Four women viciously attack a defenceless man ...

[loveyouradvice]

www.lbc.co.uk/news/crime-caught-camera/tube-horror-women-man-attack-leicester-square/

Not in my name

I am shaking with anger and horror here... an utterly vicious and horrid attack on all levels.... the ferocity was shocking.

For it then to be attributed to women when they are clearly male is so very shocking on so very many levels......

This has gone too far..... How have the police ever agreed to count crimes committed by males as crimes committed by women, just on the say so of the male committing the crime?

I knew this was happening but I hadn't realised that anyone could "self-id" as female to the police.... How has this happened?

Lighthouse, agree! I’ve found it partly depressing and partly amusing to see the comments from (mostly) men who have only looked at the headline (or who have watched the video but without paying much attention!) ‘See, women are just as violent as men!’ Etc etc 🙄😆

Lighthouse, agree! I’ve found it partly depressing and partly amusing to see the comments from (mostly) men who have only looked at the headline (or who have watched the video but without paying much attention!) ‘See, women are just as violent as men!’ Etc etc 🙄😆

"None so blind as those who will not see"

Some relevent and important statements included in the recent Daily Mail article:

'As more trans women who were convicted as men hope to follow rapist Martin Ponting into female wings, prison governors fear vulnerable inmates could be attacked
Theresa May pledged last year to make simpler for people to change gender
Transgender activists demanding it be achieved by announcing self-identity
Anonymous governor says vulnerable women in prison could be intimidated'

" Andrea Albutt, president of the Prison Governors Association , who has managed men’s and women’s jails, said: ‘I have seen women feeling very threatened by transgender prisoners’ presence.

‘Women prisoners are very vulnerable. A lot have abusive men in their lives, who are part of the reason they have ended up in prison.

'To put all men who declare they are women into women’s prisons would be very damaging."

Also:
"Prison reformer Frances Crook said that she was worried that ‘some men with a history of extreme violence and sexual violence against women have found a new way of exercising aggression towards women’.

Ms Crook, executive director of the Howard League for Penal Reform , added: ‘These men are not transitioning because they like women and want to be a woman, but in order to exert a new kind of control and dominance over women, a sort of infiltration.

‘Moreover, the process is inherently discriminatory. A woman identifying as a man could not be transferred to a man’s jail because placing a person with female attributes into a prison to live with 1,000 men, all using communal showers and living areas, would put them in serious danger.’"

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5798945/Trans-women-convicted-men-attack-vulnerable-inmates.html

Ms Crook sounds like a smart lady.

sexnotgender

She is very well informed and influential.

twitter.com/francescrook/status/1012052386624532480

Really must get back on twitter. That's a heartening tweet Rowan.

So I went to look and she retweeted lovely Ruth Serwotka

Pratchet
On the threads below are links to some of the twitter accounts worth following:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3284251-Lisa-Muggeridge-Suspended-by-Twitter-and-Quoting-her-breaches-MN-Guidelines

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3284822-Gender-Critical-Twitter-accounts

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/2874809-Gender-Critical-MNers-Gathering-Together-On-Twitter

One thing that has been bugging me about the whole story. How do we know that the victim is a man? Just because he looks it? What if he identifies as a woman? So it's ok to call 4 blokes in frocks violent women because they wear dresses but the victim must most certainly be male? So are we supposed to judge by looks or not?

All this is going too far now.wrong thread

My understanding is that the police and media protocols meant that the people doing the violence were described as 'women'. Presumably, the the same protocols would also be applied to the description of the victim.

The important thing this highlights is what are the police and media protocols?
How have they come into being?
Who was involved in drawing them up?
Are there any (perhaps unintended) consequences which may have serious implications?
Should they be reviewed?

Why the actual fuck were they released pending investigation? There is no justification for this

One thing that has been bugging me about the whole story. How do we know that the victim is a man? Just because he looks it? What if he identifies as a woman? So it's ok to call 4 blokes in frocks violent women because they wear dresses but the victim must most certainly be male? So are we supposed to judge by looks or not?

A few years ago that would all have sounded crazy - it still does to most folk but it is actually where we are at. No one is allowed to presume the sex or gender of anyone as judging a woman by her looks and by how attractive or pretty they are is UNFEMINIST and no woman should have to conform to expectations - incuding Danielle Muscato and Alex Drummond. Quite clever move really.

And let's imagine that those perpetrators ran off before they could be caught.

And the police release a statement saying that they are looking for a group of 4 violent women.

The general public coming across the perpetrators wouldn't think that that particular group of 4 were actually women and so that would clearly hamper efforts to find them.

When transwomen are victims of crime, they are "transwomen."

When they commit crime, they are "women."

And transgender people are obviously very often victims of the most awful crimes, I'm not denying that - but why the hypocrisy from the media?

I bet if one of the transwomen attacking the man were herself a victim of crime, the reports would refer to her trans status.

