Rape recorded as a female crime; Sunday Times

[MrsSnippyPants]

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/police-forces-let-rapists-record-their-gender-as-female-d7qtb7953?shareToken=3f1b1cb5fa2d8f944048e32f25488fcc

Haven’t seen this shared yet.

Interesting. The Times is really doing an excellent job in exposing the insanity of this. And that's a reminder for me to go buy the paper copy today.

They've also covered the cyclist cheating women out of medals:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/transgender-cyclist-rachel-mckinnon-sprints-away-with-200m-gold-medal-0z2n52wxs?shareToken=6dfbc936aff5cdaf275395a9be7419d2

The Mail on Sunday is covering Always eradicating women from sanitary towels:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7592413/Transgender-lobby-forces-ditch-female-logo-sanitary-towels.html

And the Observer is covering the "super complaint" from the Centre for Women's Justice into the “boys’ club” culture in certain police forces that allows officers to abuse their spouses and partners without fear of arrest or prosecution:
www.theguardian.com/society/2019/oct/20/domestic-abuse-within-police-force-to-be-investigated

“There is no evidence to suggest that recording a person’s gender based on the information that they provide will have an impact on an investigation or on national crime statistics, because of the low numbers involved.” says the National Police Chief's Council.

Except surely a change from zero female rapists to any number above that represents a very significant increase in the percentage of female rapists and is obviously going to have an impact on statistics?

Thanks to the Times, Finnbar Webster, and Dr Nic.

Interesting that they can only register sex or chosen alternative. If the reporting form was changed to show both sex and an optional box for transgender, by now we’d have lots of useful information to show whether changing the GRA to allow self-ID is safe or not. I strongly suspect that those pushing this do not want that information recorded as it would immediately show the increased risk to women.

So, that said, who would we lobby to get that change made? Anyone have any idea who would have power over that?

Someone did an analysis of the potential effects on crime statistics of allowing self ID based (IIRC) on percentages of Male v female criminals and the finding that transition didn't alter a persons tendency to crime. The effect would be expected to be very significant. Does anyone remember this and have a link?

Don't have time to look but is it on Fair Play for Woman Errol?

fairplayforwomen.com/campaigns/prisons/

Is that really the response? We can fudge the statistics because it's only a few numbers?

Let me just have a chat with my professional statistician mate. I mean, I know stats in the real world are messy and noisy. But surely that doesn't mean just giving up and going 'ah, 3, 15, 28, who cares'??

I'm glad to see this in The Times but a couple of the comments have irritated me. Are we seriously still pushing the 'this never happens' line, when it has been clearly reported that it does. One person who frequently comments on such Times articles in particular is very invested in spreading lies - it is fairly consistent.

All the 'it makes no difference' from police and others is very ignorant. Of course it makes a difference to victims, to data, to showing how most sexual violent crimes are committed by biological males - still it is very handy if you want to obfuscate that information because you can say 'it doesn't matter'. Bullshit it doesn't.

Sigh between this and women's sports and cycling world records I am pretty furious in general today.

'There is no evidence to suggest that recording a person’s gender based on the information that they provide will have an impact on an investigation or on national crime statistics, because of the low numbers involved.”'

As per pp it makes a huge difference to women's crime stats as the definition of rape involves a penis. Women can suddenly rape.

The person's comment indicates that they are ONLY thinking of male crime stats, where there are so many rapists, to lose a handful makes no odds. (so many many even though a tiny % get convicted).

They are not thinking of impact on stats of crimes committed by women.

If this doesnt show insanely massive unconscious (hopefully) bias then I don't know what does.

They are not thinking of female victims or data about female criminality. Only about male criminals and the impact on male stats.

I keep thinking I can't be more shocked but then I am.

This statement would presumably have been agreed before being issued as well.

So not only will (mostly) women have to live with ‘I’ve been raped’ but now with the ridiculous ‘by a woman’ qualifier? Men too of course. Even more ridiculous.

Who benefits from incorrect recording of sex of perpetrator in sex crimes?

Not the victim: they can’t correctly identify their attacker.

The police? I can’t see how incorrect information is beneficial to the investigation of crimes.

The courts? As above- I can’t see the benefit to a court of having inaccurate evidence.

The perpetrator?

If the reporting form was changed to show both sex and an optional box for transgender, by now we’d have lots of useful information to show whether changing the GRA to allow self-ID is safe or not. I strongly suspect that those pushing this do not want that information recorded as it would immediately show the increased risk to women.

My thought too.

Mra's do as they can say women do it too.

Feminists who are concerned with sex based violence esp sexual violence do as seeing headlines saying women are being arrested for / convicted of sex offences undermines the argument that male violence is an issue.

Women lose as the difference at population level of our lives is eroded with women seen by public as increasingly violent and sexually violent.

Women do it too and namalt are mra lines.

There was an article in one of the main papers about how there was a massive increase in women committing sex offences.
No? Over how so many women had been found guilty of rape.
Side note at the end saying men still committed I think it was 1000x more offences but that was a real side note.

We all know who benefits. Men.

More bullshit of the highest order. I’m angry today too.

This complements the 'Crime has no gender' bullshit perfectly.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3721196-women-are-just-as-likely-to-commit-violent-crimes-no-they-re-not

It is so difficult not to be perpetually enraged at all this bullshit. The terrible harm that is being done - to women, to children, to so many who are vulnerable and the thoughtless complicity of so many organisations is gut wrenching.

DH reckons I’m going to have a stroke one of these days.

Yeah you've got to wonder why europol are putting resource into telling the public that women can do it too.

Yes they can does anyone think otherwise? Of course not.

There's an agenda over all this stuff. Mra is all I can think. But from europol???

The bbc piece on that was good with an academic saying this is fucking ridiculous.

Adding a transgender tick box alongside the biological sex in police systems would be a blimming nightmare to implement. I can't begin to imagine the number of quite fundamental changes that would be needed to huge important databases, user interfaces, system interfaces, forms and guidance used by police and courts. It won't happen any time soon.

Stick to bio sex clearly defined as being the "old".

I wouldn't be recording anything about personality anyway. Do we record sexuality? Veganism? Shopping habits? If the police statisticians want to report on that stuff they can buy the analysis from Google and Facebook which might be a good idea anyway.

Well it appears that police forces can and do ask about transgender status (and a number of other identities). Just not for rapists and sex offenders.

twitter.com/zeno001/status/1186023952398901249?s=21

Now why would that be I wonder? What possible reason could anyone have for wanting to disguise critical information about rapists?