Triple-double peak trans extra-ultra.

[Miffer]

I literally cannot even begin to imagine the level of cognitive dissonance the writer of this article had to employ.

Sorry if this is a repost.

And sorry for not really offering a point of view or starting point for discussion.... but.... just look...

www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/seen-missing-woman-dressed-man-seen-derbyshire/story-29207361-detail/story.html

The reporting matters. If the photos hadn't been included, people would have been looking for a cross dressing woman. Like missing out the race when describing a missing person (though if they do you can probably assume they're talking about a white person - whole other issue).
What is a woman dressed as a man anyway? For a woman to be considered as cross dressing they usually have to go OTT drag- think suit or tux. Wearing trousers or other men's clothes is just wearing clothes.
Other issue here is disproportionately large number of male sex offenders declaring themselves transgender, usually soon after being imprisoned. So it is not just one bad apple. It is a lot of bad men declaring themselves to be female. And quite a strong argument against gender identification by declaration.

I agree. How many of these cases does there have to be before we don't have to accept 'it's an isolated incident'? For how long are we supposed to sit back and accept that it is more wrong to call a man he than it is for a violent rapist to be recorded in crime stats as a woman?

The trans community is protected by law and the article was compliant.

The law is an ass

Well OK, lets not let one bad apple sour the bunch, but do we really have to call that bad apple and orange wearing an apple skin? Even though we're trying to catch a violent criminal and it's an inaccurate description?

Actually what high says shows how totally ridiculous it is to define people based on gender identity alone.
"Police Hunt women who may be dressed as a man and uses names Lisa and Craig" complete with photo of a very male presenting person is totally confusing and ridiculous.
Police Hunt person accused of sexual assault - followed by the fact this person uses male and female details and a photo - accurate and totally unconfusing.

The "bad apple" analogy is getting boring the more these cases come to light.

This is from the evidence of the British Psychological Society to the Transgender Equality Enquiry data.parliament.uk/WrittenEvidence/CommitteeEvidence.svc/EvidenceDocument/Women%20and%20Equalities/Transgender%20Equality/written/19471.html
The BPS statement on the whole was very supportive of transgender people and their rights, but this piece of evidence suggests that male sex offenders could well be over-represented in the trans community, and is a good argument against self-declaration without additional safeguards.

To be fair, this case was on Crimewatch last night and they were very clear that this person was Craig, now calls herself Lisa and wants to be recognised as female and they showed pictures of this person as both a man and a woman, said she had previously been a man.

However the wording on the Crimewatch website is just as bad www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/profiles/vz0g2KwjxYsG1dDFGQGlWx/lisa-hauxwell as it gives the impression (if you don't look at the picture) that Lisa has always been Lisa and may be wearing men's clothes as a disguise where I would argue it's the other way round.

Crikey. If ever the 'body of Baywatch, face of Crimewatch' acronym was needed eh. That is one ugly bastard.

But yes, when the public is asked to hunt down a violent rapist before he attacks any more teenagers, it's imperative we don't misgender him. Her. Christ this is confusing.

Perfect timing, along with Jenni Murray's piece. Maybe the world will see see some unpalatable truths at last.

The trans community is protected by law and the article was compliant.
The law is in a state of flux when it comes to gender identity. This will probably leave local reporters and local constabulary press officers uncertain as how to describe someone in this position in order to be compliant and not to offend. Most reporters will follow good practice guidelines and refer to someone with the name and identity they usually use (basic politeness) but there is also a wariness about being jumped on (e.g. by Transmediawatch) if they get it wrong.

As Craig/ Lisa probably doesn't have a GRC they would not be protected by the Gender Recognition Act.

There is some protection under the law when someone has been accused of a crime (nothing to do with gender). Unless they have been charged with the crime they should not be named in the media unless there is a compelling reason to do this (usually a manhunt is often a compelling reason but a local paper will take guidance from the police on this). It is possible that the case was sub judice in which case there are very strict limits as to what journalists can write.

People are human above gender.

But when it comes to crimes they aren't. Not when it comes to sexual and violent crimes. 98% of which are committed by men.

Gender simply is NOT irrelevant. It's not like hair colour. Violent sexual crime committed by men to women makes the sex of that person just about the most important part of it.

I think it's the gaslighting bit of all this that is the most dangerous.

Of all the violent criminals in prison, 98% of them are people. Two people a week are killed by other people. Sexual harassment in schools from people has reached alarming proportions.

"Woman"? Good thing they posted those photos.

Correct me if I am wrong but is the current state of the law that male rapists can now legally hide behind the identity of woman and everyone must report them as women?

It's rather good to be able to know if it's a male rapist who targets teenage girls on the run or if it' a female non-rapist criminal.

TheChampagneGalop

As far as I know, a transwoman is not legally a woman unless she has a gender reassignment certificate, for which there is still some criteria. Course that will all change if self identification.

