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 actually support the single sex exemptions, on a case by case basis, as a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim.

So in which circumstances do you agree that women should be able to exclude all males?

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

Again you are presenting males who identify as trans as if they are all transsexuals who intend to medically transition if they haven't done so already.

I have provided the evidence from trans rights organisations, health care professionals and population statistics that your view is not rooted in the reality of the trans community in 2020.

That cohort you keep using as your argument makes up less than 20% of males clamouring to be included in single-sex provisions for women. Far less indeed.

So would you please base your arguments on the trans community we have and not on the one you claim we have?

I actually support the single sex exemptions, on a case by case basis, as a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim.

You might support it, but you don't seem to understand it. As the Government Equalities Office confirmed in 2019, case-by-case refers to use case-by-use case, not user case-by-user case.

What that means in practice is that a service providing rape crisis counselling for instance must show that it is a proportionate means of a legitimate aim to exclude all males from the session. The evidence that female victims of male violence need a female-only space to recover is overwhelming. So, once the service has proven their case, it can exclude all males without having to consider the merits of each individual male who seeks to join. A blanket ban in this situation is both legal and legitimate.

Not all provisions are as clear cut. Sometimes a male who has a GRC may be considered for inclusion on a case-by-case basis, but males who remain legally male don't have any right to expect inclusion when all other legal males are excluded.

In fact, many organisations now unlawfully discriminate against males on the basis of their sex by allowing some legal males access to female-only spaces while including others. A legal challenge on this basis by one of those males could not be defended against, because single-sex provisions are legal only in two ways: on the basis of biological sex or on the basis of legal sex.

Correction:

In fact, many organisations now unlawfully discriminate against males on the basis of their sex by allowing some legal males access to female-only spaces while excluding others.

having got to the end of the thread yet but this bit
But there's also the broader issue of women's privacy - like the girls' swim team who ended up changing in the janitor's cupboard because of (IIRC) an adult transwomen who insisted on using the open plan changing room at the same time as their swim practise
is something along the lines of something else I've been thinking about over the last 24hrs. I recently read about a school where they we're going to let any boy who self IDed as a girl, use the girls' changing area and any girl who was uncomfortable could wait until after and then get changed, so to me, aside of any sexual motivation, it gives them authorised power over girls
www.heraldscotland.com/news/16311379.schools-forget-girls-in-rush-to-adopt-pro-trans-guidance-campaigners-claim-as-christian-group-threatens-legal-action/

So would you please base your arguments on the trans community we have and not on the one you claim we have?

from CharlieParley.

This is exactly 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
I watched that video the other day and thought blimey, more words they're trying to change the meaning of! I think I'll go to my doctors and tell him how my vision in my eye isn't working properly, all the while pointing to my ear and see (or hear!) what happens

[quote EyesOpening]having got to the end of the thread yet but this bit
But there's also the broader issue of women's privacy - like the girls' swim team who ended up changing in the janitor's cupboard because of (IIRC) an adult transwomen who insisted on using the open plan changing room at the same time as their swim practise
is something along the lines of something else I've been thinking about over the last 24hrs. I recently read about a school where they we're going to let any boy who self IDed as a girl, use the girls' changing area and any girl who was uncomfortable could wait until after and then get changed, so to me, aside of any sexual motivation, it gives them authorised power over girls
www.heraldscotland.com/news/16311379.schools-forget-girls-in-rush-to-adopt-pro-trans-guidance-campaigners-claim-as-christian-group-threatens-legal-action/[/quote]
*haven't not having!

" if the fears of the gender critical don't start manifesting themselves...."
No problems in Canada? How about their female prisons?

How about the academics who have lost their jobs because they believe in biological reality? How about the poor immigrant women of colour who lost their livelihoods because of a litigious transwomen? How about the American girls losing a chance at going to college? How about the women in Scotland who can't object to having to share hospital wards with people who are male? How about the women prisoners in the UK forced to share accommodation with people who present totally as male and have suffered sexual assault at the letter's hands?

As to our fears they have already well and truly manifested themselves.

Latter not letter

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

Two follow ups then:

1. given you and your trans women friends think It’s absolutely OK to exclude occasional crossdressers, then would it not be OK for a woman Presented with such a penis haver in their changing room to ask this person to please use male facility? Or is she a bigot?

