These Are Not Our Crimes

[EmpressLangClegInChair]

TheUterati, who was one of the first FWR women to be banned under the New Rules, has made a video listing over 70 male prisoners who claim to be women and their crimes. It's not an easy watch but it's a very important one.

Really hard hitting. Very unsurprised at the very male nature of the crimes but shocked that this will have been massively inflating "female" crime figures for the past 5 years.

Worth watching.
Please share widely.

Jeremy Vine, have you seen this yet?
Victoria Derbyshire, have you?
What about you Lorraine Kelly?

The problem with this kind of reporting is that whenever people hear about a 'woman' committing a violent or sexual crime, they end up wondering if it's really a man. People don't like being lied to.

Thank you for posting this.

I find it really hard to understand why this is being allowed to continue. It's so obviously dangerous, stupid and wrong in so many ways.

And 70 of them! My god, I had no idea that there were so many. Does anyone know if that's all of them in the UK?

It might be informative to compare the number of female criminals committing sexual assault etc before the police started allowing prisoners to self identify, with the figures afterwards.

Is there a clear date from which the police started to do this, does it vary between forces and areas?

I actually saw a twitter exchange a while back between Mhairi Black and someone else - a high profile GC feminist but I can't remember which one - where she was arguing for the position that women commit violent sexual crimes at the same rate as men. She shared a list of women convicted for sexual crimes to "prove" it, and literally the first 3 "women" on the list were men. It was such a perfect illustration of the problem but she didn't even acknowledge it. Literally using male sexual crimes against women to argue that women have the same offending profile as men and that men should therefore have greater access to us. So fucked up.

I understand the enormous issues with their being housed in women's prisons but why is it a problem that they add to the female crime statistics? I feel no more culpable for their actions than I do for those of Joanne Dennehy or indeed any white criminal, female or male.

It's not really about that, crime stats shouldn't be used that way anyway though goodness knows they are at times.

It comes down to the reasons we include sex in crime statistics at all - it helps us to understand patterns of crime and patterns of offending, it can help to develop policy, and we can look at changes.

If all of a sudden we found shoplifting charges against women doubled, for example, that would raise some questions. We also know that there are some significant differences in patterns of offending between men and women, and we'd miss things if we couldn't look at them separately.

It obscures the nature & prevelance of male-pattern criminal behaviours.

They ought to list sex and ‘gender’ maybe. Interesting to compare crimes agains sex and include gender ‘ID’. That would be interesting.

Recording both sex & 'gender identity' would be very useful for everyone.
There is too much confusion caused by different uses of the term 'gender'

(Providing there is an option to include N/A or 'none' for the latter)

Dr Em's recent article examines the history and origins of the idea of 'gender identity'
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3896788-Important-series-of-articles-by-Dr-Em-Sexist-History-at-the-Heart-of-the-Science-on-Transsexualism-Part-I-Benjamin-Ihlenfeld-Money-Ehrhardt

Does anyone have a screenshot of Mhairi Black's Twitter exchange giving examples of" female offenders" who were actually male?

It obscures the nature & prevelance of male-pattern criminal behaviours.

It certainly does

It also obscures the nature & prevalence of female criminal behaviours, a subject I am especially interested in.

The other thing it does is it continues the cult-like tendencies for very obvious lies to be reported as facts, e.g. TWAW, there are countless different genders, children are born in the wrong body and should be prescribed puberty blockers, the Jack The Ripper Museum is a celebration of the history of women in the East End of London, herd immunity is the way forward, the PPE is on the way, the Emperor’s clothes are magnificent, etc etc.

More than anything else I am really sick of being expected to applaud and comply with liars liars with their pants on fires.

A bit of honesty goes a long way.

The program called "youtube-dl" may be useful. I've grabbed a copy of the video.

Bring back theUterati say I...

Importantly, none of us are responsible for the crimes committed by another. But for the purposes of safeguarding, sentencing, commonsense etc, it is imperative to interpret and understand risk appropriately.

Hypothetically, there could be a repeat offender in another Western country, whose crimes are predominantly sexual in nature, or which victimise natal women. And this particular offender might be perceived to be receiving a veil of protection // "pass" from the criminal justice system, because individual judges (or equivalent) are unwilling to sentence this person to a female estate. I wonder what that would - hypothetically - do to such a justice system, through the viewing lens of the rest of the world? Or how it might affect women as a sex class in that country and beyond? Much less to the faith in their legislators of any female children of that country...

Deeply shocking . Has anyone tried sending it their MP at all? Mine still hasn’t responded to my emails, saying he was looking into the matter...

why is it a problem that they add to the female crime statistics? I feel no more culpable for their actions than I do for those of Joanne Dennehy or indeed any white criminal, female or male.

It seems to be the opinion on here that people are responsible for the crimes committed by other members of their sex. So that's probably the issue. We would be responsible for these crimes if they were done by women.

RabidChinchilla - "It seems to be the opinion on here that people are responsible for the crimes committed by other members of their sex. So that's probably the issue. We would be responsible for these crimes if they were done by women."

It seems to be the aim of some people on here to distort and misrepresent legitimate concerns about such trivial matters as:

• truth

• facts

• honesty

• reliability of statistics

• * fairness

• * safety*

• - - - -

• fairness: eg. in sentencing perpetrators of "male pattern" crimes, women receive harsher sentences whilst transgender males (is such clarity allowed? Mumsnet mods please replace with "trans women" if that should cause offence) receive mitigated, even non-custodial sentences, due to judicial compassion for the trauma of "gender identity confusion"

* safety of some of the most vulnerable and marginalised people in society:*
ie. the typical woman prisoner: a single mother criminalised and incarcerated for a petty offence such as failure to pay the TV Licence.

Place marking to watch and share later.

Thanks.

the typical woman prisoner: a single mother criminalised and incarcerated for a petty offence such as failure to pay the TV Licence.

I’ve seen this example used on here before (not sure if it was by you) but apparently you can’t actually be imprisoned for failing to pay your tv license, so I’m a bit sceptical about the source.

www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1218208/bbc-licence-fee-what-happens-if-you-dont-pay-tv-licence-fine-prison

Generally the offences that women are imprisoned for are low level, and if they had been committed by a man, would not always result in a prison sentence. Women in prison have a high rate of trauma in their histories. The sentences are often short. They should not and we should not accept these men anywhere near them.

They should not and we should not accept these men anywhere near them.

I agree wholeheartedly with this. Thought I’d mention that as I’m usually disagreeing with posters on here.

My main frustration with the GC debate is that key concerns like this often get lost (and diluted) by all the moaning about what silly thing Caitlin Jenner’s said this week or petty Twitter infighting between different feminists. I think the avoidance of housing male sex offenders with vulnerable females is enough justification and all the petty slandering of almost anything trans related actually undermines more than bolsters the main argument.

.. It seems to be the opinion on here that people are responsible for the crimes committed by other members of their sex...

You're funny.

Did you actually read that article you linked to RabidChinchilla?

You cannot go to prison for not having a TV licence.

However, you could risk prosecution plus a fine of up to £1,000.

If you don’t pay, the court can take further action to collect the fine, including sending you to prison as a last resort.

No, you can't got to prison for not having a TV licence, but you can go to prison for non payment of a fine imposed for not having a TV licence, which amounts to the same thing really.

No, you can't got to prison for not having a TV licence, but you can go to prison for non payment of a fine imposed for not having a TV licence, which amounts to the same thing really.

You’d have to try pretty hard though! Usually these rare cases involve months and months of bad decisions and ignored letters etc. When I couldn’t afford a tv license I didn’t watch tv. It’s not a free service.