to think it is CRIMINAL to describe male rapists as women

[DickToPhone]

WTF?

www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/truth-female-sex-offenders/

The article starts:

"Last night, Crimewatch covered the case of Lisa Hauxwell: a sex offender who could be living as a either man or a woman. On the run from a 14-year prison sentence, the offender has not been seen since being convicted of a string of rapes and sexual assaults committed between 2001-2002.

It has become, sadly, typical to hear of appeals for information on male sex offenders - yet when the perpetrator is female, it always seems much more shocking. "

But the perpetrator was not female! Women CANNOT rape. It's a physical and legal impossibility. Therefore - conclusively - the offender was a male.

To compound matters, they couldn't find this evil fucker for a year because the police were more bothered tying themselves up in knots humouring a RAPIST and his silly games then actually trying to catch a dangerous sex criminal.

Last year:

www.itv.com/news/calendar/update/2016-04-14/fresh-appeal-to-trace-missing-leeds-woman/

"Lisa Lacey, aged 47, who also uses the name Lisa Hauxwell and Lisa Hauxley, was last seen at about 9pm on Sunday, April 3, at her home in Holbeck."

"Detectives say she has also been known to use a male identity under the name Craig John Hauxwell. A photograph of Lisa as Craig has also been issued as part of the appeal to trace her."

They then further compounded

www.derbyshiretimes.co.uk/news/missing-woman-dressed-as-man-seen-in-dronfield-1-7873949

"POLICE hunting for a missing woman said she had been spotted in a Derbyshire shop - with the footage appearing to show her dressed as a man."

And:

www.facebook.com/westyorkshirepolice/posts/10154129801369920

They apparently managed to tell 'Gay Star News' that he was genetically male: www.gaystarnews.com/article/police-help-missing-trans-woman/

But not any mainstream source www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-36123487

AIBU to wonder why the police were sharing this apparent 'vulnerable woman goes missing' story when he was in fact a dangerous MALE rapist? And to think that he wasn't a very good example for a story about how shocking female sex offenders are? Man rapes people, police describe him as woman, today found & living as a man (although I'm not sure how you tell? are we saying that you are a woman based on dress, hair cut, what?) www.sunderlandecho.com/news/crime/convicted-sex-offender-who-lives-as-a-man-and-woman-is-traced-after-tv-appeal-1-8427467

Suddenly based, presumably, on his clothes & haircut, the police are happy to say "We understand Hauxwell had been living at the address in Newark for several months, without anyone knowing his true identity." WTF is this shit? How have they determined that his gender identity is now male? Did they ask him whether despite 'presenting as a man' (whatever the fuck that means) he in fact 'identifies as a woman'? Perhaps he was 'dressing as a man' because the stupid police were insisting he was a woman, so this made it easier to evade capture? Who are we to presume that his femaleness is negated by his 'presenting as a man'? If a woman presents as a man for subterfuge does that means she is no longer a woman?

Women are raped and MURDERED too. Women fear death when they are being raped by men. Did your friend fear for his life during his assault? Do your stats tell you how many female 'rapists' murder their male victims?

Oh I know it's mostly a female issue, don't get me wrong. I am a woman myself, not a man jumping on the bangwagon shouting that men have it just as bad. When it comes to sexual assault, it's a no brainer that it is usually a female victim and male perpetrator. It's a sickening, global problem. Women aren't just as guilty as men, I've never said that. A crime against men is certainly no worse, nor should one case be given more publicity than one female rape case (which, of course, there are millions).

My point was the use of the word 'rape' itself and how the UK should follow America (and apparently Norway) in charging either guilty sex with rape. It's the whole, 'women can't possibly be rapists, they don't have a penis) which irks me, even though I now know that this is UK law.

It may irk you but as it stands its the truth as far as the uk is concerned. Maybe if female-male rapes were in the same number that male-female rapes are then the law would be changed. Who knows.

My point was the use of the word 'rape' itself and how the UK should follow America (and apparently Norway) in charging either guilty sex with rape

Actually rape in the US varies from state to state, so there is no universal law. Also, Norway has been criticised by Amnesty International for having unduly lenient rape and sexual abuse laws, including usually prohibiting the naming of a convicted rapist. It also requires rape to be accompanied by violence, which is very backward-thinking and archaic. I therefore would not really be seeking to emulate them if what you are looking for is harsher punishments for abusers of either sex.

www.tnp.no/norway/panorama/4838-amnesty-international-criticizes-norway-for-handling-sexual-abuse

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1225124.stm
looks as if they can and as i have said before acts of parliaments do not define words dictionaries do

Actually, yellow, that is 'aiding and abetting' rape, not the act itself. Journos aren't the best at getting the law spot on.

acts of parliaments do not define words

they most certainly do define words on a frequent basis, but where they do not, the ordinary meaning of the word should be used.

