Male police officers can intimately search women. New guidance

[HandsOffMyRights]

Apologies if this has been posted, but I am sickened that new Police guidance (written by Stonewall obvs) enables male officers who ID as women to search women.

We are meant to be reassured that 'only' officers who ID as women can perform such searches. Apparently there's a lot of misunderstanding about this.

Clinton Blackburn (@SuptBlackburn) Tweeted:
Proud to be finally launching the National Trans Tool Kit. Developed in Association with PCC @DavidJMunro @policesupers @stonewalluk @NatTransPolice @ACCJulieCooke @LGBTpoliceuk bringing consistency across the UK t.co/zcuW18hd1E twitter.com/SuptBlackburn/status/1061971348526899200?s=17

"I am a member of the public and I am not reassured by the thought that a self-declared gender identity would be sufficient for a bepenised person to stick his fingers in my knickers

You’d have grounds to complain if a nonpenised officer put their fingers in your knickers. It’s not THAT intimate a search."

????

Strip searching looks for things hidden. Clue is in the name. Where do YOU think women might hide things like drugs?

"Could have drugs on her"
"Yep for sure"
"Where do women often stash them?"
"Knickers"
"Right, we definitely won't check there then"

I thougth it was already agreed that the dual warrant card person would search women on their woman days?

Just posted on the AIBU thread that's discussing the guidelines more broadly (www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3423146-New-police-guidelines).
The searches issue is hugely concerning but I'm also genuinely worried about the potential impact of the 'transphobic hate crime' definition. This includes misgendering and not accepting someone's self-ID'd gender. So stating my belief that a man can't be a woman & vice versa, or calling Karen White 'he' could now be prosecuted as a hate crime. And if it can, sooner or later it doubtless will. Arguably it would be a hate crime to insist on same-sex searches. Although since sex is still hanging on in there as a protected characteristic I would hope that bit of the law would trump these guidelines.
But it's a pernicious mess.

The woman who got punched in the face at speakers corner got punished by the judge for refusing to refer to the nonGRC holding person who threw the punch as "her".

I tihnk her costs weren't paid or something even though the puncher was convicted.

So this has already happened > expect more of teh same.

Strip searching looks for things hidden. Clue is in the name. Where do YOU think women might hide things like drugs?

Women are asked to remove their clothing but no officer puts their hands on them. If a detainee needs to lift a body part like s breast/scrotum they do it themself. No cavity searches take place.

A strip search can only be authorised by a custody sergeant in appropriate circumstances, usually when the detainee has a history of concealing.

If a corrupt male officer wanted to take advantage of vulnerable women there would be far easier ways than identifying as female and hoping on that odd occasion a woman needs searching in custody they are on duty and available, and all that effort just to look at a naked woman?

*Could have drugs on her"
"Yep for sure"
"Where do women often stash them?"
"Knickers"
"Right, we definitely won't check there then

Still wouldn’t involve them putting their fingers in there though.

If a corrupt male officer wanted to take advantage of vulnerable women there would be far easier ways than identifying as female and hoping on that odd occasion a woman needs searching in custody they are on duty and available, and all that effort just to look at a naked woman?

This isn't about a corrupt officer it's about women being able to refuse consent for any man, whatever his intentions, to search her intimately. A huge number of women offenders have experienced male violence and abuse, generally worse than the crime they have been arrested for.

If a corrupt male officer wanted to take advantage of vulnerable women there would be far easier ways than identifying as female and hoping on that odd occasion a woman needs searching in custody they are on duty and available, and all that effort just to look at a naked woman?

Jaysus, how many more variations on 'No male would go to those lengths to be pervy!'?

When did your spaceship arrive on the planet?

Women are asked to remove their clothing but no officer puts their hands on them. If a detainee needs to lift a body part like s breast/scrotum they do it themself. No cavity searches take place.

Nothing grim about being asked by a male police officer who identifies as a woman to strip, hand all your clothes including underwear to and lift up your breasts for.

Not humiliating at all.

No appalling abuse of power.

No unnecessary degradation.

Just making sure male police officers have the right to pretend to be women even though everyone in the room knows they are the same sex as every rapist who has ever lived.

Nothing to see here.

I think from the unintelligible paragraph about searches in the document that we don't know what they are really planning. I think we need to watch this space.