2. during the years of reflection and uncertainty, And lack of access to care, why can the future trans woman not use the male facilities and services. She is at this moment indistinguishable from any other male except possibly wardrobe choices, so is in no more danger than a drag queen or feminine gay male (who we all agree should use female provision).

@CharlieParley "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."

Sorry I did mean to reply to this. I'm not sure where those stats come from, in particular the claims that androphilic trans women only make up 1%. I don't think anyone really knows how many trans women have had surgery, the only estimates are quite a few years old, and there are no published figures in the UK I don't think. And even then lots of people go private, and three of the people I know who fully medically transitioned went to Thailand. Equally there are no figures on how many people take hormones, whether prescribed or self medicating, and cross sex hormones have significant physical effects, particularly on sex drive and genital function.

But I'm not denying there are trans women who haven't had, or don't want treatment at all though, just that we don't really know the breakdowns. And of course some of that group will be on waiting lists for treatment, others may have health issues which prevent it and others may not feel the need for physical intervention, but otherwise live as women, by which I mean use female pronouns, present as women, identify as women and are socially known to others as women. These are the people I would call trans women, and these it seems to me are the group likely to want or need to access women only spaces. Additionally there are those just starting out in transition, whose gender presentation may fluctuate, who may use womens toilets when presenting as women but not other times, but who probably wouldn't access a womens refuge or something. I think this group are qualititively different to cross dressers and non binary or gender queer people and all the other identities under the trans umbrella, and it's this group that uses women's spaces.

Now there may be some who are crossdressers, or gender fluid people, who again might use toilets and changing rooms as they present, but there have always been people like this. Plenty of old school transvestites used women's toilets and stuff when they were dressed up, and there isn't any evidence of harm from this. But they wouldn't access womens refuges and they wouldnt be put in a womans prison.

So I don't think all spaces are the same, I think trans women are one group under the so called trans umbrella and I havent seen any evidence that women's refuges are beseiged by part time cross dressers, or that men are accessing womens toilets to abuse people whilst claiming to be trans.

My apologies, when I said I showed the evidence that the cohort of males who identify as trans does not, as jj1986 continues to claim, consist mostly of transsexuals who intend to transition or have transitioned, I mixed up threads. In the interest of fairness, here is the comment I posted in response to the following question:

Is it true that 80% of transwomen have not had any surgery or have no intention of doing so? Why is that?

The actual number can only be estimated as we do not have an official register for those with a trans status. However, we do have the following:

• the number of genital surgeries carried out through the NHS. This has hovered around 100 to 150 per year for many years. Compare that number to the total estimate of the UK's trans community. Please note this includes male and female patients.

• an estimate from GIRES a trans rights organisation, contained in their submission to the Transgender Equality Inquiry by the House of Commons Women's and Equality Committee.

In their submission GIRES estimated, based on various kinds of scientific and empirical data, that by 2020 a total of 20% of the UK's trans-identifying people will have approached the health service for support. (By 2015 that number was 15% at most.)

Support starts with a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, then counselling, then medication to suppress one's own hormones and prescription of cross-sex hormones. For males, there is a range of surgical interventions called feminisation surgeries. These include shaving the Adam's apple, silicone implants to construct fake breasts and facial feminisation surgery.

Very few males proceed to genital surgery, which starts with the removal of the testes, then the removal of the penis and as a third step, the surgical construction of a so-called neo-vagina, an artificially constructed opening to simulate a vagina (with of course a blind opening as males have no womb for the vagina to connect to) which sometimes involves the inversion of the penis and other times involves creating the pouch by implanting skin from the intestines or stomach. The removal of the testes often alleviates the suffering caused by gender dysphoria enough that the patient can stop there. Unfortunately for some patients this isn't enough or the symptoms return, so they do feel forced to proceed to that last step. But that number is very small.

So we can state with confidence that the percentage of males who identify as trans and who have not sought any medical help at all and who cannot therefore have had medical surgery to alleviate gender dysphoria is at a minimum 80%.

