Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

"‘No evidence’ that men are using trans identity for sexual violence"

51 replies

Igneococcus · 18/12/2019 06:44

Scotland section of the Times:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/a42ec8d2-2107-11ea-9a0e-84d50453511a?shareToken=8f86b7983e1bbc4544e7a4dd8d0a470a

OP posts:
RoyalCorgi · 18/12/2019 09:03

So what they're saying here is that the male bodied people who have committed sexual violence in women-only spaces are genuinely transgender.

That's a good point.

They're being silly, anyway. Absence of evidence does not constitute evidence of absence, so even if there wasn't any evidence, there is good reason to err on the side of caution.

In fact, as the Twitter thread NotBad links to makes clear, there is plenty of evidence.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 18/12/2019 09:04

That rather conveniently sidesteps the question of what happens if someone who's TrueTrans by whatever measure we're using to judge that commits acts of violence in a women's space. I realize that many women default to an "oh I don't mean the real ones, just the fakers" position because they think it makes them seem Nice and Kind and Not A Bigot Honestly, but there's absolutely no evidence that identifying as trans "genuinely" makes a male human less prone to violence than any other male human.

OldCrone · 18/12/2019 09:11

Sexual violence isn't the only sort of violence we should be concerned about.

www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/transgender-prisoner-branded-one-scotlands-11837767

Does the Scottish government consider Tiffany Scott to be genuinely transgender or not?

TreestumpsAndTrampolines · 18/12/2019 09:18

From the country housing Mighty Almighty aka Tiffany Scott aka Obiwan Kenobi aka Andrew Burns this comes across as a tad ingenuous.

TheProdigalKittensReturn · 18/12/2019 09:18

Tiffany Scott is a perfect example of why it doesn't matter whether someone's gender feelings are "genuine" or not - there is no women's prison designed to hold a person that violent and uncontrollable*, and exposing women prisoners to Tiffany would be a violation of their rights.

*And there's a reason for that! Perhaps both the SNP and the prison system should have a think about why there's never been a need to build women's prisons fit to hold people like Tiffany.

SarahTancredi · 18/12/2019 09:19

Does the Scottish government consider Tiffany Scott to be genuinely transgender or not?

I thought in this case the judge refused to send to a womans prison as he didnt buy it? Could be wrong of course

But as for this article well, they dug themselves a bit of a hole really. Neither interpretation, puts forward a good case

LangCleg · 18/12/2019 09:43

‘No evidence’ that men are using trans identity for sexual violence

Not RTFT yet but JESUS FUCKING TAPDANCING CHRIST what a snide mangling and twisting and employment of misleading semantics to cover up the wide variety of issues.

We think:

  1. XY persons who genuinely believe they have a "trans identity" have the same risk of being a sexual danger to women as any other XY person.
  1. XY persons who are sex offenders are likely to pretend a "trans identity" if that makes accessing female victims easier.
  1. XY persons, with or without a genuine or a fake trans identity should not be in women's private spaces or providing women only services for many other reasons than sexual danger - dignity, privacy, and not bloody being women.

They can't even be honest about the objections women have, let alone be truthful about whether they're valid or not.

LangCleg · 18/12/2019 09:45

Anyway, here is a letter from a transsexual male prisoner complaining about multiple "fake" transgender identifications in prisons among sex offenders.

"‘No evidence’ that men are using trans identity for sexual violence"
Poota · 18/12/2019 09:46

Is this argument being put forward by the Scots a nod to the 'No true Scotsman' fallacy? Because it relies totally on that.

popehilarious · 18/12/2019 09:47
  1. "There is no evidence that something has happened" does not mean "there is evidence that something has not happened". I mean, they teach that in basic science lessons, right?

  2. when this was researched, what criteria was used to ascertain which men were genuinely trans?

  3. are they advocating that "acceptance without exception" is wrong, because presumably they are making the statement that there is such a thing as "falsely claiming to be a trans woman"? Are TRAs pointing out how transphobic the claim is?

koshkat · 18/12/2019 09:52

Interesting timing...

LangCleg · 18/12/2019 09:53

And another.

"‘No evidence’ that men are using trans identity for sexual violence"
LangCleg · 18/12/2019 09:59

And another (same transsexual prisoner). I don't take a "true trans" position myself, ScotGov, but if you won't listen to women, what about transsexuals in prison themselves? Are they making it up out of thin air too?