I went right off on one about this on another thread

This reporting is incredibly dangerous

Obviously only dangerous to potential rape victims...so thats a plus

FFS!!!!

And that was sarcasm....just in case anyone is too incensed to realise, like me

It is possible that the case was sub judice in which case there are very strict limits as to what journalists can write.

Sounds a little bit like you can't do X for health and safety reasons, or I can't do Y for legal reasons. These reasons generally being entirely imaginary which is why the health and safety executive has pages and pages, and a publicity campaign to combat people saying nonsense like that.

Press standards seem to totally support accurate reporting, which this isn't, so that's one guideline not followed (it's number 1)

IPSO

I'm not a lawyer, but since he's already been convicted, and hasn't yet been arrested for being on the run, sub judice doesn't seem to apply either, and wouldn't apply to accurately reporting his sex anyway as he's not a child, and not a sexual assault victim.

Out-law

I doubt he has a GRC, because you have to have been 'living as a woman' for X amount of time, and there's nothing less like living as a woman than using your penis to rape teenage girls.

Yes the reporting is dangerous.

Why do we need to be courteous about a male rapist's special gender identity again?

He has raped teenage girls, he is scum.

"May be dressed as a man"

No shit, Sherlock

He wasn't convicted under his male name, would it still be included in female statistics.

I've been talking about this with dh earlier, he's working away at moment so didn't see crime watch last night, but he had said he remembered reading about Lisa in some local article a while back, the article was a local woman gone missing type thing, he remembers clicking link to police face book appeal at the time and the police posted than they had decided to reveal that Lisa is also Craig in the hopes it might jog memories and help and showed a photo of Lisa, presenting as male from a sighting after his disappearance presenting as a man.

Dh said load of supportive comments for Lisa, how brave they are, hoping they turn up safe and well, how their MH must be suffering and that it seemed people believed his trans status was behind his disappearance

Police didn't mention anything about him being a convicted rapist and on the run on the page dh looked at months ago. Maybe all the concerned comments may have been different if it was made clear Lisa had fucked off to avoid going to jail for raping and assaulting teenage girls.

Female family member has just rung me upset, apparently her Facebook is full of people pouncing on locals who have expressed anger at Craig's crimes, arguing about the transphobia and how his male identity should never have been revealed because its irrelevant, and then others saying yes it should, because Lisa is a vulnerable woman and needs to be found safe and well and now Lisa is more vulnerable as they could be beat up for being trans if someone recognises them. (They will be at risk of being beat up for being a rapist but so is every other man who is convicted of rape)

My family member engaged with one person who said they hope his victims are saying a woman raped them and has received a lot of shit when she replied that the only thing she hopes about Craig's victims is that they are getting support and feel safe. She rang me because she knows I'd understand and that while I've said women get shit online for daring to have an opinion if their own, she's gotten a nasty shock when it happened to her.

I've been trying to go through local articles etc from the time of the attacks and conviction and can't seem to find anything other than the missing woman stuff, usually local papers are good at reporting local crime but even in cases where papers can't report certain stuff, locals on Facebook still discuss it and share "help us find xxx" or "look out for this bloke, he attacked so and so and ran off etc" but everyone I know knew nothing about the rapes and assault on teenage girls until yesterday when crime watch was mentioned.

Can it really be that Craig's crimes were sidestepped because he is now Lisa and they didn't want to upset Lisa by mentioning they are male? I could weep.

I really really feel for the teenage girls he raped and assaulted and hope they are getting support and If they need speak of their experience,that they can do without being made to think they should centre their attacker's feelings and without worry about appearing transphobic or bigots.

they hope his victims are saying a woman raped them

I hope they're getting proper support and not being gaslighted into such an outrageous lie. Well done your relative for challenging that crap.

Craig can call himself Lisa if he wants, but any pretence of being a woman should be entirely negated by his crimes, ones which could only have been committed by a man.

People who can say that sort of thing about these rape victims are truly brainless and utterly lacking in any empathy.

"Dressed as a man"

Wtf? So everytime i go out dressed in jeans and a hoodie, no make up, i am dressing "as a man"?

By inference does "dressing as a woman" mean dress, heels, shit loads of make up and hair done?

Am i transgender? A man? Gender fluid?

OverthinkingSpartacus

That is so fucked up. I'm really getting confused here. I know people have drunk the koolaid and I also know people are scared of a backlash. But surely that can't on its own account for people, men and women, truly being more sympathetic with someone's gender identity over the rape of teens?

Why has the perspective been so drastically skewed?

I don't know. There is a trend, recently, for people to be fooled and believe utter nonsense. See Trump.

Perhaps it is the constellation of the stars that makes people dumb. I didn't use to believe in the supernatural, but struggle for a logical explanation of this idiocy.

Latent misogyny resurfacing now that they have an excuse to be misogynist and put the rapist's jendah above the victims' wellbeing?