• various papers written by those who treat patients with gender dysphoria about the kinds of interventions they do and how many of their patients require which treatment. I read one such paper which analysed patient data over a longer time frame, including the modern shift from only transsexuals being considered trans to the umbrella encompassing all who are gender-non-conforming. This paper found that the percentage of patients who did seek help for gender dysphoria and who do so by accessing hormonal treatment is going down, as is the percentage who have their testes removed. That latter group made up 1% of all patients seeking help for gender dysphoria. And obviously a smaller percentage then take that final step, but the paper did not give any numbers.

• data from the US which suggests that only 5% of those who claim a trans identity change their name. A social transition is obviously the first step on the road to recovery for those who suffer from gender dysphoria, so if only 5% of the entire community take that step, which is after all not requiring any alteration to the body, then the percentage who have surgery cannot be higher than that 5%.

As for the reason why. The trans umbrella now includes all those who are gender-non-conforming. Most importantly it now includes crossdressers. We know from research that transvestism in women is rare, but in adult men estimates range from 2 to over 6%. It is also the most common paraphilia (that is sexual fetish) found in predatory males.

This does not mean that every male who crossdresses is a predatory male or a violent offender. It also does not mean every paedophile, rapist or murderer crossdresses. It means that when you examine which sexual fetishes predatory males are found to have, crossdressing is the most common.

Crossdressers do not seek to make changes to their body as they do not have gender dysphoria (that is they do not reject their body). A small number of crossdressers do go on to develop serious gender dysphoria caused by an erotic target location error and choose to transition, typically in their late forties to fifties. And with crossdressing being so common, and now included under the trans umbrella, that's why at a minimum 80% do not have surgery.

These are the people I would call trans women, and these it seems to me are the group likely to want or need to access women only spaces.

Maybe they do want to use women only spaces. Maybe they do feel they need to not use men only spaces.

That does not mean women have to go along with it.

If a space is designated single sex for a reason then it should be single sex. If it is OK to be available as mixed sex then make it mixed sex.

So prisons single sex, hospital wards single sex, supermarkets any sex, becoming an engineer any sex.

@CharlieParley I think I've addressed most of that but one thing to add is that the GIRES estimate is of those who are gender variant to some degree, which does not correlate with the number of people who ideitify as trans women and who use and need women's spaces.

(it's also quite old so probably not that accurate given the large rise in people of all ages presenting for treatment)

There we go again, the get out phrase " to abuse women while claiming to be trans" Karen White abused women but wait he is not really trans. All the criminals on transcrime video are not trans but transvestites. Men who are able to enter female spaces because they can't be challenged and then abuse women don't count because they didn't claim to be trans or if they did, it doesn't matter because they are just pretending.

Male humans are excluded from female only spaces because some pose a threat to women. Transwomen are all male humans and some of them pose a threat to women and therefore they too like all other males have no place in female spaces.

they wouldn't access womens refuges and they wouldnt be put in a womans prison.

You really think that male prisoners would not seek to Enter women’s prison (where they will be safer and have more freedoms, not to mention if they are straight access to women) if it were as easy as saying “I’m a woman?”

Extreme Naïveté

And maybe you’ll say well, we should Have safeguarding. Ok then how do we Sort out the pretenders from the genuine? I note you still haven’t defined what a trans woman is. GRC defines the protected Characteristic as pursuing or intending to pursue physiologic or other transition. So again we have to take his word for it?

Male humans are excluded from female only spaces because some pose a threat to women. Transwomen are all male humans and some of them pose a threat to women and therefore they too like all other males have no place in female spaces.

This.

If society collectively decides that there is no need for any sex-segregated spaces (or sports, or shortlists) after all, then society can choose to dismantle these provisions and this whole debate goes away. But until that happens there is simply no evidence to support the view that trans women should be considered as distinct to non trans men when it comes to women's safety, or sports,or any of the other provisions that exist to protect women's rights.

@FWRLurker Sorry missed this. I'm pretty sure plenty of drag queens have used womens toilets in the past, and didn;t Boy George say recently that he used to use women's toilets? So that's not necessarily a new phenomena. But that doesn't mean they would try to access a refuge, or join a women's sports team, or be placed in a women's prison.

