New blog from Rosa Freedman and Rosemary Auchmuty

[SusanBunch]

theconversation.com/what-would-changes-to-the-gender-recognition-act-mean-two-legal-views-103204

See above link. Rosa and Rosemary present a GC view and Alex Sharpe presents a TWAW view. A lot of Alex’s argument seems to be that women are overreacting by not wanting to be around male bodies. Very much ‘nothing here to see’ tone.

Do you think the male ally is a MRA, trying to stir the pot? I've never really seen them in action before.

How can you logically argue both positions? On one hand noting all the constant sexual harassment and violence and female underrepresentation and on the other saying that males have a crate blanche to enter female spaces.

YY. And you're right, when this is pointed out they block or call you "unkind" and deflect to how oppressed trans people are. The cognitive dissonance is difficult.

^WTAF have I misunderstood that?
This person wants violent / sex offending cunty people locked in prison with men?^

It's another disingenuous argument these people make when prison safeguarding comes up. In the prison guidelines there is provision for any female inmate too dangerous to be kept in the female estate to be kept in the male estate. So they say that could also be the case with MTF trans who have a GRC and are legally "female". However whether a woman or a male with GRC they would have to be kept in a female section, not the general population.

In actual fact none of the arguably most dangerous women prisoners such as serial killer Joanna Dennehy are housed outside the female estate, so that situation hasn't arisen.

".If a man were to swear in front of an official of the court that he is female and intends to live as a female for the remainder of his life - and then is found to have sworn that oath falsely and goes on to commit an assault (either sexual or physical) in a female only space then her will face prosecution not only for the the assault, but also for the false declaration"

^^ comment.

If it's about internal gender id then how can anyone ever claim let alone prove that a person gave a "false oath" on this matter.

They go on to say the usual crass thing that because it is possible for men to access women's and girl's spaces at the moment by eg pretending to be a janitor, then all men should be allowed in freely.

Of course a "janitor" with a sign on the door saying "male janitor working" can be challenged, if he's sidling up to people or whatever then will be reported, he can be asked to leave. Anyone else you have to assume they are in the right place and not challenge.

There is just an absolute disregard for women's experience with creepy men and womens and girls discomfort. Because penis people must have whatever they want, all the time. Now they want to come in our facilities - and govts, womens orgs, everythign is just saying "Yes OK then that's fine".

It's mind boggling.

Ereshkigal - I've seen the "women do it too so why shouldn't TW rapists be in with the women - which is obviously as you say highly disingenuous.

I've not seen it stated before that violent women or women who have committed sex offences (cunty women) should be locked in with the women WTF are they on?

This comes naturally if you believe that sex is immaterial, gender is all, you believe strongly in sexist stereotypes. A person with a cunt who commits crimes associated with masculinity / male behaviour is really a man and needs to be in the mens prison.

I've not seen it stated before that violent women or women who have committed sex offences (cunty women) should be locked in with the women WTF are they on?

This is actual Prison Service policy. They wouldn't be with the men though, as Alex is implying. Nor would males with GRCs.

Yes exactly - this person is saying they should be locked in with the men.

I have not seen this stated by anyone in this argument before.

Previously they have stopped at "women do it too so it's discrimination against transwomen to not lock them in with the women irrepesctive of their crime" >

To say women (cunty) who have committed sexual or violent offences should be put in the mens prison is a step further

But makes perfect sense in a world where stereotype / gendered behavior ideas over-ride sex.

The massive differences between men and women on average, the fact that women can get pregnant, and the huge difference between the size of the male and female prison populations and the profiles of their crimes and their circumstances, are not considered at all.

Which ties in with trans logic > gender is all, sex is irrelevant. A man who says he's a woman should be put in women's prison. A woman who has committed crimes more common amongst men must be a man (irrespective of what she says ) and locked in with the men.

To say women (cunty) who have committed sexual or violent offences should be put in the mens prison is a step further

As I say, I've seen lots of people use it, not that they "should", but that they can be according to policy, which has the same flavour and is used to deflect the argument that violent males with GRC are being put in women's prisons.

In reality that policy does not mean that either female prisoners or males with GRCs would be locked in with the men but it suits transactivists to pretend that it does, and any problems with self ID are "a failure to apply the policy properly".

