Don't people get excited when they think a woman may have behaved badly in a way usually associated with men?

[BertrandRussell]

There have been several examples on here recently- TAAT rules preclude details - but there have been calls to contact the police, to disown, to leave, for behaviour that would be justified or glossed over in a man. It's as if people are hunting for evidence that women are just as bad as men when it comes to violence or abuse, and they get quite gleeful when they think they've found some.

There does seem to be a a few posters that hunt out evidence that women harm others and take joy when they find it

I dont think anyone one would disagree that this happens but it doesn't touch on the level of violence to women,children and other men that men commit.

A thread I am thinking of, when attempts were made to put it in context, to have a more considered less knee jerk reaction, it's 'minimising', apparently.

There is still this expectation that women falling short of perfect are Devils, whereas men will be men.

Actually, that's not fair. Most people on MN recognise an abuser when they read about one, and most are supportive of vulnerable posters. Some though...

Isn't it part of the same "she should look after her children better" mentality.
Women can't win. Men get idolised for changing a nappy.

Several times I've seen triumphant comments along the lines of 'thank you for admitting that women do XYZ'. I assume people that make those types of comments dont meet women in real life very often. IDK anyone that thinks women never do XYZ.

I thought this was going to be a Theresa May thread

Interesting. Why did you think it was a Theresa May thread?

Yes I have seen this and excited is absolutely the word. The idea of the she-devil is exciting and taboo.

I don't know the thread you are referencing though so couldn't comment specifically.

I was having a disagreement with a man on FB about the need for shelters for women affected by domestic violence. He was of course saying 'but what about the Menz' blah blah. We got on to sexual offences and again predictably I got the 'but women rape too' I pointed him to stats and he came back at me with the 'woman' rapist who was in fact a transgender man!!!
It was very satisfying to point out that 'she' was a man with a penis!!

Why? Because of the title, of course.

There are no female rapists in the UK - under UK law only men can rape. Women can be accessories to the crime.

Yes I know, he argued that women could rape and gave that as an example!!

There are no female rapists in the UK - under UK law only men can rape. Women can be accessories to the crime

I'm puzzled by the reporting of this crime. There is no suggestion Joan Taylor is transgender, but possibly it is just sloppy reporting.

'Monster' couple jailed for 84 child abuse charges
www.google.co.uk/amp/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39850119

I hesitate to say this, because you're a lawyer and I'm not, but I think women (XX, vagina-having women) can be prosecuted for rape under English law using the common purpose concept - if she held his victim down while he raped her (the infamous Bentley "let him have it" example in the case of murder).

However, if it's a lone person being prosecuted for perpetrating a rape, you know that person had to have a penis (because rape under English law has to involve penetration by a penis).

Similar to murder, the accomplice to rape can be convicted of the crime despite not actually committing the crime. Conspiracy and aiding and abetting laws are used to convict too.

splendide This is not strictly accurate. English law refers to a rapist using 'his penis', but Scottish law refers to a person's penis. I wonder if this allows for prosecution of a post-op transman?

And I remember from reading the Gender Recognition Act that a legal change to female does not prevent a MTT from prosecution for rape, despite the term 'his penis'.

splendide This is not strictly accurate. English law refers to a rapist using 'his penis', but Scottish law refers to a person's penis. I wonder if this allows for prosecution of a post-op transman?

Scots Law (there is no such thing as "Scottish law") makes any consensual penetration of another person's vagina, mouth or anus by a person's penis "rape".

It does not matter what sex the owner of the penis or the orifice is. "Penis" includes a surgically constructed penis. A trans man therefore could be guilty of oral or anal rape of a non trans man.

I'm sure English law comes to the same result although the Scottish statute conspicuously avoids using "his"

I had a bunch of people on facebook who seemed 'excited' about the 'woman' who had been charged with raping a man that was in the news fairly recently. Burst their bubbles a bit when I pointed out that it was actually a male.

Its quite sad how animated some seem to get if there is, for example, a female sex offender in the press.

Going back to the OP, yes I've noticed such people, definitely. In the case of men who do it they're typically of the same mindset as MRAs. The women who do it seem to be the type who say "I worry for my sons" (in the sense of "because some brazen hussy will accuse them of rape just because they stuck their penis in her while she was unconscious" sort of way, not the "because of toxic masculinity and porn culture and a hundred and one other influences in society that I don't want to screw him up...")

I would love to have been following your facebook feed when you pointed that out, WM.