Stats on attack on women by men self identifying as women?

[Bb2019]

Hello everyone,

I've been lurking on this board and generally following the mainstream uk press about trans issues including the JK Rowling debate etc.

I've been shocked with the likes of Mermaids and the Tavistock centre prescribing under 18s life changing treatments.

I'm still trying to understand the implications and form an informed opinion on the use of women only places by trans women. I understand it would make many women uncomfortable if it were obvious.

Do we have any statistics or research done on how often women or girls have been attacked in their own spaces by men passing as trans women and or by trans women? I know it happens anecdotally but how much more likely is it to happen? Is it isolated incidents or is the risk much heightened? Perhaps it's not possible to do this type of research though due to a paucity of data?

Thanks!

Seeing as you liked my last completely off-topic example, there is another one you can find online. Was in loads of papers.

Nathan Hogg, who was not trans wanted a good degree. He looked online and found someone who had a good degree. It belonged to a woman, who was not trans.
Nathan contacted Durham University, said the real graduate had transitioned, and Durham issued the degree to Nathan.
Different address, Nathan only had the info he’d read on Linkedin.
So self-id into a degree just like that.

He was only caught, in 2019, when the woman wanted something from Durham.

Systems designed to help trans people will be exploited by people like Nathan unless checks and balances are thought about.

Might also be important to point out it's not all about men who attack women in their own spaces. What about the simple privacy and dignity of women? Women should be able to use their spaces without the possibility of males entering. Both men passing as transwomen and transwomen are in the male category.

Hi, long time lurker here who wanted to respond to this because I think whether trans women retain male patterns of criminality is quite important to this debate and I don't think what little evidence there is is often presented fairly. So knowing I'll probably get flamed, but I am replying in good faith, here goes.

The Swedish study mentioned up thread is one piece of evidence often used to claim trans women are as likely to both commit crimes and be as violent as men. But the author of that study has gone on record to complain about it being misused, and points out that whilst in the earlier cohort trans women did appear to retain male patterns of criminality, that fell away in the group studied after 1990. More importantly, the study was not set up to compare crime rates across populations but crime rates in trans women pre and post transition. As such it did not control for things like income - we know trans people are more likely to be unemployed or homeless, and that trans women in particular are over represented in sex work, so you would expect to see higher rates of convictions when compared to the general population. Equally the sample is very small, just 61 crimes were carried out by all those studied, and only 14 of these crimes were violent.

I think it's very unfair to use this study to claim trans women retain male patterns of criminality, and in particular as some people do, to claim trans women are as violent as men given this is based on just 14 violent crimes, some committed almost 50 years ago, and this is before you get to the authors criticism of how the study has been used. Here's the link to those criticisms: www.transadvocate.com/fact-check-study-shows-transition-makes-trans-people-suicidal_n_15483.htm

The truth is there isn't any evidence either way on this, although there has been work done in the US which has shown that trans inclusive policies have not caused an increase in risk to women. And it does seen counter intuitive to me to claim trans women retain male pattern criminality, I mean where are the trans gangsters, football hooligans, terrorists or serial killers? Even the (awful imo) transcrime website can only find a tiny handful of trans women (who were tried and convicted as trans women as opposed to occassional cross dressers) convicted of serious offences, when around around 10,000 men are convicted of sexual offences annuallly and thousands more for violent offences.

although there has been work done in the US which has shown that trans inclusive policies have not caused an increase in risk to women.

Oh really. Let's see this "evidence." My counter-argument is Janiah Monroe. The prison even covered it up and punished the victims.

The TW convicted of sex crimes, @jj1968 - which prison do you think we should put them in?

How are you defining trans jj? An occasional cross dresser is trans according to the stonewall definition

Bearing in mind that close to 50% of TW in UK prisons are convicted of sex offences.

fairplayforwomen.com/transgender-prisoners/

I beg your pardon, my error - 'approximately half of the known transgender population in prison are either sex offenders and/or highly dangerous prisoners'

And here's the BBC report on the same issue:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42221629

@SetYourselfOnFire

>although there has been work done in the US which has shown that trans inclusive policies have not caused an increase in risk to women.

Oh really. Let's see this "evidence." My counter-argument is Janiah Monroe. The prison even covered it up and punished the victims.

Here's the study, it was peer reviewed so has merit I think: www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/no-link-between-trans-inclusive-policies-bathroom-safety-study-finds-n911106

From what I've read Monroe should have been segregated in my opinion, although it's probably important to note that as far as I can tell she haxsn;t been convicted yet of a sexual offence and her attorney says they werent proven. It seems to be a very complex situation from the story reported here: www.illinoistimes.com/springfield/transgender-inmate-accused-of-rape/Content?oid=11867999

But to answer the other question, yes I think trans people (and all people) convicted of sexual offences should be segregated in some way.

@Kit19

How are you defining trans jj? An occasional cross dresser is trans according to the stonewall definition

Isn't it that an occassional cross dresser falls under the trans umbrella as someone who is gender variant to some degree, like a trans man or non binary person might, but that doesn't make them a trans women which is what was being discussed I thought?

Many thanks @jj1968 for linking this study. Sample sizes are small and don't control as you say for factors like socioeconomic ones. Not finished yet forming a view on how robust it is and what we can actually conclude from it. That's for tmr!

Would you have a link to the US study you mention? I'd like to nitpick that one too.

I don't want to be flamed either for wanting to be thorough and dissect what evidence there is. I'm of the opinion we should be cautious anyway even if there is a lack of conclusive evidence. But if there is a lack of evidence, we shouldn't be disingenuous and instead say it's about being cautious, it's about safeguarding as mentioned above etc. That's valid. I wouldn't want to claim as facts certain statements that have little hard evidence to back them up - that in my mind is discrediting and it then becomes too easy for those who disagree to label me as transphobic.

