Help please! Need info re. trans-women assault statistics

[Estraya]

I've finally come out as gender-critical on fb in response to some trans propaganda a friend posted and I'm getting piled on. I've used the 'It will never happen resource thread' to help me - thank you very much for that. I've one comment left to reply to:
"Do you have any figures to prove that a higher prpoportion of Trans-women sexually assualt women than cis-women?"

Can anyone help me find data/information on this?

Thanks in advance!

According to the MOJ, just under half of trans identified male prisoners are in for sex offences, vs 19% of the rest of thr male prison population.

A long term study of all thr male to transsexual individuals in Sweden (and these are the ones committed enough to have full genital surgery) showed they retained Male levels and patterns of criminality. According to gendered intelligence, around 80% of trans women are intact men.

There is zero evidence that this subset of males is less of a risk to women than other males.

Not that specifically but I found this quite useful in backing up some of my arguments with the woke millennials at work: www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-how-many-trans-people-murdered-uk

Do you have any figures to prove that a higher prpoportion of Trans-women sexually assualt women than cis-women?

I am not sure I would answer that question. It plays into the narrative that transwomen are sex offenders.

I argue that predatory men will use the open invitation of saying "I am a woman" to access women's spaces.

And also, what about women's privacy and dignity, I don't want to share my space with men. And when I see a man in makeup and a dress I still see a man.

I believe there are figures for male pattern offending for trans women

fairplayforwomen.com/criminality/

"Do you have any figures to prove that a higher prpoportion of Trans-women sexually assualt women than cis-women?"

I know/hope someone else will find the link to the articles about how sexual violence doesn't decrease post-gender-change - i.e. trans women have the same rates as 'cis' men - but also in many ways this is not the point.

It's about making the term 'trans woman' so vague and fuzzy that male predators can more easily claim it.

And, yes, male predators will go to extreme lengths to be able to abuse. They become priests, they become sports coaches. If 'becoming a woman' is a matter of form-filling, they'll leap on that too.

The question isn't just 'what are the figures for trans women' but (and this is actually fairer to trans people) 'does the way this category is assessed allow for creepy men to sneak in?'

Semi-related: I'm fuckin' exhausted 'being kind' about trans rights when the trans community are so pointedly silent on the horrible misogynist abuse carried out in their name/by those claiming to speak for them.

There was a good thread on this a few days ago, about trans criminals not trans victims. Sorry I can't find it but I'm sure someone else had the same question as you.

Also look at trans crime - there was a paper that's was about Male pattern violence - so sorry I can't find it but it came from here so keep looking.

I'd link them to the horrifying threats of sexual abuse J K Rowling received as well, and then I'd tell them there's no such thing as bloody c** and even if there was, which there isn't, using the word is assuming people's gender identity without asking so is bigoted literal violence.

Agreed - generally, the GC stance is not that transwomen are a threat (although yes the studies prove they retain male pattern offending and there will be plenty of evidence to prove that MEN stay socially sexually abuse women more than women do).

The point I personally am pushing back on is that the self ID / relax the rules brigade are opening up female spaces to anyone who says they are a woman and making it impossible for males in our spaces to be challenged.

It’s not about the fact trans women Specifically are sex offenders, it’s the fact that predatory sex offending men can get easy access To female spaces by saying they are a woman.

Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons Undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery: Cohort Study in Sweden

Results
The overall mortality for sex-reassigned persons was higher during follow-up (aHR 2.8; 95% CI 1.8–4.3) than for controls of the same birth sex, particularly death from suicide (aHR 19.1; 95% CI 5.8–62.9). Sex-reassigned persons also had an increased risk for suicide attempts (aHR 4.9; 95% CI 2.9–8.5) and psychiatric inpatient care (aHR 2.8; 95% CI 2.0–3.9). Comparisons with controls matched on reassigned sex yielded similar results. Female-to-males, but not male-to-females, had a higher risk for criminal convictions than their respective birth sex controls.

I think it is more about male violence than transgender violence specifically, but that is also worth considering objectively and facts are facts however 'unkind' that is. If this group of people retain male pattern violence that's important information for women.

But remember the above study followed those that had medical/surgical transition. That's not a requirement for trans umbrella/self ID etc

It baffles me why anyone can't understand the need for women's loos and changing rooms. And I have argued this a dozen which ways upside down since JKR. To those who have bought into it, there is no point trying to argue - everything you say has a well rehearsed counter argument and none of it stands up to scrutiny but of course, just a few lines in and up comes the 'no debate', 'end of discussion', 'check your privilege', 'educate yourself'.... What's the point of trying to get past that?

One fellow even started crowing about how there are no statistics on men dressed as women attacking women in ladies safe spaces, and he could not find a single example. I gave him about five examples. But they were 'not real trans women', 'only in America', 'yes, but can you PROOVE it', 'yes, but you should not vilify a whole section of society based on the actions of one bad apple.....' heard it all. What's the point...

