender-ideology

Discussion her with Andrew Doyle

Place marking. There are two threads on this that I found via the search.

www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-6-consent

'Ostensible consent can be vitiated by deceptions that are closely connected to the nature or purpose of sexual intercourse.'

'conditional consent' - there is no such thing as 'unconditional consent', I'd have said:

www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/insights/blogs/criminal-law-blog/stealthing-conviction-brings-conditional-consent-out-in-the-open

Yes, that's 'stealthing' and is usually considered rape. At least, I thought it was.

However I still maintain that 'this is contrary to my wishes' cannot be seen to mean 'I consent to this'.

No, not talking to you or criticising you in any way, sorry - just so frustrated and fed up with all this.

If you are referring to me I am not trying to do that. I am not talking about consent per se, I am talking about rape law in the UK. Obviously I would hope that (one day, as soon as possible) rape law in the UK does a good job of protecting women whose lack of consent is ignored.

If a woman says "I consent to penetrative sex but not ejaculation. You must withdraw" and the man ejaculates inside her, is this something that could be prosecuted as rape under UK law? I believe that you are saying "yes", and having googled it would appear to be the case that you are right. Given the appallingly low conviction rates for rape I would imagine that a woman in this circumstance would be incredibly lucky to see her complaint to the police became a conviction.

And at the risk of being petty, "If it's contrary to the woman's wishes then she has not consented" seems a little simplistic. A woman who wants to get pregnant might consent to sex on the condition that the man doesn't use a condom and ejaculates inside her. Could she accuse him of rape if he used the withdrawal method? (I suspect not, but maybe I am wrong).

If it's contrary to the woman's wishes then she has not consented.

Dear God, the endless wangling to make using women sound ok and all right and to fiddle those boundaries gently away, wtf is going on? What do you have to be sniffing to write a sentence like that and not think wtaf am I involved in?

I would have thought it would be defined as penetration using a penis contrary to her wishes, irrespective of ejaculation?

I do not know what the law says on the matter of ejaculation. As the law currently stands is it rape if a man promises to use the withdrawal method and then fails to do so successfully?

every instance where the suspect ejaculates inside the vagina contrary to the wishes of the complainant will not necessarily vitiate consent

How do we define rape if it is not ejaculating inside a woman's vagina contrary to her wishes. Surely 'contrary to her wishes' and 'consent' have the same meaning in practice as in - against her will.

What in the ever-loving [screams expletives loudy and at length]???!!!!!

@Thingybob no argument from me! I went down the route of obvious groups to protect and there's of course the group which has endured the most attacks!

Happy to have either of these groups consulted... eventually...

WTAF?!

I would think the people most likely to be impacted by the proposals are heterosexual women. Isn't it the case that all those who have been prosecuted for the offence of sex by deception in recent years have been biological women presenting as male?

Just as lesbian women usually have an aversion to the thought of intimacy with a biological male, heterosexual women usually have an aversion to the thought of intimacy with a biological female. It is easier for a transman to pass than it is for a transwoman and with the lights switched off and the possiblility of using prosthetic devices, I can see how young, inexperienced females could be hoodwinked. I would however think it would be incredibly traumatising if and when they realise as it would be such an attack on that persons sense of 'self'

Is someone playing the game of putting forward a proposal that's so outrageous it's bound to be rejected and something reasonable accepted instread?

I think someone is playing the game of "let's nobble this quietly from inside so that we get what we want without any public debate on it". Where have we heard that before? This needs to be splashed all over the papers.

Incidentally, the current (2021) guidance is already more permissive on this than many here may be aware.
Current rules: www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-6-consent
Proposed new version: www.cps.gov.uk/publication/deception-gender-proposed-revision-cps-legal-guidance-rape-and-serious-sexual-offences

There are rules on consultations, and a ban on proposing garbage law or something thats illegal should be one of them.

From the proposed revision:

A person who presents as a particular gender at the time of the alleged offence may subsequently revert to their sex assigned at birth when an allegation is made against them. Any apparent reversion may be for numerous reasons including, but not limited to, pressure to conform to social norms.

I would also like to hear Stonewall's position - as I think they used to have the abolition of this law as one of their organisational aims, but seem to have sort of shuffled it under the carpet, somehow.

Now that the proposal is to criminalise only "gender deception" (not sex deception), Stonewall may be happy with the proposed rules on sex by deception.

I'd be interested to hear how Stonewall thinks anyone will ever be prosecuted for sex by deception if deception can only mean lying about gender (and not sex). The only step Stonewall thinks is required for someone to "live consistent with their gender identity" is to identify that way, so presumably telling the victim that you have a particular gender is all the proof anyone could ask for that this is in fact your gender. Brilliant!

If I were running Stonewall I'd keep quiet for now, but if anyone is ever prosecuted on the basis that they did not "live consistent with their [claimed] gender identity" (a high bar which can be expected to deter most detectives and CPS solicitors), Stonewall might well be called upon by the defence to explain that the accused certainly was living their gender identity - they even stated their gender identity to the complainant....