I haven't mentioned on this thread, as mentioned above by several posters, whether it's ok to risk making some women uncomfortable or stopping them from not fully participating into certain activities. I personally wouldn't care too much if I were to encounter a trans woman going about their business in a changing room for example, but I understand and appreciate that many women would for all sorts of reasons including religious and being the victim of violence committed by men. And what about prisons, domestic violence centres etc? That's a whole other can of worms that probably merits its own thread ...

@jj1968 not according to the stonewall definition - which I learnt about here - which is very broad. It includes for example straight men who dress as women.

Does anyone have access to Springer to read that American toilets analysis? It would be nice to know if toilets segregation by sex is justified on the basis of the count of police reports, which seems to be the basis of the study.
I think some women, like religious women who have to remove head scarves to wash before prayer would just have to avoid toilets that aren’t segregated by sex, so I would be concerned about those women.

Personally it’s more intimate care for disabled or elderly people or in hospitals, and again prisons.

For our US visitors, neither UK prisons nor UK hospitals offer single accommodation to residents. That seems quite a burden on the prison service and NHS.

Obviously meant domestic violence SUPPORT centres.

And to those who posted articles about trans women commuting horrible crimes against women facilitated /enabled by their trans status: I'm not dismissing those. It's awful. I'm trying to understand what statistically significant hard evidence there is, if any, to back up my views, as otherwise it's a series of anecdotes with no thread to make a strong point to those who disagree.

I think wanting good evidence is a very sound approach. (And also remembering that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence!)

But at the same time, this is at heart a philosophical argument, between those who (like me) see being a woman as a biological category, and those who see it as a "performative" or socially constructed category.

I see sex as a contingent fact about one's biology (which has no impact on one's personhood, but does have impacts on one's lived experience in terms of a whole load of things from how to play a rugby game fairly and relatively safely through to one's risk of being sexually assaulted, and the asymmetric consequences of that - e.g. both men and women can be raped, but only women can get pregnant as a result of rape).

Someone who believes in inner gendered personalities or souls (thank you Layla Moran for being honest, albeit philosophically incoherent) thinks that womanhood lies in somehow possessing some intangible feminine essence or inner sensibility.

Take prisons as an example.

If you believe women are simply adult human females then it is a clear violation of the human rights of female prisoners to single sex spaces for safety and dignity to incarcerate them with male prisoners. The numbers of male prisoners -0.1%, 1%, 5%, 20% - aren't actually relevant. One is too many.

If you believe TWAW, then you think it's a violation of the human rights of transwomen not to incarcerate them with female prisoners (and bugger the human rights of those female prisoners...)

We as a society have to choose. This is one of those occasions where that fucking stupid "rights are not like cake" meme shows itself up for the completely brain-dead fuckwittery it is. Only one side can "win" this one. There is no half-way house, no way of having the cake and eating it.

@OneEpisode I'd love to get my hands on that study too.

@DianasLasso I'm with you. I'm a life scientist at heart who believes in sex chromosomes. I find it sad that as a society we tell people they can "fix" biology with hormones and very invasive surgery. That's also a whole other thread....

Isn’t the burden on those who want to change the existing laws and social conventions to propose the new laws/conventions, and explain the benefit of the change?

At the moment there is no agreed definition of transwoman that could, for instance, be used by a premises manager to distinguish a transwoman entitled to join women, from a man who isn’t.

Without an agreed definition as a part of the proposal, it is hard to evaluate the impact of a change to the rules.

Could someone on the thread persuade me that they have a definition? Of transwoman, or a definition of transman?

[quote Bb2019]@jj1968 not according to the stonewall definition - which I learnt about here - which is very broad. It includes for example straight men who dress as women. [/quote]
I'm not sure that's the case, they seem quite clear here that it is an umbrella term that covers a range of gender variance, so a cross dresser is trans, as is a trans woman,but that doesn;t make a crossdresser a trans woman if you see what I mean and they wouldn;t be treated that way in law

"Trans is an umbrella term to describe people whose gender is not the same as, or does not sit comfortably with, the sex they were assigned at birth.

Trans people may describe themselves using one or more of a wide variety of terms, including (but not limited to) transgender, cross dresser, non-binary, gender queer."

www.stonewall.org.uk/what-does-trans-mean

Am looking for a copyof the UCLA study, it defintely was online for free because I remember reading it but I cant find it now.

Bb, remember that study seems to be comparing police reports between different areas of Massachusetts at different stages of a coming US “bathroom bill”. So it might not tell you much more than: in some Massachusetts toilets, at a specific time when conventions amongst the public may not have changed much, the law being just about to change and having just changed didn’t make much difference to police reports.

Okay I can't find a link to the study but as I recall it covered more than just Massachusetts. There are a couple of reports by mediamatters on this which come to the same conclusion

www.mediamatters.org/sexual-harassment-sexual-assault/17-school-districts-debunk-right-wing-lies-about-protections

www.mediamatters.org/fox-nation/debunking-big-myth-about-transgender-inclusive-bathrooms

I want to ask, jj, in what way are transwomen women? What do you think transwomen have in common with women?

Happy to discuss this in good faith.

@jj1968 thanks it's really confusing. A straight cross dresser might not be automatically classed as trans but they might be though if they identify as a woman? I suppose I shouldn't have brought up sexuality into it - a cross dresser full stop irrespective of their sexual orientation could be either I suppose.

@OneEpisode thanks will read tmr - and yes the definition thing you mention - It's very difficult isn't it?