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.

It is forced teaming. It is about placing trans people in the same level of vulnerability and need as refugees. (of course, there will be a small intersection of some refugees being trans people too).

I believe the OP has attempted to portray concerns that women have as being 'faux outrage'. I think they also forget that there is numerous events and articles relating to male violence still.

I also think that they are dismissing the fact that most women now understand quite well that males with trans identities are still male and that male people do not change their propensity to commit sex crimes if they transition. In fact, they seem to be either unaware or are deliberately dismissive of the actual numbers of these male individuals in UK prisons currently for sex related crime or have histories of sex related crimes.

It is always dismissed as 'a few bad ones.'

No. It is about the fact that we know that there is the same % at least of these males with this risk of sex crime, yet women have been told that they must accept them into single sex spaces.

The end result is that this increases the risk to all female people using those spaces. This is the reality that is being shown with the statistics and the new articles.

This is the reality that this OP wishes to dismiss and distract away from with this thread.

This is the reality that this OP wishes to dismiss and distract away from with this thread.

I also think that the OP is attempting to scold women for their concerns for women's rights. The false teaming seems deliberate to me, it seems to suggest that people who are concerned for women rights are likely to have racist views about refugees.

We've seen it elsewhere, it's a suggestion that being pro-women's rights to safe spaces is a far right position.

Transwomen as a class keep the physical, economic and structural benefits of being male, with the added benefit of a rights movement that bypassed the grass-roots stage and went straight to the boardrooms, civil service and political parties.

Do you have any evidence for this absurd statement eg statistics on transgender in the workplace, socio-economic analysis etc?

A recent Swedish study showed that trans identifying males commit crimes at a higher rate than other males, so it's not "exaggeration", merely a demographic trend that should not be ignored.

No it didn’t. The Swedish study from 2011 found the crime rate was similar between male-to-females and non trans males, not higher. In people who transitioned over 30 years ago before 1989.

It also found female-to-males (trans men) committed crime at a higher rate than women and similar to men.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885

What is absurd about that post? It all seems fairly self evident to me.

What is absurd about that post? It all seems fairly self evident to me.

Well it neatly fits the gc narrative but it’s actually load of guff; non-trans up to 15x more likely to be hired at interview than trans; 35% pay gap etc etc.

Ewww “cis”. I stopped listening when you used that word.

Quite. Cis : how to tell the world you have handed in your rationality card to get a gold star from an ideology which is inherently misogynistic and homophobic in three letters.

I think that most women do care, but many are afraid to say it out of fear of backlash, and then theres the vocal "ally" camp who willingly refer to themselves as a subset of their own sex class while seeking approval from the TRA.

The SRS comment was only semi serious. The idea of it would certainly weed out the cosplayers.

Have you got any sources for that please? - Genuine request.

What about the rest though?
You don't think that transwomen as a class keep
The physical benefits that come with male development?
What about the structural benefits of being male?
What about this bit with the added benefit of a rights movement that bypassed the grass-roots stage and went straight to the boardrooms, civil service and political parties.

Recent data from HM prison service and ONS show a higher sexual offending rate in trans identified males compared to the rest of the population, so I can fully understand why there's a spotlight on the situation regarding placing them in the female estate, whether thats hostels refuges or prisons.

No it doesn’t show that. Every reputable analysis says you can’t draw that conclusion from the data. Many of them identify as trans after arrest. Most of them have never been placed in the female estate.

I don’t deny that now ‘trans’ or ‘trans woman’ can pretty much mean anything, it could practically mean ‘any man’. That’s very different to want most of us know as genuine male to female transsexuals. They still exist. There’s no evidence that they pose a significant threat.

There are women, some of whom are lesbians and not trans, in prison for sexually assaulting young girls. You can find lots in the news. But you don’t want to talk about them.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/female-pe-teacher-admits-sex-6708066

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/world-news/lesbian-tricked-schoolgirls-having-sex-11994722

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8072581/kelli-vassallo-basketball-coach-sex-assault-girl-13/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10868439/Female-Op-shop-worker-25-jailed-two-years-grooming-teenage-girl-having-sex.html

Which reputable analysis says that you can't draw that conclusion?

I agree that some are not genuine, and trans after arrest to take advantage of the loophole that might allow them to be housed in the female estates. This nicely highlights the risks of self ID that feminists were told were not valid concerns, that bad actors would take advantage. We were told no male would ever do that, we were told they were all genuine, acceptance without exception. So which is it? Either way it's clear they shouldn't be in the female estate.

