To think this person should be in jail?

[FerdinandsMassiveBollocks]

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/female-transsexual-walks-free-court-8546941

Anyone else not comfortable with this being counted as a crime committed by a woman? And really not comfortable with this person not going to jail? I don't care if there are no female specific classes, (there is a reason for that btw, because women don't do this shit) this person was male enough to commit the crime they are male enough to go to men's prison.

Not everyone accepts that gender is a thing that can be changed. Lots of people agree with the World Health Authority that gender is the "feminine" or "masculine" social constructs that are enforced in people based on their biological sex.

I think that the experience of gender dysphoria is a mitigating context for the crime

Why, logosthecat?

If you're talking about the WHO's ICD, that was last revised in the 80s (I think) and it shows for all kinds of things- not just transgender issues! I believe they are revising it for 2018 and removing the references to transgender as a mental illness. So you don't 'agree with the WHO', you agree with an outdated classification document from 30 years ago!

The key thing here with prison, even for people who think that gender is an innate thing and not a social construct, is whether prisons should be sex segregated or gender segregated. Even for people who think gender is innate, that's no reason to prioritise gender segregation over sex segregation. Sex segregation has all kinds of benefits (including the very real risk of pregnancy) that gender segregation doesn't take account of.

(But this convicted child abuser isn't going to any prison at all.)

If you look at the bottom of the page, there's an article about a woman being sentenced to seven years for sex crimes where her outlandish appeals for leniency are rightfully mocked. Hmm.

I think gender dysphoria is a mitigating circumstance in the same way that any other human misery is - bereavement, severe depression, mania. These things are not 'excuses', and they shouldn't carry that much weight in affecting sentencing while people are still able to make decisions, but they are a part of the context, and surely we'd want the defence to raise them? That is, after all, what due process is about - understanding the unique features of a crime in their complexity, and coming up with a just response. In this case, if tabloid reports are correct (big if), it looks like the response falls considerably short of justice. But this seems to be precisely because the prison system fails to deal adequately with transsexual people. Because there aren't the right programmes in place in a prison for women, she hasn't been given the rehab a man would have received. This needs to change! There are female sexual offenders out there, and we need to make sure the system is adequately funded to sort them out. The last thing we all want is these people being released without the proper treatment.

My vitriol against this piece of scum, has got nothing at all to do with what gender they were/are. It has everything to do with their dispicable crime.

2% of sexual crimes is committed by women

That statistic is unlikely to be accurate in terms of actual offenders as opposed to convictions. The current definition of rape is gender specific - the offender must possess a penis. Various studies show that a proportion of women admit to forcing men to have sex with them but, as the law stands, this is not rape. Research suggests that men are less likely to report sexual assaults than women, particularly where the perpetrator is a woman. There is also some evidence that women are less likely to report sexual assaults by women than sexual assaults by men. We know that over 15% of sexual offences against children under the age of 6 are committed by women. The idea that "women don't do this shit" is rubbish.

I am surprised at the judge's statement that courses for sex offenders are only available for men. I do not believe that is correct.

Looking at the sentencing guidelines for this offence, it is difficult to be certain but the descriptions in the press suggest this was a category 2 offence for which the sentencing range is high level community order to 1 years' custody with the starting point being 26 weeks custody. The judge should then look at factors that increase culpability (of which there are at least two in this case - abuse of trust and the large age gap between victim and perpetrator) and take into account aggravating and mitigating factors before determining the sentence. As she pleaded guilty "at the door of the court" the sentence would be reduced by 10%. Note that any custodial sentence would probably have been suspended as this appears to be a first offence and the sentence would have been less than 2 years.

Without having seen all the evidence it is impossible to know what aggravating and mitigating factors were present. However, judges should only go outside the sentencing guidelines in exceptional cases. Personally I do not believe there is anything in this case to justify going outside the guidelines.

Overall I think she has been very lucky. It would not surprise me if the sentence is appealed.

Not thinking people should be separated by 'brain gender' makes me a bigot?

Separating sexually dimorphic people by sex to avoid unwanted pregnancy and assault is logical.

Brain gender is unimportant. You could just as easily say really camp men and butch women need to be separated then, which would be totally ridiculous

"Judge Ticehurst said he was faced with a difficult decision when he came to sentencing.

He said: "There is no doubt that these offences were very serious.

"The victim who was exposed to your behaviour would have suffered some trauma.

"The problem is that I am afraid that a community order could put you in the path of abuse, and all of the courses run for sexual offenders are only available to men.

"I do not feel that either of those routes would be suitable for your particular circumstances."

Unbelievable.

Sexual assault, not rape. No one said 2% of rape.

Women are also more likely than men to go down for first arrests and commit far less violent crime

FWIW it is also a statistic cited in other countries. The truth of the matter is that most people don't know anyone who was assaulted by a woman. I know many by men.

prh47 - thanks for that well-informed post. So, in your opinion, the sentence is lenient according to the guidelines for cat 2 offences?

I think, bizarrely, a thread that started with some pretty nasty transphobia has revealed something of an issue about women being treated equally in the prison system. We don't speak, as a society, about female paedophilia much. Perhaps because of motherhood, it is regarded as too 'monstrous' almost for discourse- and yet it happens. Offences by women need to be seen equally with those of men: equal culpability, but equal access to rehabilitation programmes as well. I am shocked that these are not available for female sexual offenders in prisons. I'm also shocked that a community order couldn't be carried out in a safe way. However, I do realise that the prison system is chronically underfunded, and this is probably one of thousands of things that ought to be happening that isn't.

Transphobic remarks and hate are never justified, no matter how awful a particular individual transsexual's behaviour might be. Generalising from one individual to an entire group is hateful.

I don't believe anyone is though? Saying you believe a penis is male something we have been taught in biology or school or by our parents since day one is not the same as disregarding someone's feelings about the way they choose to dress or what name they want to be called.

No one has said "All transwomen.."

No, Annie. Same person, same culpability. Different gender

SAME. SEX.

No, Annie. Same person, same culpability. Different gender.

BOLLOCKS

Even trans people believe they were "misassigned" so they were always the same "gender".

No one believes you can change gender (or sex).

YANBU - this was a crime committed by a man, and should have been prosecuted thus.

This person should be in prison. She is a transwoman, not a woman. You can't change your innate biology, however much you wish it.

I think which prison she should be in depends on whether she's had full reassignment surgery or not. If someone is still male bodied with a penis then they should be in a male prison. If they have had surgery and no longer have a penis they could be accommodated in a female prison, as the risk they pose to women is lowered (not eradicated I know, but lowered).