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!

I think you are confusing 'toilets' and 'spaces' because there have been more than 2 trans people found guilty of sexual assaults on women while in a women's prison.

There are more trans people who have been convicted of murder in the UK than trans people that have been murdered.

Only two?? Is this a joke? Did I just imagine the news reports of transwomen assaulting female prisoners, attacking girls in toilets and spying on women and children in changing rooms? Your two examples must have been busy!

JJ this has been going on for long enough that third spaces could have been an aim we could all get behind, but it was never on the table as too many people who describe themselves as trans (and I phrase it that way as no one has any idea if posters on Twitter are trans or using it as an excuse to tell women to shut up- please note I’m not suggesting trans people don’t exist, just that having a mix of trans, allies, MRAs with an axe to grind and general shit stirrers means anyone can claim anything and who can challenge?) have flat out said no.

There are posters on this board going back at least 4 years (that’s how long I’ve been reading the FWR board) suggesting trans people joined voices with feminists to campaign in a different way and yet here we are. Feminists who are drawing a firm line, any guy in lipstick claiming they are a woman (again not erasing trans people but I do doubt the commitment of some who may not be as authentic as they claim) and still no protection for those who need it.

So yes, there will be trans people who are afraid, but read around these boards. Women are afraid too. The campaign of “acceptance without exception” has helped none of the people it should and the fall out will be bad.

Plus all those things you state are equally applicable to women so what can be done about that?

I'm not sure there have @Thelnebriati, I'm not aware of any convictions other than Karen White but apologies if I've got that wrong, got a link?

I've seen the argument about murder rates, I'm not sure it's very helpful as it tends to use a fairly broad definition of what a trans woman is. I'm not sure it negates my point either, the stark fact is that trans women are highly vulnerable to male violence of all forms and it is being argued that almost all current protections against that should be removed, all at the same time, as soon as possible. That's a pretty chlling prospect for trans people, without al lthe other stuff that would come with it.

You keep saying things like "it tends to use a fairly broad definition of what a transwoman is" implying that these people are not really trans . So I'll ask you for the third time "what is your definition of satranswoman?"

a transwoman( not satranswoman)

@Deliriumoftheendless I think the main difficulty with third spaces has been that it wouldn't really solve the problem from the trans perspective, assuming these spaces were gender neutral then it still means trans women in with the men. And if they were trans only then that would mean trans people outing themselves every time they went to the loo.

But more importantly, I just don't believe a campaign for third spaces would have got anywhere at all, especially under a Tory government at a time of austerity. Polling shows most people dont really care that much, and businesses would be furiously opposed to anything that meant they had to spend large amount of money fitting extra toilet spaces, that in truth would probably only be used a couple of times a day. So it felt a bit like an insistence trans people should direct their energy into campaigning for something they didn't really want, that the public probably wouldn;t back and that didn't have a hope of succeeding anyway.

Please go and do your own research. There are websites that document convictions, they are easy to find.

@334bu

You keep saying things like "it tends to use a fairly broad definition of what a transwoman is" implying that these people are not really trans . So I'll ask you for the third time "what is your definition of satranswoman?"

Well someone who identifies as a trans woman for a start which most of the "violent male transvestites" on the transcrime website very much didn;t.

I know thats not a hugely satisfactory answer, and I'm happy to go into more detail later, but I;m done for the night now and off to bed.

@Thelnebriati

Please go and do your own research. There are websites that document convictions, they are easy to find.

Well theres no mention of them on transcrime and Ive never heard of them, and cant find any trace of them, so if you refuse to tell me who they were then Im sorry, but I find it difficult to just take your word for it. Anyway night, thanks all for discussing this in good faith.

So if transwomen are so worried about being in with the men even in gender neutral spaces, why are women's toilets all over the country being changed into gender neutral spaces? If transwomen who share the same male strength are vulnerable to men then there's not much chance for us mere females.

How can a third space be outing if it is used by men, women, trans and non binary? Especially as these definitions are so loose as to be virtually meaningless.

You can’t just say only passing transwomen count as many don’t and they would not be taken for a woman even if they used women’s changing rooms, toilets, services etc. That would be discriminatory.

Your need to cherry pick the data on recorded crimes to suit your narrative is at odds with your insistence that women's spaces should be open.

The Inebriati. I think we can fairly assume that no matter the number of examples we might give , they will fail on one of the two following points.
1 The crime was not committed in a dedicated women's space.
2 and this is the most important
They were only pretending to be transwomen. (However, we can't really define a real transwoman)

IKR!
I am not going to use the actual sexual assaults of women and girls just because someone on the internet demands a link. Its grim.