My point was the use of the word 'rape' itself and how the UK should follow America (and apparently Norway) in charging either guilty sex with rape. It's the whole, 'women can't possibly be rapists, they don't have a penis) which irks me, even though I now know that this is UK law.

Men who rape women with their penises do not only traumatize them psychologically, they are also doing very, very heavy physical damage by putting their victim at risk for pregnancy, with all that entails. Also, much higher risk for STD transmission than if a woman sexually assaults a man.

I think it is only fair that the difference in the harm done is acknowledged.

Since the UK punishes sexual assault without a penis the same as rape, I don't see a problem there. Makes it easier to tell when we are being told nonsense about the identity of a rapist, if nothing else.

I'm local to Newton Aycliffe and knew nothing about the rape convictions and assaults on teenage girls. People I've spoke to form here and aycliffe knew nothing about it either I've been talking about this with dh earlier and he's reads all the local papers etc everyday and he had said he remembered reading about Lisa in some local article a while back, the article was a local woman gone missing type thing, he remembers clicking link to police face book appeal at the time and the police posted than they had decided to reveal that Lisa is/was also Craig in the hopes it might jog memories and help and showed a photo of Lisa, presenting as male from a sighting after his disappearance presenting as a man.

It was presented in a way that led people to believe a local vulnerable woman had gone missing, rather than on the run to avoid going to jail for raping and assaulting teenage girls.

I've been trying to go through local articles etc from the time of the attacks and conviction and can't seem to find anything other than the vulnerable missing woman stuff, usually local papers are good at reporting local crime, but even in cases where papers can't report certain stuff for legal reasons, locals on Facebook still discuss it and share "help us find this person, they raped and assaulted teenage girls and have gone in the run" or "look out for this bloke, he attacked so and so and ran off etc" but everyone I know knew nothing about the rapes and assault on teenage girls until yesterday when crime watch was mentioned.

It was very much a male Craig who raped and assaulted teenage girls, I know his victims will be adults now but it must still be just as difficult for them reading and watching articles and attitudes that a) centre their attackers wellbeing rather than the victims, b) present the situation as something very very different which enables their attacker to avoid justice and potentially rape and assault other teenagers.

Those teenage girls were raped and assaulted by a man presenting as man, to say it was carried out by a woman is massively offensive and contradicts what the girls experienced. I truly hope that his victims are able to seek support and be able to speak freely of what they experienced without being pressured to feel the need to alter the facts in case they are accused of transphobia or whatever.

I'm please they have caught him but I'm worried that he will be placed in a woman's facility. I dint know how it works but I read that he will be handed to Durham police in "due course" why hasn't he been sent straight to the men's prison to start his sentence? He's was living as a man when he commited the crime and was living as a man when they captured him, he should be locked up with men. It's crazy to think there's a possibility a rapist could be locked in a cell with a woman who can't get away, but it wouldn't surprise me at all.

Im surprised it hasn't been claimed that Lisa is only pretending to be trans as has often happened when posts of transwomen accessing women spaces and harming them have been discussed before.

The telegraph had used Lisa's case to highlight that most sexual offences are carried out by men it shoudlnt be ignored that transwomen rape and commit sexual offences too it would go down like a lead ballon.

Lisa and Katie's crimes are being used to demonstrate that women's sexual offending is on the rise. If they were used to demonstrate that trans women's sexual offending is on the rise, in particular in the North East there'd be accusations of scaremongering and bigotry etc.

Maybe crimes should be recorded as man/woman transman/transwoman? It would be interesting to see the comparisons between the number of sexual crimes carried out by women to those carried out by trans women. I agree that women committing sexual offences should not be ignored and is a serious issue, but I also think that sexual offences committed by transwomen and transmen is a serious issue and should not be ignored either.

Screw like I said I say I was raped by my mother, the word rape carries more emotional force than sexual assault imo and I choose to use it. But I accept that legaly she didn't not rape me. And while her rape of me was much more truamatic and damaging for so many reasons that should be obvious it could never have carried the physical and mental risk of pregnancy or std/i's that the rapes I suffered from men so I accept the need for a different legal term.