And you've just done what the OP was complaining about. Using cherry picked examples of female sec offenders to tarnish all females.

Except if you look at the actual stats the number of female sex offenders is so minute compared to males.

Of course they should. I believe there should be safe spaces for both women and trans people. Both can have different sex spaces one for solely women and the other for trans people.

Not 'safe' spaces just plain old single sex spaces that are just that single sex and exclude all people of the opposite sex irrespective.

The figures regarding the breakdown of prisons population by sex crimes do not bear out your claim that the threat of TW committing sex crimes is over exaggerated. The number of TW in prison is small, however, the number of them incarcerated for sex crimes is high.

I don’t deny that now ‘trans’ or ‘trans woman’ can pretty much mean anything, it could practically mean ‘any man’. That’s very different to want most of us know as genuine male to female transsexuals. They still exist. There’s no evidence that they pose a significant threat.

The problem is proving which transwomen pose a threat. Nicola Sturgeon was undone by a man in a pair of pink leggings after she had tried to force through a legislative change which would have had him legally recognised as a woman. Supporters of the bill were then unable or refused to name the gender identity of the man in question and so he became "a rapist" or "the individual".

There is no way of proving who is genuine and who is not so you cannot say that there is no evidence that transexuals do not pose a threat because they've been lumped together with the chancers in the name of inclusivity, I'm sure they are delighted, and it's why some of us now think that there should be no males in women's spaces however they identify.

The issue with that though is what about trans women who can't have the surgery for health reasons? I knew a trans woman, who as far as I'm aware given the level of their health problems and disabilities, would never have been able to have the surgery.

It's like the argument I've seen some make - oh it's ok if they pass. Lots of trans women will never pass. Physically not possible for some.

Some things can be split by gender, in some situations. More need to stay based on sex - and I'd be all for a third space.

Which reputable analysis says that you can't draw that conclusion?

eg https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42221629

I agree that some are not genuine, and trans after arrest to take advantage of the loophole that might allow them to be housed in the female estates. This nicely highlights the risks of self ID that feminists were told were not valid concerns, that bad actors would take advantage. We were told no male would ever do that, we were told they were all genuine, acceptance without exception. So which is it?

No we were told some would do exactly that as long ago as 2015 (I think) by James Barrett from the gender identity service Charing Cross in a submission to the women and equal committee.

And you've just done what the OP was complaining about. Using cherry picked examples of female sec offenders to tarnish all females.

Of course. To prove that’s how easy it is to do. That’s the point.

Except if you look at the actual stats the number of female sex offenders is so minute compared to males.

Yes. But what about looking at the rate of sex offending amongst lesbians against female children compared to heterosexual women? You can use statistics to prove all sorts of things.

Recent data from HM prison service and ONS show a higher sexual offending rate in trans identified males compared to the rest of the population

Please can you link to the data? Your statement here is ambiguous so I’d like to make sure I’m understanding correctly. Does the data show a higher rate of offending in comparison to the rate of the entire non-trans population (which includes women, so in that case it’s not surprising that the rate would be lower), or in comparison to the offending rate of non-trans-identified males?

Yes, the conflation of media treatment of refugees with that of transwomen is the kind of thing TRAs do like to do. It's dishonest and in bad faith, but those are the only arguments they have.

The data is compiled from the census data and the MOJ statistics on trans identified prisoners who are of the male sex.

However, even before the census came out there was hand sorted data from women’s groups manually mining the data and sorting the male with trans identities out using court records and media reports etc. So the numbers for crimes committed by these males are accurate. And even when using the estimated population segment from stonewall in the past the rate was at least equal to all males.

It has never been anywhere close to female rates of committing sex offenses via estimates and now using the census data or from even the scant studies available. Ever.

You're right.

Right, so you’re saying that the rate is around the same as other males, not that it’s notably and consistently higher

I think the point about transwomen committing crimes against women is that women are incessantly told that transwomen are just a vulnerable harmless minority so just let them into your bathrooms/prisons/ shelters etc. Whereas they seem to retain male pattern offending so it’s important to understand that they are basically the same as other men in terms of risk to women and children. Not necessarily better or worse just the same.

Also refugee men is a different issue, I suspect you added that in to affect the top line vote on AIBU.

No it is around 60% compared to 20% for men who do not say they are women.