BBC News does not inform readers cat killer and murderer Scarlett Blake is transgender in this article. I intend to complain to ofcom. These are not our crimes.

I don’t know why this article made my head spin. Perhaps it is because such an article should never need to be written. How have these delusions been crowbarred into the foundations and fabric of society? How can our democracy and our norms be so vulnerable to this deliberate corrosion?

Does anyone remember that some mad TRA adjacent academic wrote an article in the Telegraph about how "female violent crimes were becoming more common" and this included and was illustrated with a picture of an MTF? Called Lisa Hauxwell or something.

Alex Massie in the Times has written a good Comment piece which pulls a few threads together

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/scarlet-blake-case-shows-we-need-a-serious-conversation-about-truth-nfc999xpp

https://archive.ph/JaTK7

Use the archive link to jump the paywall

It just all adds to the very dangerous 'cloak and dagger' element of this whole issue.

People with dishonourable intentions 'hiding' in plain sight. As we always said would happen. Largely unquestioned and in the main, enabled by society in the name of Be Kind.

If you look at the date that came out, Monday, it was the day of the sentencing of Scarlet Blake. Great timing.

The Guardian has helpfully been reporting that more women may be psychopaths than previously thought. I wonder if it has crossed their minds that reporting male psychopath crimes as women’s might be relevant here?
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/feb/26/more-women-may-be-psychopaths-than-previously-thought-says-expert?CMP=twt_gu&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium#Echobox=1708960949

@Gettingmadderallthetime One of the best posts I have read on MN in some time.

Yes, you write your own self declaration, and get it countersigned by the same type of person as you do for any first passport application.

So you rock up in a skirt, or with a bit of lippy, or skip the barbers for a few weeks, with a letter from an obliging nonentity, and you're good to go.

It's not like people who would be prepared to lie about one thing would have scruples against lying about anything else.

The "Cross Dresser" process

Crossdressers
We can only issue a passport if it’s established the customer is using their new identity for all purposes. You, the examiner, must not issue a passport in a name a customer uses for some but not all purposes.

If the customer cannot provide medical evidence, they must make a statement confirming they permanently use the preferred identity. They must also have a countersignatory or digital referee confirm their new identity and send us evidence if they have changed their name (see Names - evidence to change a name)

You must scan the customers signed statement that confirms they use the preferred identity on to the application (see gender recognition: scanning supporting documents)

www.gov.uk/government/publications/gender-recognition/gender-recognition-accessible

They're implying that Blake's GRC should be presented to the court.

Not if you go down the "cross dresser" route, they'll accept a signed declaration countersigned by your bank manager etc in the same way as getting any other passport.

And that's not what they meant anyway, or just the passport in a lady name with an F should suffice, which he probably has.

I think they're half right.

You do need documents, detailed here https://www.gov.uk/changing-passport-information/gender#:~:text=Other%20name%20changes-,Gender%20change,is%20likely%20to%20be%20permanent

We've no way of knowing. It might be that the poor victim had bought the 'transwomen are women' lie and misjudged the risk.

A victim who, drunk as he was, may not have clocked Blake’s sex.

Blake was also wearing a hooded coat and a Covid mask.

The Telegraph needs to get their facts straight. You do not need "gender recognition documents" to get a wrong sex passport.

”(even if - see Miller - there have been cases where the transID made the victim more willing to go along with the accused)”

I don’t know if this came up at Blake’s trial, but presumably he was presenting as femininely as he could manage when he met his victim. A victim who, drunk as he was, may not have clocked Blake’s sex.

Even when very drunk, most men would be wary of another ‘civvy’ man offering assistance (sadly). Or at least more wary than of someone who appeared to be a woman.

There are a few threads about Blake, so I wasn't sure where to post this. Anyway

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2024/02/28/gender-injustice/

https://archive.ph/dmMJB

I'll spare the Telegraph's blushes...🤔...no I won't. The Telegraph was a bad as any other news platform and, I notice, they're careful in this Comment piece not to use any pronouns about Blake unless quoting another source. I also don't agree with the conclusion. No paperwork can make a man a woman, even if he has had all the surgeries. Also, the draconian secrecy clause in the GRA makes it impossible to know who has a GRC and dangerous to even speculate.

Emma Barnett will be a sad loss to WH but I'm glad she will be able to expose this shit show to a much wider audience when she joins the Today programme.

Well they've inadvertently proved us right, that wrong sex pronouns are not just common courtesy. They have the power to stop even really intelligent journalists from being able to clearly understand issues.

ITV This Morning talking about this - calling him a she and (unless I missed it as didn't see the beginning) not mention of transgender?

Yvette Cooper waffling on about difference between biological sex and gender. Also said something like 'I believe there was a gender recognition process in this case'. Several direct and indirect references to the GRA.

Ooh, Emma Barnett asking Yvette Cooper on WH right now about how this crime will be recorded.

I'm sure that if the powers that be decided to label all female crime as trans crime there would be a fuss.