Police accused of political correctness after issuing an appeal for a sex attacker WITHOUT mentioning suspect was a man wearing a woman's clothes

[PlatoAteMySnozcumber]

Police issue appeal without mentioning suspect wore woman's clothes

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8443647/Police-issue-appeal-sex-attacker-without-mentioning-suspect-man-wearing-womans-clothes.html

DM granted, but outrageous example of pandering to the trans lobby at the expense of justice and common sense. How on earth can you catch an offender if you aren’t allowed to describe them? Are all offender descriptions going to be race and gender neutral for fear of offending people? Funnily enough they never seem to have a problem writing about Muslim terrorists, maybe the Muslims need a stronger lobby, they best get on Twitter.

It's all getting too much now. It's bloody stupid and I think it's pathetic you have to tread on egg shells describing a human being!
I'm not transphobic before that gets thrown in but I don't believe in the whole 'they' BS. Wet blankets.

Really fucking stupid.

The police have really drunk the woke kool aid.

Wonder if they recorded it as a women’s crime as well all because of the frock.

the victim was male. I wonder did that have any bearing on the polices final decision to come clean?

How can anyone trust the police when they prioritise one group's feelings over everyone else?How can anyone trust them when the police keep the truth quiet despite the seriousness of the assault and the trauma to the victim.

Let it sink in. The people who are supposed to
uphold the law, who we are supposed look to when we are victims of crime, prioritised feelings over a serious sexual assault.

I'm just

I hope to God someone with some clout has a serious word with the police about this.

Why is he being described now as man in a dress? Is this the new strategy? Trans don't commit crimes so when they do they automatically become men? Just fucking brilliant.

It's the No true scotsman fallacy I guess.

Man in a dress is preferable to woman. The victim was male as well.

If you described a trans person as a man in a dress you'd be off to a gulag. How come the police get a pass? Yes I think it's the no true scotsman fallacy.

Well that kinda answers the question I keep asking that our tra friends who keep poppimg up in here refuse to acknowledge.

What happens when someone goes missing or is wanted by the police and they need to release a description.

Not all trans people are rapists the same way not all.men are rapists. So if a description of a man the police are looking for isnt offensive to other men then a description of a man wearing womens clothing shouldnt be offensive either.

What an insult to the victim. How dare they. he deserves for the police to do their jobs properly keep him.amd their town safe and do every thing they can to catch the culprit not worry his description will offend people who werent even there and who are innocent.

I have probably read too many detective stories but perpetrators have been known to dress as the opposite sex as a disguise to make it easier to commit a crime and get away from the scene. Surely the police only needed to say, 'the victim was attacked by a person wearing a dress (describe colour and length) estimated to be of (describe height and build)?' If you want the public to help you, 'acting suspiciously' is not exactly helpful. Without more precise information about the attacker's appearance, most potential witnesses, hearing that a man was sexually assaulted in public, would assume the attacker was another man.

I wonder if they misgendered him by calling him a man... I wonder if the trans activists will have something to say about that or leave well alone as the circumstances don’t fit the narrative

I'm a wee bit confused.

Is the alleged perpetrator in this story a trans woman?

Is he only "trans" if he claims to be?

How are we to tell?

And the fact that the police spokesperson mentions gay and then trans, shows they lack understanding of the real issue here and cannot distinguish between sex and sexuality again.

The thought police are employed by the TRAs, not the LGBT community as one group.

A cross dressing violent man who preys on women is most likely to be straight FFS.

Apologies, the victim was male and I mistakingly referred to a man who preys on women.

www.whtimes.co.uk/news/advice-for-hertfordshire-partygoers-1-1165591

Also from Hertfordshire police - that "really sensitive" rape poster about not letting a night full of promise turn into a morning full of regret.

Funnily enough, comments are disabled on that article.

www.google.nl/amp/s/www.hertfordshiremercury.co.uk/news/police-believe-man-sexually-assaulted-4204249.amp

This report makes it clear it was a man posing as a woman, not just a man donning a dress per se.

What on earth does it mean to “act suspiciously”? The examples I can think of are “following” someone or “watching” them but would have to be pretty extreme to be “suspicious”. A person wearing gender non comforting clothes is not itself suspicious.

Comforting!!! Lol!!!

Yet another example of women's physical safety being less important than a certain subset's feelings.

Excellent. No wonder we get people saying we don't need feminism any more. Yay.

what on earth does it mean to “act suspiciously”? The examples I can think of are “following” someone or “watching” them but would have to be pretty extreme to be “suspicious”. A person wearing gender non comforting clothes is not itself suspicious.

Exactly, I wonder how many reports of men in trousers acting suspiciously that they immediately ignored as it didn’t fit the profile- what a waste of time. Conversely, I wonder how many people thought they saw a bloke in a dress acting a bit odd but didn’t want to say for fear or seeming transphobic. It’s utter madness.

Is there a copy of the description they issued?