"‘No evidence’ that men are using trans identity for sexual violence"
OldCrone · 18/12/2019 10:17

“The Scottish government has not identified any evidence supporting a link between women-only spaces being inclusive of transgender women and non-trans men falsely claiming a trans identity to access these spaces and commit sexual violence.”

Karen White was placed in a women's prison where he committed sexual violence against several female inmates.

According to the Scottish government, either Karen White is genuinely transgender or the sexual violence didn't happen.

Since the sexual violence is on record and cannot be disputed, it appears that the Scottish government believes that Karen White is a genuine transgender person, because no man would pretend to be transgender in order to commit sexual violence.

According to the Scottish government, all men who identify as transgender and have committed sexual violence in a woman-only space are genuine transgender people.

koshkat · 18/12/2019 10:21

Yes that is about the size of it.

Michelleoftheresistance · 18/12/2019 10:32

Oh for fucks sake.

Unless female people can establish, beyond all reasonable doubt, with statistics, that enough of them have been victims of serious, proven sexual violence by thoroughly testing this utter loopiness to destruction, they have no grounds for asking to retain single sex spaces?

Give us a figure you bastards. How many females do you need to see damaged? What's the acceptable loss here?

No. Females need spaces apart from males for privacy, dignity, safety, freedom from voyeurism, harassment and many other reasons than not wanting to be beaten up and raped because it isn't only the feelings and needs of males that matter. How fucking subhuman do you think women are? Find another solution for those males, don't strip females of all rights to keep those males happy. Or admit that you are creating law that demands females either accept being used by males in those spaces for them to undress/toilet/sleep or lose all right to any provision. Own it. Tell the electorate that males are what matters and females may have no rights that males who want to use them may find inconvenient. You misogynistic, stupid wankers.

Michelleoftheresistance · 18/12/2019 10:41

And I'll point it out again: it's an ugly truth, but those born male insisting on using female spaces are using those females, whether they want to admit this or not. For validation of a chosen identity, or in the case of some cross dressers as evidenced by their Twitter feed, for sexual kicks and wank fodder. Third spaces won't do because there are no females in them. The presence of the females with no boundaries allowed to them is the key part.

And let's be honest about what part of the females are being used, because their consent, their feelings, their minds, their personalities, their lived experience, their culture, in fact any part of them separate to their biology are of absolutely no interest here.

When did it become ok to use females? It's like any comprehension of consent, objectification, exploitation never happened. Please, someone, link the woke explanation of why this could be somehow justifiable and we have actual MPs and government lining up behind this? And then go ask Jo Bloody Swinson how pushing this incoherent sexist insanity worked out for her.

happydappy2 · 18/12/2019 10:41

How does someone ‘live as a woman for 3 months’? What criteria must they meet? I’m a woman but I don’t have long hair, wear heels & carry a handbag. It’s just so rediculous.

koshkat · 18/12/2019 10:43

You are just not womaning right happy. Hmm

mement0mori · 18/12/2019 10:50

According to the Scottish government, all men who identify as transgender and have committed sexual violence in a woman-only space are genuine transgender people

And logically this would mean that women are more at risk from transwomen because TW have a higher rate of sexual offending than other male people. Which backs up the need for separate spaces.

HandsOffMyRights · 18/12/2019 11:10

Clearly they've never read this thread:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3348290-It-will-never-happen-resource-thread

I'll refer to James Kirkup's brilliant piece last year following Karen White's violence:

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/07/are-female-prisoners-at-risk-from-transgender-inmates/

*There are other cases where it has been reported that male-born criminals have been admitted to the women’s prison estate and caused harm and distress to women. In April this year, Andrea Albutt, president of the Prison Governors Association, told a Commons committee about the consequences of allowing male-bodied prisoners into the female prison estate:

“I have seen women very scared in the situation of somebody who has a male body but identifies as a woman coming into a female prison or potentially coming into a female prison.”

Hers is not a lone voice. Not long ago, I spoke to someone in a senior position in the Ministry of Justice who told me that the risks presented by transgender prisoners in the female estate were not being adequately managed; according to this person, there were several cases where male-born inmates had transferred to the female estate on grounds of gender reassignment, and subsequently committed acts of sexual violence against female inmates. Have either the managers of the prisons system or the politicians to whom they answer taken the issues that raise such fears seriously enough? Again, an open question.*

And
*psychologists working with forensic patients are aware of a number of cases where men convicted of sex crimes have falsely claimed to be transgender females for a number of reasons:

· As a means of demonstrating reduced risk and so gaining parole;

· As a means of explaining their sex offending aside from sexual gratification (e.g. wanting to ‘examine’ young females);

· Or as a means of separating their sex offending self (male) from their future self (female).

