Data on violence against trans people & women

https://kareningalasmith.com/2021/04/21/counting-dead-trans-people/#:~:text=Since%202009%2C%20at%20least%20129,trans%20person%20in%20the%20UK.

There is no evidence that transpeople do not experience violence is the other way of looking at things

As PP said , it's a difficult area to get data on for various reasons

Hold on, who has denied that trans people experience transphobia? This thread is about violence against trans people. PPs have pointed out the absence of evidence that trans people are particularly vulnerable to violence. Don’t try to twist our words.

I agree with @PermanentTemporary.

I can recognise that people who identify/present as trans do experience transphobia (which might overlap with homophobia), which can sometimes be violent, without agreeing that this means TWAW, or that women should centre their victimhood, or whatever.

There is a whole lot of space in between 'making this women's problem to solve' and outright denying it's even anyone's experience.

It doesn't take much imagination to understand that transwomen are likely to be victims of male violence because they are "different" and because they challenge the norm for males

it's a problem and it needs a solution

Just not one that throws women under the bus

Show me some evidence that trans people are vulnerable because they are trans (as opposed to because they are sex workers, as many TW in Brazil are). All you have given us so far is conjecture.

So you are taking an unsubstantiated assertion and demanding that women sign up to protecting a group of men, for some reason that you cannot explain. No.

Of course we should have the backs of anyone who experiences discrimination

And of course that doesn't mean giving up any understanding of sex or assigning sex based rights to gender identity

Although I understand that some women have been so upset by the TRA that they have less sympathy than you might otherwise have had for transgender related discrimination

This is the third thread currently at the top of the board where someone is wanting females to be the 'bigger person' and suck up the shit in order to make male people happier.

No.

As several posters have pointed out: violence to anyone is a bad thing. But the issue is not the case of prove violence/emote enough = women will surrender their sex based rights and equality.

That is how it is framed. Feel sad. Pity. Get protective. Be Kind. Mummy the world. and hand over your rights to men.

@MissLucyEyelesbarrow are you genuinely saying that you don't have ANY fellow feeling with another human being who has a similar experience of violence? I'm specifically saying that I DON'T think the motivation of an attacker beating up a woman is the same as an attacker beating up a transwoman, and it doesn't mean a transwoman is a woman. But it's still a violent attack, it's still male violence. I believe I can agree with TRAs that male violence is the problem without also saying that some males are actually women and that means they should be in women's spaces.

I don't think denying another group is vulnerable to attack is the slightest bit helpful to women.

Upthread, you said trans people are vulnerable to violence and sexist prejudice and we as women should have their backs on this because we know what it's like.

You are making unevidenced assertions about violence against TW based on one person you know and shit people post on the internet (PSA - it's not all true).

So we have:

1. Forced teaming and eliding of male sex-specific experiences with those of women. I have nothing in common with TW, in terms of how I experience violence, because they are male. I am against violence to anyone, but it is absolutely not my job to have TWs' backs.

2. Unevidenced assertions of risks to trans people from others or themselves (suicide) are the keystone of TRA demands to access women's spaces and to use women as human shields.

For someone who is 'extremely GC', you seem to have borrowed a surprising amount of material from the TRA playbook.

See I won't entertain this argument.

Your dps view is that men are dangerous and a risk.

That doesn't mean the way to solve that is by allowing biological males into women's spaces. This increases the risk to women. How is that a solution?

If trans women are more attractive risk than women, that needs looking at. But the solution can never be to increase the risk to women, ro decrease the risk to biological men who wish to appear as female. They are still biological men.

There's no evidence that transwomen commit violent crimes at vastly lower rates than men. And in fact a large portion of transwomen in prison, appear to be there for sexual crimes. Thats the stat i would look for. But i dont think they track it.

It does seem that you're not reading my posts completely... I'm extremely GC. I think it's also possible to see specific vulnerability in transwomen, different from the vulnerability of women. Why would the two views be incompatible? I'm also saying that as a GC person I support accurate data on who is vulnerable and who is getting attacked and the nature of those attacks. Which Stonewall et al seem to be determined to avoid by pretending that sex doesn't exist.

my cousin who transitioned a couple of decades ago was violently assaulted in the street

Sorry to hear that. My cousin, who is a gay man, had the shit kicked out of him for being gay. Does he belong in women's spaces?

My friend, who is of Indian heritage, had the shit kicked out of him in a naice middle-class town for "being a P**i". Does he belong in women's spaces?

I do believe that there is a particularly nasty strain of almost punishment beating landed on transwomen by men - as if by refusing to 'act like men' they have let the male side down

You can believe whatever you like, but there is no data to support your belief. If TW were being targeted in the UK, don't you think this would be reported in the trans-supportive media, like the Guardian and BBC?

In any case, it is irrelevant to the issue of women's spaces. Male on male violence is a problem for men, and women are not men's human shields.

Transmen, of course, belong in women's spaces (if they wish to use them) because they are vulnerable in the same way as other women, regardless of how they identify.

HAVENT

Gah. Hope they HAVENT been left with long term effects.

