Man in Brighton exposes himself to children while wearing womens clothes claims athletes foot made him do it

[miri1985]

www.theargus.co.uk/news/15768693.Salesman_in_sports_bra_exposed_himself_in_children___s_play_area/

Don't worry this kind of thing never happens!

Interesting that OP never suggested the pervert was trans.

Anyway, I nominate Feminism chat for the highest number of ploppers than any other board on here.

A fetish for wearing women's clothing does not equate to them being trans, which is what your thinly veiled snipe is really about. He is a disgusting person, and I hope his life is forever ruined, but the constant anti-trans bullshit on here is sickening.

Are you saying the only difference between this man and a transwoman is that he hasn't had the foresight to state he is a 'woman' and therefore it be reported in the gender in which he committed the act, which was in drag aka as a 'woman'? As if it was reported as a woman you'd be up in arms about women being sickos, surely?

Nicky Yep, but watch that point sail right over the heads of certain posters.

NickyNackyNoodle

It's a shame that they tend to disappear. Especially because all of us would be relieved to see research showing that our fears about self ID are unfounded. If there is any.

I respect the people who stick around to discuss this with us.

nicky

I agree that this board is plopper central

I also agree with the points raised

No one here has said that criminal is a transwomen

I dont ever remember seeing a post saying categorically that all transwomen are perverts and sexoffenders....never. i would like a link to such a post

By what definition is this man not really trans, Laudanum? Because that sounds awfully like the No True Scotsman fallacy. Check out the definitions all major trans orgs use.

No one here has said that criminal is a transwomen

Yep, we just think he's an AGP man - it's Stonewall who says he's trans, not us!

Not to mention that this is the third time the police have had to talk to him about exposing himself, and it's only now that he's been punished for it (80 hours community service and a fine)

Oh that is ridiculous!

As Ereshkigal said, the objections here are no true Scotsmans.

If the naysayers think that this person isn't trans, shouldn't be described as trans, shouldn't be seen in law as trans - where's the difference between them and the standard Mumsnetter position?

Why are people so blind? It's doing my head in.

Yes, please do pass your concerns about categorisations of trans people on to Stonewall etc. I'm sure they'll give you a considered and well argued response for their choice.

Who is anyone to deny the man in the OP though? 'fake trans' vs 'true trans'? Really?

What IS the categorical difference between the two categories? Can someone explain why they are certain that the example in the OP isn't trans? Are people trans until they commit a crime and then they are not? If that's the case then why are trans orgs pushing so hard to validate the identities of transwomen in jail?

As far as all trans organisations are concerned, and many gender specialists have stated, cross dressing is a statement and expression of identity. I'm surprised to see some trans people denying the identity of others.
If there is such a thing as fake trans, I'd like to understand how we can categorically distinguish this.

Maybe if the man in question stopped wearing tight women's underwear and leggings, his chronic athletes foot (of the balls) would clear up.
A couple of months wearing cotton boxers and Blue Harbour chinos and he'll be sorted

QOFE

I am really at a loss to think of what legal protections trans people enjoy or would enjoy that grants them permission to jack off in the park. Do women have this right? Not that i'm aware of.

How would he benefit by self ID'ing as a woman. He could walk into a woman's toilet, same as now, there is no magic force field. Self ID wont grant him access or licence to commit sex crimes in the ladies, in the park or anywhere.

There is absolutely no benefit to him to self ID as a woman, there are however a huge number of obstacles to life if he were to self ID as per proposed changes and not actually live his life in that role. It is incredibly hard to live with ID documents that don't match your presentation or third party perceived gender. This is all backed up by the evidence of the countries that have self ID.

If he actually does self ID'd would his crime go down as part of female statistics, there is a chance, but then there is a higher chance that during the prosecution his self ID will be picked apart and he would also face the charge of fraud on top of his sex crimes.

Self ID is not a get out of jail free card for sex offences.

How do you pick apart someone's self ID in court? What kind of questions would that involve?

Wow, laudanum and zigzag beautifully illustrating what everyone here is so concerned about!

Under Stonewall's definition, this man absolutely is 'trans'. And if the GRA comes into force then he will be 'trans' just by virtue of him saying so. He will be a 'woman' just by virtue of him saying so. Can't you see that that is the whole issue here?

Or is it that once a trans person does something wrong they can no longer be 'trans' because having that label certainly does seem to mean that you are beyond reproach no matter what your actions are?

Please come back and engage. Please don't plop and run, it really does make it look like you have no argument.

Also absolutely baffled as to how having 'athletes foot' means you have to get your todger out and start scratching it in public?

Surely that is 'athletes cock'?

BeyondAssignation

Well if he has a stat dec but all his other documents were unchanged then that would be a pretty big red flag. Whilst there may be arguments to be made for all aspects of appearing not to be abiding by the stat dec it would be reasonable to conclude that it was fraudulent if enough of them look to be lies. The court systems work on the balance of the evidence.

Also worth noting he got away with the previous occasions not by claiming to be trans but using a minor medical condition.

Thehair, I've never disputed whether or not this person is trans. That makes zero difference to me and my whole point is that whether the person in question is trans or not is completely irrelevant.

Thehairthebod

The lines around trans are indeed very vague and this individual if he indeed id's as trans does trans no good. But being trans is not the same as Self ID in terms of GRA reform. There really would not be any benefit to this person to complete a statutory declaration and declare themselves as a woman. How would he gain? It wouldn't give him license to sex crimes.

Many people under the trans umbrella are not transitioning, some such as this person (if he is) or crossdressers, transvestites etc have gender identities which remain in their genetic sex, they just enjoy feminine things, some in sociable ways others in sexual ways. But if your identity is not strong enough to transition and live your life that way then there really is no benefit to GRA self ID, it would make life a nightmare to be honest if one did. The kind of nightmare that transitioning trans people know all too well under the current situation.

whether the person in question is trans or not is completely irrelevant

It isn't at all irrelevant. It's a good example of why women require female spaces without any men in them, and to be empowered by the law and society to chuck dodgy men out of them. Because MTF trans are asking for privileged access to female spaces and it's about what is best for everyone. So yes, it's completely relevant to recognise that women require sex based protections from men.

So, if there appears to be a marked pattern of sex offenses within Male trans people, that is even greater than that of the rest of the male population, and astronomically different from the sex offending pattern of females, is that also an irrelevance? Something we should ignore, whilst acknowledgin the exponential increase in male people identifyin as trans AND lobbying parliament to remove all barriers of access to women and girls spaces?

The lines around trans are indeed very vague and this individual if he indeed id's as trans does trans no good. But being trans is not the same as Self ID in terms of GRA reform. There really would not be any benefit to this person to complete a statutory declaration and declare themselves as a woman. How would he gain? It wouldn't give him license to sex crimes.

It would give him access to women's spaces?

Thehair, I've never disputed whether or not this person is trans. That makes zero difference to me and my whole point is that whether the person in question is trans or not is completely irrelevant.

Of course it's relevant. If the GRA is passed, then as I understand it this person would be able to say 'I am a woman', fill in a form and it would be thus. And then they have access to women's spaces and no one can challenge it because he is 'a woman'. If I have this wrong please do tell me, I am still trying to get my head around this whole thing.

Thehairthebod

There is no law protecting single sex spaces.

Yes, there is.