To think the media over exaggerate trans women and refugees?

[SleepDreamThinkHuge]

I have noticed in the media when trans women and refugees do crimes it is highlighted to such an extent compared to if say men commit rapes. When it is a trans women raping someone it leads to "women being unsafe" and the funny thing is a lot of people doing this faux outrage and pretending they care about women is from some men. It is strange when you hear things like "as a father or mother I worry for my child's safety they are not safe." Ok so what about when most sexual attacks are committed by cis men? You never heard them protest about that.

It is the same with refugees you only hear the bad stories "oh he is gaining the system" "oh a lot of these refugees are rapists." There is no middle ground in both of these issues. Rape/sexual assault gaining the system is done by a minority of all people (black, Asian, White etc..) But when it is refugees or trans men doing crime it is highlighted to such as extent to which other groups that do the same crime e.g. white Brits is less highlighted and outrage is not as much.

Well that's right, but I can imagine that the employee would raise a grievance that the employer has failed to protect their safety or failed to protect them from harassment or that the employer has vicarious liability in the case of physical assaults by another employee, much as they did in the case of De Souza v Primark where the harassment was misgendering and deadnaming rather than physical. Incidentally the award there was £48k.

The employer always has a duty of care to the health and safety of the employer, it's hard to imagine that this cannot be established easily in the case of a physical attack.

It just seems strange that we are not seeing reports that back up this statistic.

not sure of the other….will have a look when I get a mo….not claiming to be an oracle on the matter just massively disappointed with general presumptions of inaccuracy just because it’s stonewall.

Well given that I asked you where it came from I made no such assumption 'on the basis that it was Stonewall' because I didn't know that was where it was from !

What I am struggling with, a bit, is where the claims are, you'd expect with a statistic of 1 in 8 to find more than the Primark case which is not actually physical violence.

I do know that some might settle out of court with a confidentiality clause but that figure is so high that I am very surprised not to have heard more about it.

I do have some experience in Employment Law btw from before I had to quit work to care for disabled children. I follow employment barristers & HR magazines on social media, I would have expected to have heard more about this.

OK, maybe the white feminists bit was a bit antagonistic but I do feel it gets a bit cliquey and self congratulatory at times.

I just feel like people aren't really interested in the dirtier side of it where criticising cultural issues skates dangerously close to offending communities with established (but unacceptable) practices and the dangers of being called 'a racist' and lumped in with the far right by the 'be kind' mob.

It seems like every reply to criticism around gender stuff becoming monomanical is ultimately just a justification of why it should be the main focus.

I really do feel like identity politics has shifted the focus onto legislation and online stuff and away from real life sexual assault which the authorities seem very keen to plaster over and ignore (and we help them to accomplish this).

Perhaps you would like to watch this British documentary.

https://adulthumanfemale.info

Would you like to tell us which people here fit your description of 'white and middle class' and which ones do not?

If you are only superficially watching discussions, perhaps you don't see the wide range of feminists in the movement. It is like we are constantly told we are all 'middle aged'... err. No. People who are speaking out on tik Tok and other platforms are not 'middle aged', the young women I see at the meetings and campaigning events are not predominantly 'middle aged'! They are also not predominantly 'middle class' and there may be more 'white' women but this is the UK.

If I could see some concrete stats that the trans thing has had as grievous an effect on women then I might be persuaded. But I'm looking at things like sexual crimes doubling in Denmark, immigrant men committing crimes in proportions far outweighing their representation in the population, and events like 1200 women sexually assaulted in one night.

These statistics to me dwarf pretty much any other feminist issue in terms of impact. It's like a new hyper patriarchy is arising and we're standing by twiddling our thumbs.

"It seems like every reply to criticism around gender stuff becoming monomanical is ultimately just a justification of why it should be the main focus."

And maybe it is just that many people disagree with you and your view of the priorities of feminists.

So, is the trans issue causing hundreds of rapes and thousands of sexual assaults for which we have concrete statistics?

You are perfectly free to start campaigning specifically around your chosen issue. You are free to have your opinions.

Women with other priorities don't have to agree with other women.

So, what is your intention here. To shame others for not having the same priorities as you?

Have you started a campaign that you would like MN feminists to get behind? Have you been posting it on either of the feminist boards? Is it not getting the traction that you feel your campaign should?

Would you like to tell us which feminists are not also working on these boarder issues that you think should be working on them? Have you spoken with them to discuss your campaign?

Have you got 'concrete statistics' by religion and race for the UK that you want to discuss?

"broader" not 'boarder'

Well given that I asked you where it came from I made no such assumption 'on the basis that it was Stonewall' because I didn't know that was where it was from ! sorry, assumed you knew this as you had rtf

The employer may simply have dealt with the assault appropriately. (Tragically) many public servants and customer facing staff are assaulted in their daily work and employers cannot safeguard against this beyond a range of expected measures and risk assessments. And if they have failed to do basic measures there are, as you rightly pointed out internal resolution options from grievances through to settlements (not published or collected unless via FOI). And then there are tribunals that don’t reach the headlines because the case details or outcome (inc 6x figure payouts) aren’t newsworthy.
discrimination cases at interview stage.