I'm really answering my own question here, but 'women beat up man' is going to sell more advertising space than 'transwomen beat up a man' - because the latter headline is going to be criticised, and that doesn't please the advertisers and investors.

I feel compelled to weigh in regarding the criticisms of how this is reported.

This particular story, if you take out the politics, is an emergency services story.

The protocol for reporting these is very strict. The reporter contacts the force's media team and uses the information provided in the statement. They can't deviate from this information. Any deviation which leads to a complaint could land the reporter and the outlet they work for in the shit.

That's not how reporting works

@Pratchet - That's how it is for stories like this.

Nonsense.

A report does not have to come from emergency services or from their media team.
The origin of a story can be anywhere \ anyone, the footage can be sourced from the owner of the footage (often mobile phone).

@TornFromTheInside - footage from bystanders is often used, but with incidents like this the press are very limited on what they can initially report. Another reason for this is if any reporting is found to prejudice a trial - well deep shit wouldn't even cover it.

Fromage

There are some restrictions with press reporting.

See James Kirkup's article re the Home Affairs commitee on Hate Crime when editors were interviewed,
(extracts)
" [Stephen Doughty MP] said. “Do you think the use of the phrase “trans lobby” is an appropriate one?”

As it happens, Dr Carmichael [lead Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) of the Tavistock and Portman Trust, which is the NHS centre of excellence for helping children and adolescents with gender dsyphoria and other issues of gender-variance] in her lecture said some things that seem relevant here:

“Gender has become amazingly topical and we have to be really careful not to assume that anyone is exploring or questioning their gender is going to want to change their bodies in line with that. The extremes on either side are not helpful. We need to look at the grey areas in between. To do that we need to be able to talk and discuss these issues. All too often stakeholders become lobby groups.”

She did not name any stakeholder. But her words might be relevant to a charity called Mermaids. Mermaids is a charity that describes itself as “a support group for children and young people with gender dysphoria and their families”. Its CEO, Susie Green describes herself as “parent to a daughter who was born male.” Mermaids is a relatively small charity (it had income of £127,000 in the year to March 2017) with a big reach. It has prominent backers and its advice and recommendations have been absorbed and adopted by many public bodies... (continues)

"Doughty said. “Do you think the use of the phrase “trans lobby” is an appropriate one?”

As it happens, Dr Carmichael in her lecture said some things that seem relevant here:

“Gender has become amazingly topical and we have to be really careful not to assume that anyone is exploring or questioning their gender is going to want to change their bodies in line with that. The extremes on either side are not helpful. We need to look at the grey areas in between. To do that we need to be able to talk and discuss these issues. All too often stakeholders become lobby groups.”

She did not name any stakeholder. But her words might be relevant to a charity called Mermaids. Mermaids is a charity that describes itself as “a support group for children and young people with gender dysphoria and their families”. Its CEO, Susie Green describes herself as “parent to a daughter who was born male.” Mermaids is a relatively small charity (it had income of £127,000 in the year to March 2017) with a big reach. It has prominent backers and its advice and recommendations have been absorbed and adopted by many public bodies...."

(concludes)

Surely a bright, thoughtful chap like him [Stephen Doughty MP] didn’t mean to imply that it was his job as Member of Parliament to tell newspapers what they can and cannot write? Surely he had no intention of acting as if it is in any way appropriate for a politician to decide what is and is not acceptable for journalists to say, and how they say it? And I can only hope that it was by a simple accident that he singled out by name a female journalist and suggested that her employers stop her saying the things that she thinks – because Doughty happens not to like her saying those things?

As I say, I must assume that he meant none of these things, that he had no such moronic and bullying intent when he spoke and acted as he did. I assume that Doughty is an honourable politician determined to do his job in a democracy and ensure that matters of public policy are debated fully and honestly, whether or not some people find such debate offensive. Because, as I am sure Doughty knows, there is no right not be offended and if we ever let hurt feelings stop us discussing matters of public interest on the basis of the facts, everyone loses.

And it is because I am sure that he is wholly committed to such debate that I decided to write this article. Thanks for everything you’re doing to encourage the free press and open debate, Mr Doughty."
blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/05/why-are-some-mps-trying-to-shut-down-the-transgender-debate/

No it isn't. Reporters have to observe certain rules if proceedings are active (which they are in this i believe) but that's not 'protocol' that's the law. If they aren't they can report verbatim what the police say plus whatever else. Protocol doesn't come into it.

Ah... thanks Pratchet . I thought it was a combination of both IPSO and Police regs.

In a case like this it would probably be a question of whether an editor wants to publish and be ready to defend. Which they wouldn't. A risk could be taken with good supporting arguments that it doesn't breach any IPSO code. But IPSO have had their trans awareness training of course so it's not protocol that is an issue here - it's fear and not caring enough about the issue to take the risk.