Does it worry you that six WOMEN are convicted of rape?

[loveyouradvice]

Mail today..... about how far more sex crimes are being committed by women....including six rapes.

To commit rape you have to have a penis - that is the definition of rape (intentionally penetrating vagina, anus or mouth with his penis without consent)

So at least six of these crimes committed by women - and probably far more - have been committed by men who identify as women.....

This really worries me

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5465541/Record-number-women-convicted-sex-crimes-Britain.html

No, MrsMad those offences would count as sexual assault by penetration (and would carry the same sentence as rape) but would not be rape, legally speaking.

Rape under our law requires a penis. Therefore the 6 individuals in the Mail article must be in possession of a penis. (Feels like the opening of a dystopian re-write of Jane Austen).

It’s quite right, imagine if s babysitter had sex with your child, yes it’s child abuse, well imagine of a teacher had sex with your 16 year old son along with threats, that’s rape. I do get sick of the “men bad women good” agenda, it’s rubbish,

Totally totally wrong that men who have raped a woman or man with their penis, is now being reclassified as a woman who rapes with her penis.
Madness

At the moment 98% of convicted sex offenders in prison in the UK are male, and 2% are women. No-one's pushing a "men bad women good" agenda, but the figures are there in black and white, publicly available from government websites. Men carry out 50 times more sexual offences than women.

Yes, it is equally horrible for the victim, regardless of the sex of the perpetrator. But it nonetheless remains the case that men offend more. A lot more. (90% of those in prison for violent offences are men, too).

that when they transition, the level of their violence towards women is the same as mens (i.e. doesn't change - and is sometimes higher

That is completely untrue.

It is a common lie often repeated but that is completely untrue.

The conclusions from that survey have been discussed many times and it's clear that that statement is false.

No doubt you will link a quote - but then there is plenty of evidence from the author that goes into detail on that survey.

KingLouieCatz it's joint enterprise - the case you are thinking of is this one:

www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/mar/17/sarahhall

I am reporting this thread. Excusing sexual crimes commitef by wonen with transphobia is pretty fucking disgusting. Have a word with yourself.

@steff13 it says in the commencement provisions of any act whether it extends to the whole of the UK or just England and Wales. Not blaming you at all for not knowing, just saying in case you're interested for future reference!

@loveyouradvice sorry but that's bullshit. A statistically tiny number of rapes are committed by transwomen compared to those committed overall. And while obviously ANY rape is a horrific offence which must be taken with the utmost seriousness regardless of the gender of the perpetrator, the current definition of rape in England can only be doing a huge disservice to rape victims.

The law changed in Scotland specifically in response to campaigns from women (and men) who had been raped in ways which didn't involve a penis, and who felt that their experiences were marginalised, taken less seriously or even outright dismissed by prosecutors and the public at large. Many women in lesbian relationships who had been raped by their partners felt the law specifically excluded them. Women and men who had been raped with bottles, sex toys, fingers and any number of other implements felt that the law did not consider their ordeals to be significant.

There was a huge consensus that rape is a terrible crime because it is a total violation of consent and personhood - and that was true regardless of whether the implement which had been used was a penis or something else.

I know that trans-bashing is a full time occupation for a lot of MNers but in this instance you are throwing women under the bus and specifically Ignoring the views expressed by the majority of rape victims because of a fear of transwomen which is based on a statistically tiny number of cases. So yes, you can feel that transwomen who are rapists are scum. I feel that way too. But they aren't worse than any other kind of rapist and they certainly aren't a large enough group of people that your hysteria about them justifies making life harder for literally thousands of rape victims.

You are basically saying that you think having statistics to whole which percentage of rapists are transwomen is more important than the safety and wellbeing of thousands of rape victims.

but there are a significant number who are, especially sadly amongst autogynephiles

How do you know that it is a significant number?

How many trans people are there ? Clue - no one knows.

So how can you say it's a significant number?

I do wish people wouldn't talk about UK law when they mean English law. It's very arrogant and ignorant, and does people who need advice a complete disservice by perhaps giving them completely the wrong information. Get it right, it's not rocket science.

Did you mean England and Wales? [head tilt]

Are these figures from Scotland's crimes too or just England and Wales?
Seems weird to have a set of crime statistics where the crimes are different...

If it's just E+W then obviously transwomen are raping and being recorded as women.
This is total horseshit.

Any links sagamartha

As you asked:

transadvocate.com/fact-check-study-shows-transition-makes-trans-people-suicidal_n_15483.htm

It's an interview with the person who was lead author.

You can be convicted of rape if you don't have a penis. A woman who held another woman down to help a man rape can be found guilty of rape.

confusing, is this thread about trans or women who commit sexual assault which i believe has gone up

You can be convicted of rape if you don't have a penis. A woman who held another woman down to help a man rape can be found guilty of rape.

This. Google “joint enterprise”.

Scottish 2009 act - still requires a penis, albeit specifically encompasses surgically constructed penises.

So, a remarkable spike in women committing rape via common purpose (holding the victim down), or a remarkable spike in rape by post-operative transmen (born female), or a number of rapes committed by transwomen, or some mixture of all three. I guess we just have to try to work out what the likeliest scenario is.

Op you are jumping to conclusions:

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1225124.stm

*Between 1997 and last year a total of 14 women were charged with rape in London alone.

Opening the prosecution, Richard Whittam, had explained to the jury that although Marsh was female it was still perfectly possible to convict her of rape.

By holding her down "while the event was taking place", or simply "encouraging" the others while being prepared to lend a helping hand, she was just as guilty as the actual rapists.*

sagamartha
Can you give any further information on this please. According to info read on this website, Half the TIMs in jail are in for sex crimes. Do you refute this as well?

So based on that very old news report (2001), this wouldn't be a spike either.

Overall there seems to be a greater trend of men reporting crimes, which is a good thing. Women can and do commit sexual crimes.

But the 6 rape cases - if it is transwomen then this needs to be highlighted. Biological males claiming to be women to get an easier time in prison or to get access to women is not ok. If the 6 cases aren't transwomen, then it's very different.

I can't find a link breaking down the stats anywhere; can anyone else?

wijjy beat me to it, I was going to say I think a woman can be convicted of rape if she participates in the crime. It's not just the penis-owner that's guilty of a rape, it's anyone who helps facilitate it. (I think, not a lawyer.)

Technically, a woman could be convicted of rape in England & Wales, but by joint enterprise (their action directly enabled a man to rape, eg. by holding the victim down). This has happened at least once.

www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/mar/17/sarahhall

Thank you Hairy .
'At the moment 98% of convicted sex offenders in prison in the UK are male, and 2% are women'
So am l right in thinking that the 2% of women has included the ppl who have transitioned from men to women?
Therefore the % of women who are convicted sex offenders (born as women and not transitioned) is less than %2 ?
It does give one food for thought.

I am a very slow typer.....