Would it help you Step to read more of Julie Bindel (who I don't believe is middle class, but she could well be 'white')

https://juliebindel.substack.com/p/grooming-gangs-the-rape-and-pimping

(sorry pressed post too soon) as for discrimination at interview stage most people don’t know they have legal protection. It is difficult to prove also.

I have every sympathy with being passed over for a protected characteristic on application or at interview. I am one of the invisible middle aged women that employers don't seem to want to touch. It's very very had to prove but I know it's that.

I'm surprised not to see more about violent attacks on trans people at work on twitter. You'd think the TRAs would be all over it given the way that they consider misgendering/ even unintentionally to be literal violence.

I wonder if a slightly more likely explanation is that those filing in the questionnaires for Stonewall aren't, in part, answering thinking that misgendering counts as a violent attack as they tell people it amounts to literal violence and women have been arrested for it.

On the subject of being refused employment for a protected characteristic, in the 1990s when I worked on an employment law helpline I had a least one employer asking for help on avoiding employing women of child bearing age because they didn't want to pay maternity leave!

By the way step, what do you think happens to those women and girls who are attacked and raped and seeking care when they also then cannot get access to female only care and support?

At the Women's Day event I attended, in an area with a very high ratio of the people you are discussing, the women who are working at the grass roots level are working very closely with the council and charities run by the local women to change the culture from within. It is already happening. And many 'white' and 'middle class' feminists support them without taking over and without believing they know best.

oh that was commonplace and, shockingly, not just from male intervewers.
my worst story was shortlisting for an admin role with a senior lawyer who asked 5 applicants into interview with English names and rejected 5 with non-English sounding names. Def not a co-incidence

Yes, life it has been discussed that the collection documents with the questions are not made public for analysis.

It has been pointed out that there is some rather prejudiced views expressed in the conclusions in what is 'transphobic', 'harassment' and 'discrimination'. And we have pointed out that 'abuse' could mean misgendering as we have read this in other documents about spousal abuse - that so much of it was about 'misgendering' and 'lack of support for the spouses transition'.

Physical violence needs to be clearly defined when so much else seems to be unclear.

yes. I remember advising employers similar in the 90s. And reminding them what discrimination was and how it was illegal.

It is very concrete to state that rape crisis centres don't offer protected female spaces any more and males are in women's prisons. If we accept these developments then their will be many more assaults and little subsequent support. People can multi task and support other issues whilst recognising that we don't have to wait for the flood gates to fully open before alerting that it is no longer holding firm. I think the argument that we should ignore the assaults on women's rights which pretending men are women facilitates because there are other important issues is nonsensical. Indeed why focus on any of this then? Climate change is a threat to the whole of humanity. Just focus on that and ignore everything else then.

I totally agree, this should really be an easy win for women's rights. I mean is it really asking too much for single sex spaces? We had them until a bunch of males and their advocates took them away without consent.

Perhaps @StepAwayFromTheBiscuitJar rather than blaming women for wanting to say NO to males in our spaces you could blame the males for taking them and acknowledge that if they would give them back we could focus on other important issues.

Perhaps blame those who are needlessly diverting attention away from other issues by giving feminists yet another thing to fight for.

StepAwayFromTheBiscuitJar

Would you also like to tell Hibo Wardere and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie who have both been very vocal about protecting women and children's rights against the conflicts of the demands of male people what they should be focusing on? They focus on multiple fronts too.

What about the women of New Zealand who contributed as Maori women to the NZ consultation about Self Id - such as Rex of Mana Wahine Korero? Would you like to tell them what they should be focusing on? I believe they focus on different issues, maybe they are not focused enough on the issue you wish to campaign on though.

If you are not happy with where 'white' and 'middle classed' women are focused, then perhaps read wider than where ever you are reading at the moment. There is plenty of evidence readily available to anyone who looks that shows that 'white', 'middle class', 'not focused on other feminist issues' are all false.

And if you are not happy, there is absolutely nothing stopping you from starting a specific campaign for yourself. You are regularly on the feminist boards, go and start it and tell us all about it and how we can help.

damn

"There is plenty of evidence readily available to anyone who looks that shows that 'white', 'middle class', 'not focused on other feminist issues' are all false."

There is plenty of evidence readily available to anyone who looks that shows that 'white', 'middle class', 'not focused on other feminist issues' are all falsely used to detract from the wide range of women involved and the work they do.

And yet, it is very clear that a high % of the high profile UK cases that feminists have been involved in : Keira Bell, Allison Bailey, Sonia Appleby, Maya Forstater and Raquel Rosario Sanchez are not 'white' 'middle class' women. It really has become a lazy tactic.

Well, yeah, individual women are free to focus on the area they seem most important, as I'm free to state my opinion.

We continually hear how men in women's spaces increases the possibility of sexual assault. You'd think that people so concerned about this issue would be alarmed about the thousands of sexual assaults that are currently happening/have happened (not might happen).

But no....pretty much radio silence.

'deem most important'