· In rare cases it has been thought that the person is seeking better access to females and young children through presenting in an apparently female way.

Such strategies in no way affect risk and indeed may increase it.

Some people falsely believe that taking oestrogen and blocking androgen in males will reduce risk of offending, however this is not necessarily the case.*

And
*The committee also heard from James Barrett. Dr Barrett is the lead clinician at the Gender Identity Clinic at the Tavistock and Portman NHS trust, recognised by many people as the foremost NHS centre for the treatment of medical issues relating to gender variance. He is also the editor and main psychiatric author of the standard United Kingdom textbook in this area, and at the time was president of the British Association of Gender Identity Specialists. It was in the last capacity that he submitted evidence to the select committee, writing on behalf of BAGIS, a group of clinicians and other health professionals committed to “the promotion of excellence in transgender healthcare”. In short, Dr Barrett can reasonably be described as a leading expert in this field, and an expert whose entire professional effort is focussed on the welfare and wellbeing of transgender people. This is what he wrote about transgender people and the prison estate:

'The criminal justice system merits quite a bit of thinking about. On the one hand, many of us can remember patients who were charged with crimes, convicted and who ended up on the sex offenders register when we thought that the same thing wouldn’t have happened if they weren’t a trans person.

The converse is the ever-increasing tide of referrals of patients in prison serving long or indeterminate sentences for serious sexual offences. These vastly outnumber the number of prisoners incarcerated for more ordinary, non-sexual, offences.

It has been rather naïvely suggested that nobody would seek to pretend transsexual status in prison if this were not actually the case. There are, to those of us who actually interview the prisoners, in fact very many reasons why people might pretend this.

These vary from the opportunity to have trips out of prison through to a desire for a transfer to the female estate (to the same prison as a co-defendant) through to the idea that a parole board will perceive somebody who is female as being less dangerous through to a [false] belief that hormone treatment will actually render one less dangerous through to wanting a special or protected status within the prison system and even (in one very well evidenced case that a highly concerned Prison Governor brought particularly to my attention) a plethora of prison intelligence information suggesting that the driving force was a desire to make subsequent sexual offending very much easier, females being generally perceived as low risk in this regard.'

In summary, a representative body for psychologists and the leading expert in the field, speaking for other experts, submitted clear and quite extensive evidence to Parliament suggesting that some male sex-offending criminals have attempted to exploit existing gender-change rules for harmful and illegitimate purposes and that others are likely to attempt to do so in future.*

stillathing · 18/12/2019 11:20

Michelle I always think, but never say, how completely succinctly brilliant your posts are. I so hope you're someone with a voice IRL.

Angryresister · 18/12/2019 14:01

Thank you handsoff for putting this up again. Are you planning on sending it to the consultation. This is pretty clear..why would it be rejected as evidence? ( yes I know, but..)

HandsOffMyRights · 18/12/2019 15:22

Yes Angry

Still have my extensive notes from the last time women were forced to explain why we don't want penises in our spaces or sex based laws.

Last year when I was explaining the whole mess to my dad (75) I mentioned that some males are using this as an excuse to perv on and abuse/sexually assault women.

I also mentioned cases in schools where teenage girls had to get changed in front of a teenage boy (I think I cited a case where the boy was getting aroused and playing with his cock - lovely chat with one's father, I know) and my dad was not surprised at the least

"Well why wouldn't they?" Dad asked, as we have also asked on here.

He knows such men can now have their cake and eat it, for want of a better phrase.

Michelleoftheresistance · 18/12/2019 16:04

there were several cases where male-born inmates had transferred to the female estate on grounds of gender reassignment, and subsequently committed acts of sexual violence against female inmates.

There will be no publicly available data on how often this has happened, in the same way that the number of children who die in situations like Victoria Climbie/Baby P are very difficult to establish, because the authorities dealing with them regard a case that 'escapes into the press' and gets known to the general public as a disastrous failure of containment. Rather than the utter, unacceptable scandal the general public view it as. I wish I was exaggerating, but I've sat in those meetings.

Swipe left for the next trending thread