To object to having to call a man accused of rape 'she' in a criminal court trial?

[Appalonia]

Firstly, the definition of rape is penetration by a penis without consent. Only men have a penis. This case makes a mockery of the law and the criminal justice process and is a gross victimisation of this victim?
www.clydebankpost.co.uk/news/23259685.clydebank-court-hears-woman-raped-clydebank-home/?ref=twtrec

While I agree with the sentiment here, we all need to stop referring to this person as a ‘rapist’ because there has not yet been a conviction. The trial is ongoing.

Re. pp, please sign and share the petition linked to below

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4722618-petition-to-update-the-equality-act-thread-2

If "Ms Bryson" is convicted of rape, this person will be sent to a woman's prison because in Scotland, a woman is anyone who says they are a woman. Little details like being a convicted rapist and a danger to women, and having a penis are irrelevant.

And people wonder why there has been such a stooshie about the gender reform bill which makes this sort of nonsense all the easier.

Personally, I would not lose any sleep over misgendering or dead naming a person accused of such violence.

Doesn't this show the lengths some abusers will go to negate responsibility.
If he is transitionning does he have the right in law to be known as she?
Does it not demonstrate that he was still a male who forced himself on his victims regardless of what he is now.
If I were on the jury I would see it that this was just more abuse and unfortunately the law is patriarchal and weighted against women on so many levels this does not surprise me. The poor victims.

In Scotland he doesn't need to "transition". He just needs to announce that from here on in he is no longer Keith, he wishes to be known as Belladora-Princess and everyone has to go along with that. No need to take hormones or have inconvenient surgery or anything like that. Some vague statment about "living as a woman" although they can't really define what living as a woman means, and hey presto! you're a woman! 🙄

And come on ladies, you know we have to BE KIND to these people like Isla Bryson, they are so discriminated against, and hated, and marginalised in society. Poor, poor Isla the (alleged) rapist.

If anyone has been in court as a witness especially for a traumatic case like being raped, they will know that it is an extremely stressful situation.

The defence can be quite vicious in their questioning (there is a court case being brought in Scotland because a rape victim felt so badly bullied while giving evidence) and will jump on hesitations or stumbles if it helps them undermine the woman’s evidence.

How unbelievably stressful must it be to have to remember, in each sentence where you are forced to relive your traumatic experience at the hands of a male , to have to remember to refer to them as anything other than ‘he’.

The rape victim experienced the actions of a male, his identity didn’t rape her, he used his male body.

Even if the court allows the victim to describe what happened as she experienced it, hearing her attacker referred to as female will be discombobulating and has the side issue of potentially being confusing to the jury.

Confusing the jury in a rape trial is not going to be to the benefit of the victim. Considering that police only manage to bring a charge in 1% of reported rapes, I would suggest this further contributes to the effective decriminalisation of rape in this country.

I would bet my house that he keeps his penis and 'reverts' to being a man at some point in the future.

Be kind, women, they say what they say they are, as Nicola wants to push through to the detriment of women and children everywhere.

This

I object too. Generally speaking women don't rape. It's entirely possible to care about rape victims and obfuscation of who commits violent crimes.

This. Its so scary how we seem to slipping into a dystopia world where those in authority are forcing us to lie.

YANBU

Gaslighting fuckery. We need, individually and societally, to stop living by lies.

“Violence does not lay its paw on every shoulder every day: it demands from us only obedience to lies and daily participation in lies. And this submissiveness is the crux of the matter. The simplest and most accessible key to our self-neglected liberation is this: personal non-participation in lies. Though lies may conceal everything, though lies may control everything, we should be obstinate about this one small point: let them be in control but without any help from any of us. This opens a breach in the imaginary encirclement caused by our inaction. It is the easiest thing for us to do and the most destructive for the lies. Because when people renounce lies it cuts short their existence. Like a virus, they can survive only in a living organism.”

Alexander Solzhenitsyn

journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03064220408537357#:~:text=The%20simplest%20and%20most%20accessible,help%20from%20any%20of%20us.

Short 5 page essay that’s extremely pertinent to where we are now.

Solzhenitsyn refers to the West in his essay, that they have elections and have recourse to strikes and demonstrations at least. But now in the West, women have recently been expelled from the Green Party for standing for the basic truth that males cannot be women. The Trades Unions have been captured by queer theory ideology, and women’s rights rallies have swathes of so-called antifa thugs turn up in intimidatory counter protest.

The truth is the hill I will die on.

I long ago decided that this is one hill I would definitely die on. I absolutely will not be compelled to outright lie to spare the feelings of a rapist/sexual criminal. I’d rather be jailed

This

Granted there’s more that society could do in some areas, but this kind of sweeping statement just weakens the cause.

That’s far from true, anyone with fairly balanced reasoning can see that.

Like when Sussex Police warned people to be kind to a child abuser.

news.sky.com/story/amp/sussex-police-apologises-for-telling-people-not-to-make-hateful-comments-about-transgender-sex-offender-12706559

The thing that really bothers me about this is nobody, not the police, not the courts, hell, not even TRAs believe 'Sally Ann Dixon' is a woman - we are all being forced to participate in a script that everyone knows is bullshit.

It blows my mind how quickly this madness has taken over our institutions.

So what would happen if one refused to use preferred pronouns in court?
It’s demonstrably true that a male is a male no matter how he identifies, but in all honesty, in Scotland (Lala genderland) would the victim be punished for this?

Sorry, the relevant quote was about swearing to tell the truth and nothing but the truth, then being expected to call a rapist she.

Definitely NBU

It's fucking ridiculous...

You are not unreasonable.

As a victim of rape, for me I think the reaction of the rapist's friends afterwards and my mistreatment by the NHS caused me as much damage as the actual rape.

I find this current fashion for sneery, superior misogyny very retraumatising. Constantly seeing powerful people who loudly proclaim to be good dismiss and slur women like me is so distressing. MPs! Women who work in refuges! Celebrities! It is devastating. I don't know how I'd cope if I'd had to call my rapist "she".

It's such a male crime to rape. It's hugely offensive to women that it will be recorded as being carried out by a female.

The extra trauma and humiliation to expect the victim to refer to their attacker as she is shocking.

Well he was a man when he raped her that's for sure. Actually could that be used as a defense? I am legally a woman so I can't rape anyone, under the law.

True, but most of us are making general comments - the case cited is unfortunately far from unique and there have been convictions.

No, I don't think so. The legislation refers to 'a person'. It does use male pronouns
'he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,' but there's a lot of legislation that uses 'he' merely as a default and it refers to both sexes.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/rape

Given the first response here, and that a lot of readers may be encountering this particular scenario for the first time, I think it's worth sharing this gem from the Mumsnet archives, to maybe help them focus their thoughts further.

The content was banned (at the time), but I hope a link won't be now:

Pronouns are Rohypnol

Well didn't someone use their status as having some special identity ( non binary demi sexual or something?) to escape charge recently?

It boiled down to "I can't have done it because my special identity proves I don't fancy her" and the judge fell for it. Because too many men don't really believe rape is rape. They think it's regretted sex and they think the man's motivation is attraction not violence and power.

I would refuse. The court is effectively compelling the witness to lie, while under oath.