Since we're down this rabbit hole where a man can put on a dress and claim himself to be a woman, I'm in no rush to have the E&W legal definition of rape rewritten to include female perpetrators. Currently at least I know that if someone has been charged or convicted with the specific offence of rape, that person is a man - and a violent man at that - regardless of whether he is now calling himself Susan and decking himself out in a darling little pink skirt suit.

When society at large wakes up from this fallacy that a man can get up one morning and decide that on Tuesdays when he goes swimming he fancies being a woman complete with beard, hairy bollocks and all, and reaffirms what we know to be a biological fact - that an adult human with a penis is a man - then I might support any move to make rape an offence capable of being carried out by either sex. Not before.

Page
Good post. Thoroughly agree. We should not be afraid or allow ourselves to be silenced on the matter.

We need to get definition of rape changed to be something akin to 'sex with someone without consent'. Its irrelevant what the gender of the perpetrator is.

I have a male friend who (a decade ago) was raped by a (biological) woman. It started with domestic abuse. He had a mental break down during the relationship and another several years after it. He was never able to have another relationship or recover and is now just waiting to die. Very sad.

A big part of the problem was that no one believed it was even possible for a woman to rape man. And even if he reported it, the law says its impossible for a woman to rape a man. His male friends were just incredulous, he got no support whatsoever.

I fully expect to hear he has committed suicide at some point.

What does it matter it matter the gender, No means NO? I guess not.

A big part of the problem was that no one believed it was even possible for a woman to rape man. And even if he reported it, the law says its impossible for a woman to rape a man. His male friends were just incredulous, he got no support whatsoever.

That society is slow to accept that men can be victims of domestic and sexual abuse, and the fact that rape is defined as requiring a penis, are two entirely separate issues. And it has already been explained on this thread why sex is relevant. Women can, for example, get pregnant from rape. You're right, though, that gender is irrelevant. Susan with a penis who likes to wear dresses can get a woman pregnant by raping her as much as the next male.

Women can, for example, get pregnant from rape

Umm yea, duh! So that obviously means raping a man should be lessor offence?

When did 'no means no' become: no only means no if there is a possibility you get your victim pregnant?

The TRA agenda will make it harder for men who are abused/assaulted by women to come forward, because it is perpetuating the bullshit gender stereotypes that women are soft and feminine and weak and decorative and men are rough and macho and strong and practical.

A woman convicted of sexual assault on a man is subject to the same sentencing guidelines as a man who rapes a woman. There is no distinction in severity.

Umm yea, duh! So that obviously means raping a man should be lessor offence?

When did 'no means no' become: no only means no if there is a possibility you get your victim pregnant?

You seem confused.

Sexual assault is not a lesser offence. It is a different offence. It can carry the same sentence as rape.

The concept of consent does not vary between the sexes.

A woman convicted of sexual assault on a man is subject to the same sentencing guidelines as a man who rapes a woman. There is no distinction in severity.

But there is in society. And that does make a difference, which is reflected in the legal system. Which affects people in real life.

Words mean something.

The concept of consent does not vary between the sexes

So why is it not the same offence?

Its the same crime, what does it have to do with the gender of the victim?

But there is in society. And that does make a difference, which is reflected in the legal system. Which affects people in real life.

Words mean something.

Can you clarify what your words mean? I'm struggling to work out your argument. Are you saying that people generally consider 'rape' to mean 'making another person have sex', and that this affects the legal system somehow?

So why is it not the same offence?

Its the same crime, what does it have to do with the gender of the victim?

It's not the same crime. One involves penetration of the victim with a penis. As explained multiple times. It also has absolutely nothing to do with the gender of the victim. Or the sex of the victim. Or the gender of the perpetrator. It does have something to do with the sex of the perpetrator, given that a certain sex does not possess a penis.

Are you saying that people generally consider 'rape' to mean 'making another person have sex'

I am saying that everyone I know considers that rape means having sex with someone who hasn't consented. Never met anyone who brings up the legal definition. Even TV ads have said this.

I am saying that everyone I know considers that rape means having sex with someone who hasn't consented. Never met anyone who brings up the legal definition. Even TV ads have said this.

I don't think I've ever met anyone who has brought up the topic of men being forced to have sex by a woman. Interesting conversations you have.

It's not the same crime. One involves penetration of the victim with a penis

Murder is murder is murder is murder. And rape is rape is rape. We don't differentiate the crime into, domestic abuse murder, murder by penis, murder by neglect, murder by disagreement. Its all murder.

Same with rape. Its ALL rape. What difference does it make what gender the aggressor is?

I don't think I've ever met anyone who has brought up the topic of men being forced to have sex by a woman

Yes I get that but I have. Why does that mean it shouldn't be an equal crime?