One annoying thing reading the comments is the casual way that newspaper reports of actual criminal cases are dismissed as ‘anecdotes’. No- anecdotes are where I say ‘my mate told me that X happened, so this proves Y’. A report of a decided court case is not an anecdote. Yet these idiots keep dismissing all of the mounting evidence as ‘anecdotal’. At the same time, they tweet and retweet things like #ibelieveher, so clearly their aversion to ‘anecdotes’ only applies where it concerns trans people. A criminal case requires proof beyond reasonable doubt. I think you can be pretty darn sure that a report of a verdict is not anecdotal.

That idiot MRA David Morley also keeps asking for statistics. He is given them (BBC report and Swedish study). His response- ‘I think we’d better leave it here’.

At least Alex can no longer claim all the comments are supportive anymore, although David is sure doing his level-best to tell all the women that they are hysterical man-haters and that concerns over safety are exaggerated. But I bet my life that he’ll also retweet some performative supportive message about Kavanaugh and the horror of the prevalence of sexual violence.

So to get this straight: women are right to be concerned about male violence, but not when they are concerned about males that the woke-brigade likes. Then, they are hysterical, hating misandrists who should STFU. God, the mental gymnastics of this are astounding. The lesson is clearly to stop thinking for ourselves and just rely on David and Alex for guidance on everything.

Women who have committed sex offences who are in prison have generally committed very different sexual crimes to men in for sex offences. Often we are talking about sexual activity with a minor (eg teacher/pupil activity). Virtually none have committed opportunistic offences against adult females. Sharing a cell with a 26 yo woman who slept with a 16 yo female pupil is nowhere near in the same league as sharing a cell with a rapist who retains a penis. To suggest it is is just insanity.

There is of course female violence in prisons too, but note that even notorious female prisoners like Rose West, Myra Hindley and Joanna Denehy have not presented risks to the extent of requiring segregation. Women commit very different crimes to men and therefore their risk factors really cannot just be compared like for like. Those women who commit murder tend to kill partners or children. Female serial killers are extremely rare and with the exception of Joanna Denehy, they tend to involve acting together with a male accomplice.

No- anecdotes are where I say ‘my mate told me that X happened, so this proves Y’. A report of a decided court case is not an anecdote. Yet these idiots keep dismissing all of the mounting evidence as ‘anecdotal’.

My thought exactly. He called Karen White an "anecdote". Stupid, arrogant misogynist.

Also did you see Alex's comment to the two feminist commenters? So revealing! They can't help themselves.

"They" being transactivists, obviously.

The one about how anyone in any doubt would now have made up their mind? The level of arrogance is astounding.

Karen White literally pleaded guilty and it’s still not enough for them. What the fuck more do they want beyond a trans woman formally admitting to sexually assaulting women? At the same time, they have zero issues with relying on bullshit stats on trans suicides where a tiny group of people self-reported suicidal ideation. That’s apparently gospel whereas the verdict of a court of law is just made up anecdotes.

That's the one. They are playing games with our lives.

I think the two GC women have managed to get some excellent points across. There aren't many people engaging, but it's probably give the lurkers food for thought. I bet most have never heard of Stefonknee before today and that's about as batshit crazy as it gets.

A lot of Alex’s argument seems to be that women are overreacting by not wanting to be around male bodies.

I don't get this really. Because the whole reason 'transwomen' want to use womens areas is because they don't want to be around male bodies.

So why on earth is this fine and dandy, where women who feel the same are hysterical bigots who are overreacting?

Males - I don't want to be around male people when I am naked and vulnerable. Oh thats totally understandable.
Females - I don't want to be around male people when I am naked and vulnerable. TERF cunt, go die in a fire, bigoted witch.

Alex Sharpe:
Barrister (Garden Court Chambers) www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk/barrister/alex-sharpe/

Professor Sharpe joined Keele in 2004. Prior to her appointment at Keele she taught and researched at Macquarie University, the University of Sydney, the University of Western Australia, the University of East London and the LSE. She has been a Visiting Professor at the Faculty of Law, University of Sydney, the Faculty of Law, McGill University, Montreal, the Faculty of Law, Lund University, Sweden, the Crime and Justice Research Centre, Queensland University of Technology, and the Institute of Criminology, University of Sydney. In addition to her Keele Chair, she currently holds an Adjunct Professorship at Queensland University of Technology (2014 -).

