Jenni Murray "Changing sex can't make a real woman"

[Freddorika]

'Those who have lived as men, with all the privileges that entails, do not have the shared experience of growing up female.'

Brave and interesting article in the Times.

Link here behind pay wall I think

Well that article is... I don't have words.

I can't work out if it's blatant sabotage of the Transactavist agenda or blatant gaslighting.

They are either trying to call attention to the fact that Male sexual crimes are being reported as Female crimes by illustrating the piece with a picture of a transwomen or they are totally gaslighting the readership by trying to get us to accept that Lisa Hauxwell is actually female.

I'm hoping the former but I bet it's the latter.

Actually raging. This is so wrong. I just went off on one when DH asked what was wrong with me

This will never happen...never does happen...yet...

We need a lawyer, women's 'dignity' is protected under EA10 but i'm not a lawyer. This is insulting, this is like saying a gllywg is a real black person. I am so offended I want to burst into tears.

Imagine if a black and white minstrel committed a crime and it was reported as a 'black man' the world would RIGHTLY go utterly fucking beserk, I can't take any more, I really can't.

If Rachel Dolezal became a criminal and they wrote an article on the 'truth about black crime' about crimes that were almost always committed by whites, e.g. serial killing, there'd be fucking RIOTS, I'd be there chucking molatov cocktails myself.

This is counter revolution make no mistake. There has to be legal redress.

GirlScout but how? There must be some way of nailing the misleading nature of the article/research, but not a legal avenue?

Charlotta actually I think it's "real" that's a red herring. It's practically been banned in forward thinking adoption circles (because the "birth mums are worthless brigade" were applying to themselves exclusively and the "she's not your real mum" brigade were upsetting children). This is rather like this debate in fact.

Just as trans women can feel as if they have a female gender, I can be a mother. I'm comfortable with that. I'm a woman and I'm a parent and I also identify as female.

To be a biological mother - you need to be a woman, and have given birth. You don't need to be parenting (my children's birth mother is not parenting). You don't need to identify as female.

I can't be a biological mother - I can't give birth and I didn't give birth to my children.

Trans women can't be biological women.

I'm not bothered by my lack of biological status, except in the odd moment, but if I am I keep it to myself generally. The odd moan in private to some other adoptive parents.

Apart from sex dolls everyone's "real". Their status in various categories varies though.

I know this isn't the "correct" terminology but "real" as I say to me feels really outdated/stick to bash people with in my world so I don't want to use it here. "Biological" will do nicely.

Agreed drspouse! I did say 'real' was a red herring, so only used it in the sense that it doesn't add or detract from your status as mother. Anyway sorry for the confusion.

He can't legally be a woman unless he has a gender reassignment certificate. Currently the criteria is you have to live as a woman for two years.

If he hasn't done that, and I bet he hasn't, he is illegally being called a woman.

They cannot ever class trans crimes within the sex they trans to, surely?

I feel as if we are all being pushed to see how far they can go, I really don't want my daughter to grow up in a society worse than I did in the fucking seventies.

Do we email the Telegraph and complain?

Letters to the editor

I would, but as I've said on various of these threads, there is a trans person in my near family and I do not want to cause the family-bust-up-to-end-all-bust-ups.

Trans crimes are ALREADY being classed as the sex they trans to, someone I know did an FOI

which is why we are seeing a huge statistical spike in these crimes

I don't know how we tackle it, we need a bloody good lawyer to advise

You sure there's still a requirement for GRC, Datun?

Unless it's been updated

The Act requires applicants to have transitioned two years before a certificate is issued.

From Wikipedia about the gender recognition act 2004.

I'll keep looking.

I'm wondering if the student has had her research bastardized or did she write it herself? But it does happen, papers misrepresenting research and researchers.

I've messaged a journalist and am asking around about lawyers, I'm so at kilimanjaro trans

Girlscout72 perhaps you could send your FOI information to Andrea Darling who wrote the article and is researching female sex offenders for her Phd?

For the first half of that article I thought I might be reading an incredibly clever subversive parody. I was getting quite excited! Then she started talking about actual female sex offenders and I had to get my head round the fact this article might be real and the world really has gone this batshit insane.

I'm still not sure which it is. It is so blatant I can't quite believe it's not deliberate. It's in the Telegraph! People will notice!

I've worked on newsy websites and magazines a bit and I know you need to make sure you get your message into the headline, first image, first paragraph because a lot of people don't read further than that. You also keep a bit of an eye on what text goes next an image because people will associate them in their minds. The Telegraph know this too, it's journalism 101. I find it hard to believe they are not aware of the message they are sending out here.

I'm reserving judgment for now but I do think deliberate mischief might have gone on somewhere.

They are either trying to call attention to the fact that Male sexual crimes are being reported as Female crimes by illustrating the piece with a picture of a transwomen or they are totally gaslighting the readership by trying to get us to accept that Lisa Hauxwell is actually female.

When newspapers are bound by law not to report something, they produce lots of articles around the issue, dig up loads of historical stories etc. We saw this recently with the reports of the apparent sexual shennanikins of a 'celebrity couple' that weren't reported. They do it a lot with politics eg if they think two people in public offices are having an affair, there will be lots of articles linking their work and jobs.

I can hope and dream that something is afoot - they must be well aware of the constant press releases in trans issues and they do not usually like others telling them what they should report.

So much of what is in the press seems to be second hand reporting of stuff released to them, that I wonder sometimes though .

I'm wondering if the student has had her research bastardized or did she write it herself? But it does happen, papers misrepresenting research and researchers.

I don't think so, the article say 'My current research...", she also specifically mentions Hauxwell so it's not as though the picture has just been planted in an article written about actual biological female* sex offenders.

*Has female been appropriated now as well as woman? This article would suggest so.

It's bad enough if they don't mention that someone is trans when they commit a crime, but to frame an entire article around the rise in female sexual offences when the perpetrators are men is fucking ridiculous. And lying.

I am praying it's a mistake. Maybe the author of the article took the police reporting at face value.

And that's why it's soooo fucking dangerous.

Andrea Darling is on twitter. She has posted a link to the article. Not bastardised at all, and apparently neither she nor the telegraph see anything ironic about it. A few people have tweeted to her but no reply.

Press guidelines are different though - they don't require a GRC.

I still contend that if you've raped someone with your penis you don't get to claim you're a woman.

The problem is that on things like job applications, passport applications etc. you generally have to declare previous names. BUT if you're trans, then that infringes on your human rights and the equality act (you get to hide your sex) - so if you're hiring a trans person (and 9/10 you'd guess if you met them) you can't actually check them under their previous name unless they tell you.

That is the most terrifying article I have ever read!

I can hope and dream that something is afoot - they must be well aware of the constant press releases in trans issues and they do not usually like others telling them what they should report
I've been wondering the same actually. The uptick in trans based reporting this week (Jenni Murray, Crime watch, the case in Newcastle then this) all seem very close to the Gender Identity Bill reading in a couple of weeks.
It could be my confirmation bias but I hope there is a move to illuminate the madness