Unfortunately it wouldn't change their mind.
Sleep well everyone, tomorrow is another day or so they tell me.

jj ignorance of the law is not protection from the law.

And I’m assuming that you’re expending a similar amount of time exhorting TRAs and their advocates to stop with the current push to colonise, remove, or negate anything female.
I mean you wouldn’t just be here telling women to shut up and budge up because we were once kind enough to turn a blind eye so it’s our fault we’ve lost the right to single sex provision.

Here’s a one stop link for you. Get up to speed with where we are.

www.womenarehuman.com/

The same bait and switch played here, was also pulled with the original Gender Recognition Act process.

Talk about males who identify as trans as if the entire cohort were fully transitioned, post-op homosexual transsexuals, talk about their struggles, their vulnerability and their need for protection but define them as "anyone who identifies as". Thus including in the cohort many times more males who share no such struggles, vulnerabilities or need for protection.

And I've encountered plenty men claiming womanhood who made no changes at all. Usually shouting in my face and calling me a fascist, a cunt, a bigot and all sorts of other things. I've encountered magnitudes more online. If you deny their identity as genuine, jj1968, you will find yourself lumped in with us so fast it'll make your head spin.

I've actually met more male transsexuals on our side of the debate than I have seen on the other side, although I make no claim to absolute numbers of overall support. Those are my real life observations though, however limited.

Defining contested terms is paramount in law making and important when law reform is discussed. Only universally accepted terms are exempt. But if they are used in even a slightly different manner, even universally accepted terms will be defined.

Such as "woman" in the Equality Act. The term is universally understood to mean adult human female and a word for woman with this meaning is found in thousands of languages across the planet. Now, those involved in writing the law felt it would be too cumbersome to write women and girls throughout its many paragraphs.

So they stated their definition was "a woman is a female of any age". Thus eliminating the need to use the word girls in the text. They did the same for men and boys.

Female and male were not specifically defined because these are universally understood terms refering to the two human sex classes.

So while my understanding of the terms you use is, like yours, based entirely on self-definition, meaning a verbal statement of identity is enough, I then apply this definition across the whole debate.

So if we're talking about males who identify as trans accessing single-sex spaces legally reserved for females, I include the entire cohort of males who identify as trans in my thinking about the people demanding access. Post-op transsexuals making up a small minority of about 5% and homosexual transsexuals just 1%. At least 80% are non-med, ie fully functional and obvious males who may or may not crossdress. Most of whom are straight.

So what is your definition? And would you please, once you define your terms use this in your arguments consistently?

I don't know a single trans person, whether an activist or not, who believes occassional cross dressers are trans women that should be given access to women's spaces

Can you explain how women are supposed to know if the stranger with a penis and whatever clothing they run into in women’s accommodation is an occasional cross dresser (who You agree should be asked to leave) Vs a genuine trans woman (who should not be challenged upon fear of prosecution)? How do I know?

I really feel this gets to the heart of the matter.

Ultimately jj I am sympathetic to your position. I agree that the “stereotypical” trans woman - who passes for the opposite sex, who is perhaps shorter and small of stature, who tries not to make a disturbance, possibly avoids speaking so as not to out herself As male, who certainly would not allow her male genetalia to be seen, if she hadn’t had the surgery - I agree That this trans woman has generally been accepted into women’s spaces without complaint. If by default as she hasn’t been detected, or by politeness if she has.

In any case, if women’s rights to establish single sex boundaries were reinforced, in that it was made crystal clear that women are encouraged to exclude males From Women’s only spaces based on sex, I can assure you that NOTHING would happen to this cohort of “traditional” Transsexuals. They would continue to pass completely (assuming they did before) without notice in public single sex provision as apparently natal female. Women would still not be consenting to the presence of males so as before it would still be kind of a shitty thing to do (which is why having non-outing 3rd spaces is a good move), but nothing changes. Nada.

The only thing that would change is the rest of the male people currently claiming a trans identity (including “non-binary” and crossdressers Like pip Bunce and etc) who you claim all sensible trans people and feminists alike agree do not belong in women’s spaces COULD actually be asked to leave / not admitted. Because indeed they are obviously male.

Permissive access is the only workable solution for trans women accessing women's spaces. Trans women who pass, or make an effort to do so, and are respectful towards women's dignity and privacy, can access women's spaces. Women feel confident that they can call out any abuse of this understanding without risking cries of 'bigot', or at worse a criminal case for hate crime.

