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

The legal definition of rape has been changed, it now no longer means penetration by a penis alone.

that should be universal, bloody disgrace it's not and we have been backwards for so long.

Half the TIMs in jail are in for sex crimes. Do you refute this as well

I don't want to derail the thread but I would suggest that not all the statistics given by activists on here - or on other sites are actual truth. People bend statistics, cherry pick them and the reality is often more complex than the conclusions they draw - but they are repeated often and are used to help fuel an agenda.

So presumably the chances of running into one of these six people in a changing room somewhere is vanishingly unlikely.

sagamartha it might help if you were able to give some actual stats on here from reputable sources.....

I do agree there is a paucity of evidence but what there is is pretty terrifying to both women and non-violent transwomen

I have a question - say a woman drugs a man, forces him to take Viagra, ties him up ect... and then has sex with him (without his consent) wouldn't that be the woman raping the man?

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

sagamartha
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.

I went to the original study and it is clear that is what it states. The early group who transitioned had higher offending rates but the in the later group offending rates were unchanged. It was thought to be due to better counselling and understanding, amongst other things.

The author did an interview later with a pro-trans group and they have cut and pasted from that interview into the article you refer to. There is a section where the author appears to contradict the clear statements in the original paper, but given the cut and paste job we can't be clear the author is being fully and honestly represented.

Also the interviewer asks the author to comment on a number of claims about the study and when the author says the study has been misrepresented, she talks about the fact that they didn't look at the types of offences committed (some people claimed the study referred to sex offending).

I think the study has been misrepresented on some points, but not in relation to the basic finding of offending rates remaining the same. The author certainly hasn't published any addendum to her study indicating any part of it is incorrect.

it might help if you were able to give some actual stats on here from reputable sources

You are the person who gave the statistics - I am showing you the interview with the author of that study who explained why the conclusion you drew is wrong.

Something else that might be an issue - I totally agree that that it's an issue about saying 'women' and 'men' - and how you can't differentiate. I do believe there are trans people who do decide to 'transition' in jail - for a variety of reasons. The statistics don't even reflect the status they were when they committed the crime. When was the crime committed relative to the transition?

I don't know if the Home Office collect such data.

I went to the original study and it is clear that is what it states

It DOES NOT mention violence towards women.

The author did an interview later with a pro-trans group and they have cut and pasted from that interview into the article you refer to. There is a section where the author appears to contradict the clear statements in the original paper, but given the cut and paste job we can't be clear the author is being fully and honestly represented

It's on Reddit

www.reddit.com/user/Cecilia_Dhejne_Helmy

sagamartha it might help if you were able to give some actual stats on here from reputable sources..... Slightly ironic considering that you have started a thread based on the DM as your source which doesn't even specify what the figures refer to - (England and Wales? UK? Something else?) and conclude that 6 rapes have been commited by men who identify as women despite this not being mentioned in your source at all!

I've reported this thread. Some of the comments on here would be considered completely unacceptable if they were referring to people with any other protected characteristic apart from transgenderism. If @MNHQ let it stand I can't see how it would be anything other than complete hypocrisy.

But hey - maybe there should be another study.

Because it would stop people repeatedly posting such stuff. Looking at trans people and crime. Offending rates. A properly controlled study comparing people from similar backgrounds etc - so the only difference was whether they were trans or not. Oh - and clear definition of trans.

Sirlee66 no that would be sexual assault. Rape specifically relates to penetration (by a penis in the UK) without consent, not sex without consent.
Rape and sexual assault are subject to the same sentencing tariff and are regarded as potentially equal offences.

Can you explain where I’ve misunderstood

Violent crimes against women?

That's what the OP said.

This is the interview.

Dhejne: The individual in the image who is making claims about trans criminality, specifically rape likelihood, is misrepresenting the study findings The study as a whole covers the period between 1973 and 2003. If one divides the cohort into two groups, 1973 to 1988 and 1989 to 2003, one observes that for the latter group (1989 – 2003), differences in mortality, suicide attempts and crime disappear. This means that for the 1989 to 2003 group, we did not find a male pattern of criminality

sagamartha
If their overall offending rates remain the same, then unless you are suggesting that transwomen start committing other crimes at an increased rate, the logical conclusion is that they commit violent offences, including violent offences against women, at the same rate as pre-transition.

It is true that the study did not specifically look at offences against women.

If their overall offending rates remain the same

Except it doesn't...

"What we were saying was that for the 1973 to 1988 cohort group and the cisgender male group, both experienced similar rates of convictions. As I said, this pattern is not observed in the 1989 to 2003 cohort group"

Because:

The difference we observed between the 1989 to 2003 cohort and the control group is that the trans cohort group accessed more mental health care, which is appropriate given the level of ongoing discrimination the group faces. What the data tells us is that things are getting measurably better and the issues we found affecting the 1973 to 1988 cohort group likely reflects a time when trans health and psychological care was less effective and social stigma was far worse

That was the cut and paste interview. It is pretty basic academic practice to look at original sources if there is a conflict. The original paper is the author's words, unadulterated by any party with an agenda.

I worked on a children's helpline for many years. Although any child abuse is dreadful, it truly shocked me the amount of women abusing their children. Penetration was not always with a penis, but whether it is referred to as rape or sexual assault is not something to focus on. If somebody is sexually violated, they are sexually violated.

I will try and post from the original paper, but I really need to be somewhere else, so it may be later.

We know that Buxtonstill. We're talking about legal terms. Of course there has to be a distinction between different types of crime.

I will try and post from the original paper, but I really need to be somewhere else, so it may be later

Complete with the limitations? All the conclusions? All the caveats?

Or selective quoting from it without all the extra information and the stats?

I think the legal definition needs to be updated to non-consensual sex. Having known a man who was raped by a woman it destroys their life just as much as when it is the other way around.

The idea that only a man can rape another person is just so outdated and stops men from reporting these crimes, being believed and getting the support they need to recover.