AIBU to think the media should report people’s actual sex—not preferred gender—in legal cases, courts, and crime reporting?

[SernieBanders]

A large portion of the country does not know what "transgender woman" means, (is it someone male being female or female being male?) And using incorrect pronouns from reality makes this worse.

Not to mention it clouds the reality of important cases such as Dr Beth Upton and Nurse Sandie Peggie - at a glance it could be easy for a casual reader to not know why Sandie was so upset, surely it's just another woman in the female changing rooms?

Language matters. Always. Twisting it and using it incorrectly leads to all sorts of misunderstandings, like "Her Penis" or "His Ovaries"

Has there been an uptick in the legally impossible act of women raping people? No. But according to the media, seemingly yes.

Organisations do this because IPSO (Independent Press Standards Organisation), forces them to do so, see this description from the Spectator, who had their hand forced https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-ipso-surrendered-to-the-trans-lobby/?homepage-tracking=high_density-article-1

For example this, awful story, is a male, raping and sexually abusing children under 13.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14392643/Transgender-woman-court-rape-girl-sexually-assault-boy.html

This should stop - it's not a matter of "outing" people, as the media often says "transgender woman", but it is a matter of being fair and clear to both sexes

The Scottish Express - has tried to stop doing so - and they have been reported to the police:
https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/comment/scottish-express-referring-dr-beth-34670335

Of course YANBU. It's absurd to report that a woman has raped someone when the rapist is a male.

I agree with you. It's true that a great many people don't understand whether a transwoman or transman is male or female - so they (not unreasonably) treat the 'trans' bit as nothing more than an adjective to quantify the end of the word.

Even if the reports said "X who prefers to use she/her pronouns", that would give a reasonable clue that they aren't the instinctive biological pronouns, ergo it's a male-born person.

As it is, people see 'transWOMAN' and 'she/her' and come to a very understandable - but biologically incorrect - conclusion.

I agree and I would also like to know if this affects crime stats? Does a trans woman committing a crime get recorded as a female?

Can you clarify "legally impossible act of women raping people'?

Yes they should report what the person identifies as now but also their real biological sex. So something like
"Michelle Smith who identies as female, but was born male, and was formally known as Michael Smith".

Rape is forcible penetration with a penis, if I have understood the law correctly, @Catza - therefore only someone with a penis - a man - can commit rape, and a woman cannot.

They can, and sometimes do, commit sexual assault, but rape with a penis is a SOLELY male crime, and I abhor reporting that suggests rape is a female crime.

yes thats it. It's not that female people cannot commit sexual assault, but in the UK, rape is specifically with a penis.

I'm sure that it does affect the stats, because gender identity is often recorded, not sex?

Yep, I'm sick of male crimes being painted and recorded as female. Pure male supremacy.

I am surprised by that. I would have thought any penetration would be classed as rape. I am extremely uncomfortable with this legal definition.... Live and learn!

That's what I thought, but I had a lawyer arguing with me the other week that a woman forcefully penetrating a male with an implement was legally defined as rape, so I'm doubting myself now 🤔

I think it goes back to my original intent, words have meaning, specific meaning, and we all need a good shared understanding of what we mean when we say them. Rape means something very specific, as does every other crime definition

@Catza and @MissyB1 Penetration by another object or part of anatomy is classed as sexual assault; women can commit such a sexual assault, but rape is strictly a male offense committed by men with their penises.

Do Transmen usually get some sort of penis created for their body - I mean a flesh and blood one, not a strap-on dildo.

If a transman has such a "created" penis could she commit Rape?

I agree that crimes should be recorded as committed by sex not gender, so perhaps a female could commit rape in these circumstances and it should be recorded as a such, so a woman could Rape.

Do you agree?

Yanbu, sex should be the default stat for so so many things.

In the UK rape is penetration of the vagina, mouth or anus with a penis.

Penetration of the vagina, mouth or anus with another object is sexual assault.

The maximum sentence for rape and sexual assault is the same. A sexual assault with an implement being used in the same way as a penis would carry the same sentence as rape.

As this is about as common as seeing a leprechaun at the end of a rainbow it seems like a bit of a moot point doesn’t it - but mansplainers always trot out this fallacy - you see it all the time on here from the incels and the odd handmaiden: “bUt WoMeN dO tHaT tOo!!!”

Yes of course people should be reported as their actual sex - fucking ridiculous we’re even having this conversation and it properly boils my piss.

Agree about most people not even knowing what a TW actually is - I’m always banging on about the TWAW issue and dh still every single time asks “what’s a TW again? Is it female to male or vice versa?” 🙄

Different jurisdictions have different definitions. The fact that elsewhere other penetrative assaults are called 'rape' makes the OPs point more important.

There have been headlines using the word 'woman' - without the trans part - for rapes and other sexual assaults/crimes committed by males. As I point out every time the IPSO code is mentioned, its very first clause is about accuracy and not being misleading. Editors who allow headlines and content which call a male sex offender a 'woman' or 'she' are breaking the code.

Yes

Ie they should print the truth

Yes, reality should be the basis of information given in a court of law, in a hospital, in prisons, schools and reported in newspapers/media sites.

You can use your feelings, sexual preferences and preferred pronouns in personal situations and where all others have consented to being part of your fantasy life.

They almost never do get phalloplasty. It's an extreme surgery with very high failure rates and involves attempting to create an approximation of a penis from a skin flap harvested from the forearm or thigh wrapped around their urethra which obviously needs to be lengthened in some way.

The main aim is to reduce dysphoria so they have something that resembles a penis, then to pee standing up.

To have intercourse with it they'd need some sort of pump or other device to produce an erection.

I don't know if this would be classed as rape if achieved as part of a sexual assault. I guess so. The numbers are likely to be very, very small given offender stats for females + rarity of the surgery + logistics.

I've no objection to newspapers reporting a persons 'gender' in addition to their actual sex, it may be useful clarification if they're using a 'feminine' name.

good point. Names alone can be misleading

The definition of rape in law is when a person puts his penis in another person's vagina, anus or mouth, without that person's permission. Yes, the law uses the word "his".

Assault by penetration is when someone puts an object or any part of the body other than their penis (for example fingers) into another person's vagina or anus, without that person's consent.

Sexual assault is when someone touches another person sexually without that person's consent, with an object or body part.

Scottish law does specifically include a surgically created penis in its definition of rape. The law in England and Wales does not.

Actual biological women can be found guilty of rape if they assist a male person to rape someone, but such verdicts are rare.