TW who supports the SC ruling - AMA

Exactly.

Respectfully, I do not believe that either of us know for sure. You have the advantage of closeness to the issue, but given the issue is you, you are maybe too close.

Mental health practitioners of all sorts appear to me to be deeply flawed due to bias, and they are practicing something which seems to be art s much as science.

And that is before we get to my issue which is that aside from things like pinning back ears or reducing the size of a very large nose or skin grafts to hide a facial scar, all surgery should be for medical issues. I do not accept that there is evidence that BIID should be treated with amputation, and no evidence that GD that leads to surgery or hormones is anything other than Sex Specific BIID under a different name.

And even if surgeries were categorically statistically seen to benefit the mental health of an individual we still need to consider whether the financial and other costs to society are worth the price.

As far as I am concerned truth will always matter and truth must always win. I simply do not believe that individuals or society benefits in the mid to long term by lies.

Unfortunately the moderate voices always get shouted down.

No one thinks that fertility is the definition of sex. Otherwise children and women past the menopause would be sexless.

What this conversation shows is how often the trans argument is linguistic. They are changing the definition of words to fit their world view, not using language to clearly articulate their position.

They claim we can't say women are of the sex that becomes pregnant because some women cannot become pregnant. But they are changing 'can become' from potentially to definitely.

Similarly the discussions around trans in general is hard because they refuse to define and jump to different groups when it suits. Trans is an identity, a diagnosis of GD, a GRC or surgery and hormonal treatment at any given time.

As a fellow infertile woman I hear you and I would also say that the only ppl who have ever tried to equate my infertility with not being a woman are TRA.

so much be kind/RSOH

This Swedish cohort study by Dhejne et al. (2011) followed a population of individuals who had undergone surgical and legal sex reassignment involving hormonal and surgical treatment between 1973 and 2003 (324 in total) and compared them to a matched control group of their birth sex.

Not the current definition of trans, and not the requirements to get a GRC.

What it interesting is that even with surgery and hormonal treatment, the rates of offending is the same as all other men.

Trans rights organisations really do need to get their houses in order. They have allowed themselves to be taken over by an aggressive, vocal minority.

I see parallels with the way the Labour Party allowed itself to be taken over by Momentum.

Perhaps there is simply a population of aggressive, vocal people who are constantly on the look out for a new cause to shout about.

One consolation is that we all know that these TRA types are so illogical, ill-informed, nasty and cruel tht we rally can pretty much ignore them 100%

Fuck right off with this shit. You do NOT get to weaponise my trauma as an infertile woman as a gotcha. stop it now. How dare you? How do you have the audacity to claim anyone thinks a an infertile woman is not a woman. If I wasn’t a woman, I wouldn’t have cared about not being pregnant, cried every time my period came or put myself through frankly humiliating and invasive tests and treatments. Go away and boil your head.

Perhaps people with transgender identities need to start a campaign of ‘not our crimes’ and start sorting the data like feminist groups started doing. But as mentioned, to do that the group collating the data will have to define who is transgender for the purposes of data collection. Therein lays the issue that may well prevent the campaign even starting.

Jamie is pointing out the phenomenon that has been recorded in the UK but also I believe in other countries. If you want a study done, I would start campaigning for one to be done. I believe many feminists would support an independent study being done to find accurate rates of offending.

However, we can only work with what we have. Just like the current spikes in female sex crime statistics which when I last looked, was showing a significant trajectory and we should be fucking worried that female people are now committing sex crimes like never before… or it could be that some of those female people are not female at all! Just like the census data inaccuracy.

Please don’t complain to feminists about us having to use what data we have and the conclusions that data highlights.

Yes the best thing the trans lobby could do for men who are struggling with dysphoria to the extent that leads to surgery (though baring in mind Ritchie Heron was classed as such) is to actively state that the diagnosis and social status has been hijacked by predators and fetishists. Also support the SR ruling as it’s the myth that men are actually women and must be ‘treated’ as such that’s created this situation.

i still don’t know how you’d tell them apart though.

I don't make the rules. I never said TWAW. I never said "believe everyone when they tell you who they are".

By TRAs rules a man who only comes out as trans after being convicted is just as trans as any others.

If someone wishes to gatekeep transness, then I am willing to believe that the numbers can be brought down. Like if we gatekeeped transness there would be fewer men in women's spaces.

Either way it is absolutely clear that "real trans" (potentially offending at close to normal male rates) and "predatory pretenders" are impossible to tell apart.

Absolutely, I completely agree with you. Studies have convincingly showed trans women have the same rate of offence as other males.

I was disagreeing with @JamieCannister saying that trans women have a higher rate of sex offence than males. That's not proven anywhere that I know of. Happy to be convinced though, I strongly do believe the truth is important.

I was about to say that if the same study was done now that I think people might be surprised at the findings.

No statistics are not a pain.

What the prison stats show very clearly is that male criminality patterns continue. Because the statistics of prisoners show that male people with transgender identities in no way have anything close to the rate of sex offences that female people have. And for strong safeguarding principles, that is the risk that should be considered.

Are male people with a transgender identity committing similar crimes and at the same rate or lower than female people to be treated as if they were female people in strong safeguarding measures? If not, then they should not be treated as exempt from the same principles applied to all other male people.

the Swedish study is likely out of date now though.

Given the rate of sissy porn use now, trans women stating publicly that sissy porn made me trans, WPATH advisors running a fetish website with stories about horrifically linked things, and 30% containing child abuse fantasies there will be higher rates of offending amongst this group of males

Right exactly, so that statistic doesn't imply your statement then.

The Swedish study selected a group of trans women, and non-trans male and female controls, and THEN tracked their criminality. Thus it's a fair comparison and the TWs end up being typically male.

If instead you select prisoners and quantify whether or not they're trans, you're potentially measuring the opposite effect: i.e. the likelihood that being arrested triggers someone to transition. I personally believe that trigger rate is quite high, but a proper study would need to be done to confirm.

Statistics are a pain!

This is the problem the TRAs have created for themselves; is it a true stat or is it rapid onset prison dysphoria

I believe it comes from current UK conviction rates and prisoner rates and their crimes and past crime history. I have links but I don’t want to add the information here as it could be seen as a derail as per previous discussion.

But there are ministry of justice figures released to the public from FOI requests that break the numbers down.

you can start with my post on this link 11/5:2025 at 22.03

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5332931-why-dont-trans-women-care-if-women-feel-unsafe?reply=144215189&utm_campaign=reply&utm_medium=share

I think it’s base on prison data

@JamieCannister
The answer is that men are 20 times more sexually abusive than women and men who identify as trans are 4 or 5 times more sexually abusie than other men.
Sorry to ask, but what is the receipt for the stat about trans women being more sexually abusive than men. The Swedish study said the rate of offence was the same as the male controls. The stat I've seen that you could be referring to is the fact that a higher percentage of the trans woman prison population are incarcerated for sexual abuse than male controls, but this is not the same stat, and doesn't necessarily imply the statement you made. Especially given the shockingly common phenomena of male prisoners transition after being arrested for a sex crime.

I'm happy to believe good studies; the Swedish study is convincing about the rate of offence being the same as male controls, but we should be careful about over-interpreting statistics.