Can I also say all their stuff looks like it has been produced on word. Surprised they didn't use comic sans.

And as we know, suspects who struggle are often charged with assault and/or obstructing the police.
In many cases this is a deserved and reasonable response. But if a woman physically resists a cavity search by a person with a penis, is she going to be charged with offences against the police? And would it be transphobia as well?

If a corrupt male officer wanted to take advantage of vulnerable women there would be far easier ways than identifying as female and hoping on that odd occasion a woman needs searching in custody they are on duty and available, and all that effort just to look at a naked woman?

Says a man who will never have been on the receiving end of pervy male attention, so doesn't know what he's talking about.

If a corrupt male officer wanted to take advantage of vulnerable women there would be far easier ways than identifying as female and hoping on that odd occasion a woman needs searching in custody they are on duty and available, and all that effort just to look at a naked woman?

In what ways do male officers take advantage of vulnerable women? Don't you think these situations should be eliminated rather than expanded?

This is horrendous!

Says a man who will never have been on the receiving end of pervy male attention, so doesn't know what he's talking about

I’m not a man

Glad the police can’t do cavity searches

Having been pinned down by four male police officers during a severe Mental health episode, and remembering the hugely inappropriate amount of force one of them in particular used, this is not filling me with confidence. Having them touch me at all while I was frightened and distressed was bad enough, but the thought of having a man who claims to be female, despite everyone on the planet knowing they’re not, touching and searching is fucking terrifying. I can see how that would do a whole lot for somebody’s mental health.

Glad the police can’t do cavity searches

Yup. I'm glad the police aren't allowed to torture or rape people in police custody either.

But that doesn't make me feel any better about the fact that male police officers can perform intimate searches on me and other women and girls though.

I thought there were laws to protect our privacy and dignity and protect us from unnecessary degrading or humiliating treatment in custody - clearly not.

So this happened last week.

Police officer dismissed for sexually assaulting sleeping woman on train

Independent link

But hey it never happens, right?

So we should go right ahead to make it easier for men to sexually assault women.

Oh and from the article:

"Blood, 38, of Luton, said he had changed his name from Carl to Kyle in a bid to distance himself from the embarrassment the incident had caused him."

But people never change their names in order to hide their dodgy pasts, do they?

If i was searched by anyone who identified as a woman rather than was a woman and I did not have a right to refuse I would regard that as an institutionalised asssault and abuse.

It is that simple. I would feel like my rights had been violated. Whether the law was in law with that or not, would be beside the point. Thats how it would leave me feeling.

Whether people feel the law is just and there for the benefit of society as a whole is important. Moves which make sections of the public feel like they are exposed, at risk or removes their dignity are recipes for disaster.

This would undermine trust in the police on an enormous scale - and disproportionately amongst working class /ethnic communities.

Frankly, that makes the entire idea ill thought out and doomed to cause huge problems from the work go.

I would like to point out this case that has been recently in the news:

www.stokesentinel.co.uk/news/stoke-on-trent-news/police-officer-accused-raping-13-2169122
Police officer accused of raping 13-year-old 'joined force to exploit girls'
Ian Naude, 30, has denied charges including rape and sexual assault

This guy ADMITS having sex with the girl, but is using the defence that she consented. When you read his background and why he joined the police the whole case is utterly revolting.

I'm glad the police aren't allowed to torture or rape people in police custody either

Yeah you’re correct, they’re not. That bloody Police and Criminal Evidence Act, spoiling all their fun, eh?

This woman's story in the press at the moment certainly indicates they touched her genitals and I believe her - it's the story I posted upthread where the police seem to hae strip searched her as punishment for gettign involved in something they didn't want her involved in:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-45439954

If you think that police officers never abuse their powers you are mad TBH.
I am also dubious that they aren't going to check themselves / not bring on the force if they are refused.

Good lord, no, there are some police who have been proven to be absolute bastards (although thankfully a very small minority!)

The point is though is it doesn’t follow they’d have to pretend to be trans to be corrupt

it doesn’t follow they’d have to pretend to be trans to be corrupt

No but it would allow them to molest women and girls as part of their job without breaking any rules.

'She' was checking for piercings and drugs... all totally above board.