Heat is frying my brain, sorry.

That is terrible, I hope they have been left with long term effects. This should happen to nobody.

But the question remains, would the assault not have happened if women hadn't had equality, and single sex spaces? Because the one is being used to lever the other.

The whole point is to obfuscate, and to allow gender ideologues to make hyperbolic assertions that are impossible to unpick, because the data has been corrupted.

I agree that TW are not at high risk of murder in the UK. Assault may be different.

It's bloody difficult to tell since campaigners decided that it was a really good idea to remove or confuse categories. Not just that TW are supposed to be W, and that all categories in the LGBTQ+ group are put together, but now the latest one referring to 'trans people' without differentiating between transwomen and transmen where relevant, despite - shock! - their needs and experiences being different. Eg outcomes on puberty blockers - where any research has actually been allowed to be done, patient satisfaction with PBs is reasonably good in males, less so in females (not the same as it being ideal treatment but important). You'd think that would be useful information for girls wanting PBs.

Trans people are NOT at high risk of assault in the UK.

A massively higher proportion of violent rhetoric comes from the TRA side.

Transphobia does not equate with homophobia.

Women are more vulnerable to violence and sexist prejudice than trans people and maybe they should have OUR backs.

The problem is that transwomen are actually male.

Whether they have modified their body, whether they disguise themselves with wigs, clothes and makeup, or whether they just self ID without any change at all.

They are still male.

And because society cannot tell which males are more likely to be violent towards women and girls, we have a system that puts safeguards in place. Just in case. We segregate by sex.

Men - Men are dangerous
Women - Yes, we know
Men - Let them into all your single sex spaces
Women - No

That's it.

Well, he's out on the number of trans people by a factor of 5, for a start, so that doesn't inspire confidence.

The 2021 census found that 0.1% of the over-16 population of E&W identify as TM and another 0.1% as TW. Perhaps surprisingly, almost all respondents answered the optional question on gender identity, so this should be an accurate number.

The usual annual homicide rate in England & Wales is about 700 per year (there were dips in Covid years), and 93% of those convicted of homicide are men, so men kill about 650 people each year. 35% of these are women - 228.

If 0.2% of the population is trans, and if they have the same homicide risk as women, you should see a homicide by a man once every 2 years.

If you're only thinking about transwomen, you should see a homicide by a man every 4 years.

Oh BTW my cousin who transitioned a couple of decades ago was violently assaulted in the street. They also have long term complications from their genital surgery. I'd say they are vulnerable in quite a few ways.

I do think trans people are at high risk of assault, in fact. I also think that violent transphobia exists. Imo it is pretty hard to pick apart from violent homophobia. Tbh that I assume is why so many people passionately assert that the LGB belong with the TQ+. In the same way that those who state TWAW do so at least partly because they believe both groups are at risk of male violence.

I personally don't wish to define 'woman' as 'person attacked by men'.

I do believe that there is a particularly nasty strain of almost punishment beating landed on transwomen by men - as if by refusing to 'act like men' they have let the male side down. I saw an appalling clip of a transwoman being beaten up by a group of men in the US and I would say the nature of the violence was different from what would have been done to a woman. Not private sexualised control, but almost proud public punishment of a sexual minority.

Thats what I hate about supposedly GC men (and women) saying 'if I see a TW going into a women's toilet with my child they will regret it' as about the last thing women need is violent men invading women's toilets with social permission to hit people.

Isn't this where we came in a few years back? Yes trans people are vulnerable to violence and sexist prejudice and we as women should have their backs on this because we know what it's like. I never thought that meant that transwomen ARE women, any more than I thought it meant gay men are women.

He said that if around 1% of the population are trans then at the same rate of murder of women you’d expect 0 to 1 trans murder per year so therefore in line.

But he initially said they were at 'greater' risk I'm not sure you can argue with someone who, as you said, invalidated their own point almost immediately.

As someone upthread said, and is always my go to when arguing with stupid, maybe instead of splitting hairs over 'who suffers more' or 'is at greater risk', both sides should be focusing their attention on the perpetrators. Who are women and transpeople afraid of violence from? Who commits 90% of violent crime?

Men, that's who. If, somehow, the problem of male violence was solved, this wouldn't even be an argument about who was at greater risk from men.

What is the point of all this endless unpicking of the marketing anyway?

If T people were at higher risk of violence than anyone else, then that's a bad thing and action needs to be taken regarding it.

None of that action requires sacrificing women's rights, child safeguarding and single sex spaces. That would be insane. It's not like something you can stuff on an altar and sacrifice to Judith Butler and watch the evil spirits disappear. And yet it is largely what the emotive mantras are designed to soften you into accepting. No. Fuck that. Protect trans people. And leave women's rights and equality alone. Two different things.

It's like the wailing about male people with T identities aren't safe in male prisons.

That's a valid problem, except it's all kinds of male prisoners and not a T related specific issue. Definitely something serious should be done about it.

No actions though necessitate putting any male prisoners in the women's estate. Because largely that's about a belief that some male people have a right to non consenting female bodies, which is insane.