The minute you try and protect the right of trans women to access women's spaces in law you have to be able to define, in a concrete and enforceable way, which trans women count under this definition, and in which contexts. I think many women would agree to a long term, surgically transitioned trans women using a space such as a women's toilet. But no-one with an ounce of common sense could think an occasion cross-dresser should be working in a women's refuge as a woman.

So jj, once again you need to provide this robust, observable definition of what a trans woman is. Because I don't think you can. And that is exactly why trans women cannot be granted rights as women in law. The fact that the TRAs and gender ideologists have truly fucked over old skool trans people is not women's shit to sort out.

I agree that there are few hard edges in this debate, and that makes it difficult, although that's not a unique place for the law to find itself. It's probably worth noting that trans women don;t spring into being fully surgically and socially transitioned, it can take years to get treatment for a start,and that can often be preceded by years of self reflection and uncertainty. Many if not most trans women would probably have had a stage in their lives where they might be viewed by an outsider as a crossdresser And it's equally true that a very young and aggresive pro trans and queer movement has emerged, at a time when almost all political debate has been turned into an online battleground due to the advent of social media. I often wonder how the gay and lesbian rights movement would have fared in the 1980s if every time a gay man or lesbian was convicted of a serious crime anywhere in the world it was splashed across social media as evdience of the gay threat, or if lesbian separatism and the aim of destroying the family was repeatedly presented as mainstream 'lesbian ideology' in the right wing press.

I think as difficult as it is when you're immersed in this it's important to hold onto the fact that what's happening on twitter is not happening in real life. Women's toilets are not full of shouty men with beards, trans people arent waving their genitals round in changing rooms, men aren't dressing up as trans women to be predatory, the women's refuge sector is not reporting huge problems with trans inclusion. And this applies not just in the UK but elsewhere. In reality even today most trans people who have just started to come out are terrified of walking down the street never mind using a toilet inline with their gender identity.

I'm sure it went down like a lead ballon on here but I think Renecca Solnit's recent piece showed that even in probably one of the most trans inclusive cities in the world many of the fear raised by gender critical people haven't materialised. I often see people on here aghast that people don;t seem to know what's going on, and the dire warnings going ignored but I think a lot of the time that's because many of the fears are not manifesting in reality and the truth is most people rarely even ever see a trans women when they're out and about.

I do understand these concerns in a world in which male violence is endemic, but it feels a lot like trans women have become a bit of a sacrificial lamb to atone for male violence and I'm not sure that's justified. Trans inclusion does not seem to have presented a risk to women. Self ID, in Ireland and parts of Northern Europe, has not resulted in the erasure of women, or lesbians or gays. In truth trans inclusion is becoming the norm all over the world, and it seems upcoming generations have very different ideas about gender, for good and ill I think. Times are changing, and if the fears of the gender critical movement don't start manifesting in people's everyday lives then perhaps there is an argument to be made that as sincere and understandable as the concerns are, they seem to be unjustified.

@cheeseismydownfall "The minute you try and protect the right of trans women to access women's spaces in law you have to be able to define, in a concrete and enforceable way, which trans women count under this definition, and in which contexts."

I'm not sure you do. There are lots of things in law that are vague. I think the EA is drafted more deftly than people give it credit for. I actually support the single sex exemptions, on a case by case basis, as a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim. That to me seems to give some leeway for example to VAWG organisations who can work towards a principle of trans inclusion but retain the discretion to discriminate in cases where that doesn't feel appropriate.

But the impact of trans activism is being felt in real life. Girls and women are missing out on fair access to sports. Referrals of adolescent girls to gender identity services are skyrocketing. Women have had careers destroyed for expressing their belief in biological sex. It is happening right now, this minute, in the real world.

And you cannot support single-sex exemptions and also believe that TWAW. And if you don't believe TWAW, then what are they?

Oh blimey, is it that time of year already? Feels like a bi-annual event to haul out this film for any newbies of Tara Hewitt, the prominent trans activist and NHS Inclusion and Engagement Manager, telling a room full of healthcare professionals the definition of trans. Very much not vague, indeed a very detailed and specific definition in all it's broad umbrella inclusivity.

At approx 4.30 in. Trans " includes people who wear clothing to get a sexual desire out of that clothing ". Note, as Tara says, that tends to be generally be associated with men wearing women's underwear.

(Always wondered what that second definition of crossdressing was, as Tara never covered it)

(Also later in the clip, there's the advice to healthcare professionals that they may want to find out if the trans person would rather you refer to their penis as their clit. And why it may be more traumatic for a transwoman to have a mastectomy after breast cancer)