She has been involved in transgender law reform and activism for over twenty years. During that time, she has provided advice to various government agencies and departments, members of parliament, law firms, public interest advocacy organisations, and a variety of professional bodies, both in the UK and internationally. She has been cited judicially by the European Court of Human Rights and by a series of other courts in domestic jurisdictions. She sits on the International Legal Committee of the World Professional Association of Transgender Health (WPATH). This committee makes law reform interventions in transgender litigation worldwide by way of amicus briefs. She also sits on Amnesty International's Expert Committee on the Criminalisation of Sexual and Reproductive Conduct. For more information about Alex's work, see her 'Making a Difference' page: www.keele.ac.uk/law/research/makingadifference/alexsharpe/

So, TELI ? , Amnesty and WPATH

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3383981-Amnesty-has-jumped-the-shark

Bolloxio you’re right, it makes no sense. Well, it kind of does when you remember that Alex and co don’t actually care about women or their experiences. They focus exclusively on trans rights.

I mean, if you read Munroe Bergdhof’s tweet, it question what the hell access to women’s spaces even has to do with women at in the first place. I don’t get how anyone can be so entirely disconnected from reality, but there you have it. Alex interacts with this tweet and agrees with Munroe. I mean if I were Alex and wanted people to agree with me, I would at least PRETEND to give a tiny shit about women and their fears. But hey.

see TELI UK (Jess Bradley, Tara Hewitt, Michelle Hudson etc)
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3374926-What-influence-does-TELI-have-on-government-public-services-and-charities-policies-Co-founders-include-Jess-Bradley-Tara-Hewitt-and-Michelle-Hudson

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3325882-WEP-conference-questions-for-panel-of-trans-rights-advocating-barristers

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3325623-Jess-Bradley-a-government-advisor-on-womens-rights-suspended-by-NUS-over-indecent-blog-Part-iii

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3320513-Jess-Bradley-first-transgender-student-officer-suspended-after-flashing-photos

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3321764-Jess-Bradley-suspended-Part-II

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3323623-Who-is-really-funding-Jess-Bradleys-defence

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a3385533-Prominant-campaigning-role-of-Tara-Hewitt-NHS-TELI-Social-work-universities-etc

Males - I don't want to be around male people when I am naked and vulnerable. Oh thats totally understandable.
Females - I don't want to be around male people when I am naked and vulnerable. TERF cunt, go die in a fire, bigoted witch.

Yes. Also:

Males: I am afraid of assault, harassment and violence if I have to undress/toilet/sleep etc with male bodied people. Answer: That's totally understandable and of course you shouldn't have to do it.
Females: I am afraid of assault, harassment and violence if I have to undress/toilet/sleep etc with male bodied people. Answer: Never happens, you can call the police anyway if it does, shut up and die in a fire.

Alex sees no reason to put people with intact functioning penises who are incarcerated in with women.

Alex also sits on " Amnesty International's Expert Committee on the Criminalisation of Sexual and Reproductive Conduct"

Well that's fucking terifying.

Given that they obviously know and/or care fuck all about fact that women and girls globally are at particular risk of violence from men including DV and sexual. That pregnancy is a very non trivial consequence of this...

It's an area where sex ie biology >> is paramount. + the oppression that we experience due to our sex ie being the ones that have the babies.

If Alex doesn't believe in any of this, WTF are they saying on that panel?

Amnesty went to shit with the "human right to sex" and agreeing with pimps but this is interesting >> SWERF and TERF always used to be linked when they have nothing to do with each other. Pro pimp / pro prostitution/ pro porn is men's rights. Much of Trans activism is abut mens sexual rights as well. And about "queering" boundaries (that will result in women and girls being abused and exploited.

The second hit on google for that committee is the updated stand on "sex work" from Amnesty.

Hmm.

And about "queering" boundaries

Yes, most of this is about boundaries.

The one way to get a TRA/MRA to show you exactly who they are is to say 'no' to them.