However, the John Cleese's of this world can obviously be persuaded..... There are surely thousands of people waking up to this right now who have never been versed in parroting the same thing back at you, so, see what they think of Karen White, Jonathan Yaniv et al.....

It's very focus pee on the transpeople perspective, is there evidence that they physically harm women

It would be nice to consider from the women perspective, and to remember that sometimes the harm doesn't have to be physical .

Well, in deed. Might be harder to convict a peeping Tom, someone who gets off on making you feel uncomfortable, someone who enjoys the power of pushing past your boundaries without actually doing anything illegal. This will make it so much easier for that kind of person.

And frankly, I am pretty immune to that by now. I walk through life with a lot of confidence now I am in my 40s with over a decade of martial arts training under my black belt. I don't even actually care if someone wants to video me having a poo and wank off to it later (although I would never do it on purpose!!!). But it's not just about me and my boundaries and what makes me feel uncomfortable any more...

In my view what it comes down to is whether you agree there should be single sex spaces/services/sports at all. If you agree with them but not for the trans umbrella/self ID that just doesn't make any sense.
Same for sports. If you want to ignore biological differences and prioritise inclusivity over fairness then just argue for that on its own merits, but don't argue for one by saying it won't affect the other when it's just not true.
Arguing for a kind of free for all where everybody was mixed in all aspects of life and females lost some protections but some other groups would gain them is not what I would agree with but at least it's honest and logical.

The question is irrelevant. The figures you need are about men sexually assaulting women because self ID opens the door to any man who wants to enter women’s spaces.

Ask them what proof they have that transwomen commit less crimes of violence than others born male!

There are 33 million women in the country, and around 120 sex offenders in prison.

There are estimated to be 200,000 trans women in the country, and 60 sex offenders were known to be in prison 3 years ago.

For rates to be equivalent, you would need 16.5 million trans women.

(There were, at the time, 33,000 men in prison for sex offences. Men commit them at a massively, massively higher rate.)

I would also stress that trans women don't commit more such offences than any other male. But they are doing so at male rates. Which makes the notion of 'brain in wrong body' a bit questionable, at best.

The Ministry of Justice also released figures last year that say 1 in 50 male prisoners are now claiming to be trans. The belief is that they are lying to gain advantage, but that's also not reassuring given we are constantly told nobody would lie about that to gain advantage.

Fair Play For Women point out that if we put transwomen sex offenders in women's prisons, then 3 years ago 1 in 3 would be trans.

If 1 in 50 sex offenders in the male estate are now claiming to be trans, and if (as in the past) sex offenders are over represented, then there will be more trans women sex offenders in prison now than natal women sex offenders. Which is what the SNP Rhona Hotchkiss said is presently the case in Scotland. She was governor of a women's prison, so has expertise in the area.

Necessary disclaimer: trans women are NOT more criminal than anyone else born male. They're simply committing crimes at male rates. They're not in any way a scary or dangerous group of people. They're just a male group of people, with the increased propensity for violent crime of that half of the human population. And that increased propensity is why we have separate spaces to begin with.

"Do you have any figures to prove that a higher prpoportion of Trans-women sexually assualt women than cis-women?"

As well as girls and women's safety, female spaces are also for their dignity and privacy.

Maya Forstater's article makes clear that this is an issue of women and girls' consent. A core principle of consent is, of course, that it should be informed consent.

(extract)
"Why has this become so difficult?
The rules and expectations about single sex services have become confused.

Some people think they are based on ‘gender identity’

Some think they are based on ‘gender expression’
(clothing and appearance)

Some think there are no rules at all

There is no right to share intimate spaces with members of the opposite sex without their consent

Where a service is provided for a single sex, whether for everyday privacy or a situation such as a rape crisis centre or a women’s refuge, there should be no need to negotiate with each individual member of the opposite sex about why it is not open to them."

a-question-of-consent.net/

It really is time to change the focus of these type of questions. Female only spaces were set up for females. Therefore if anyone who is not female wants to be admitted to these places it is up to THEM to prove that they present no threat.

Therefore if anyone who is not female wants to be admitted to these places it is up to THEM to prove that they present no threat.

There are many men who might by reasonable definitions be able to demonstrate that they are no threat to women & girls' safety. I could probably endorse quite a few with 99% certainty. None though can be admitted to female spaces or services on such basis since it disregards girls and women's dignity & privacy a well as ignoring the importance of each individual girl or woman's right to withold consent.

There is no right to share intimate spaces with members of the opposite sex without their consent

That's it, in a nutshell.

Male demands are prioritised over women's consent. And all in the name of equality and inclusion.