I often think the very worst is assumed of people in this debate, and that there are hordes of gender fetishists and crossdressers desperately trying to access women's spaces for some nefarious reason when I think the reality is most people are just trying to get on with things, making choices based on personal safety, dignity and respect for others in a world where sometimes there are no easy answers. I think mostly people try and do the right thing, and that people are flexible, a cross dresser, who's all done up, in a queer club, might use the womens loos for example, but the next day at work, once presenting as male uses the mens. But they probably wouldnt dream of accessing a refuge, or using a communal changing room,. And that's not just saying that you should just assume the best in people, but it's an observation of what seems to happen where trans inclusion has taken place. It hasn't seemed to have caused harm, there aren't loads of bearded men in women's toilets, the refuge system is coping fine they say, and I include the UK in that where even under the current laws the most lurid fears could probably technically happen, but they haven't. And I think that's why some people raise an eyebrow at the more fervent gender critical views at times, because all these terrible things just don't seem to be happening on in their day to day lives.

I'm not sure where those stats come from, in particular the claims that androphilic trans women only make up 1%.

I refer you to my comment posted on 15 August at 19:00. There is a lot of research into the two type taxonomy of transsexuals and the distribution of early-onset homosexual transsexuals vs the late-onset non-homosexual transsexuals. I referred you to the research published by Anne Lawrence, a respected researcher in this field. As someone who has also transitioned, this is a researcher with a lot of personal experience and an interest in trans rights.

Just to recap: the estimate for homosexual transsexuals (androphilic) vs non-homosexual transsexuals is 1:4 for Western countries like the UK.

Of all those who sought medical treatment, those who fully transitioned (which we were discussing at that point) make up at most 5%, given how few surgeries are done in the UK. And 1 in 4 means leaves just 1% for post-op homosexual transsexuals.

As for people accessing surgery abroad, that requires a lot of money which most people who identify as trans cannot afford. The narrative of doing so is much more relevant to the US trans community where surgery is not available on the NHS like here but via various insurers with huge co-pays or privately, which does indeed make going abroad feasible.

As for your claim that hormone suppression and/or cross-sex hormones render a male harmless, we have research showing

1. that the suppression of testosterone via medication is far less successful than was commonly assumed and
2. that even 90% of castrated males can achieve intercourse (about half need to take erectile dysfunction meds to do so) and
3. we know that (again from ample research) that castration, whether chemical or surgical has proven ineffective in the treatment of sexual offenders and in stopping them from re-offending.

So, no, as long as a male retains his penis he cannot be said to be rendered harmless via hormones or the removal of his testicles. And even fully post-op transsexuals have committed heinous crimes. If you accept that people who identify as trans are no better or worse than any other, that is but a logical outcome.

I do not question the need for vulnerable transsexuals to be protected from male violence. But we will not achieve this by not tackling the root cause - the attitude of the male sex class as a whole towards gender-non-conforming males.

And if it were ever in doubt, it is further proof of the oppression of females in a male-dominated world that the suggested solution to the problem of one small group of males being assaulted by another group of males is to force all females to relinquish their right to privacy, dignity and safety in female-only spaces.

We are not human shields for vulnerable males. We have our own needs and safety to consider. The problem is male violence towards males and the solution is for the male sex class to learn to accommodate gender-non-conforming males.

Still no clearer in the definitions, are we?

With all the good will in the world, we can't argue this with any clarity until terms are defined.

What differentiates a transwoman from a man?

What is a woman?

the refuge system is coping fine they say

The executive directors of many organisations in the VAWAG sector say that. Maybe because they are fervent believers in transgender ideology. Maybe because they think they have to or lose funding.

But frontline workers and women who used and/or still need these services have set up many of the new grassroots women's rights groups founded in the last few years to oppose GRA Reform and trans inclusion policies based on self-id. Because there are problems of the worst kind with allowing males into the female-only therapeutic environment. They have happened. They are happening right now.

Rhonda Hotchkiss, a former prison governor in Scotland has gone on record talking about the harms caused.

Frontline workers met with MSPs in a closed session in the Scottish Parliament to inform them of the harms caused by these policies.

And I know that the policies you jj1968 proclaim as harmless are nothing of the sort, because I am a woman directly harmed by them. And I was part of a group of victims and parents of victims harmed by these policies who went to talk to the directors of a national service last year. To tell them of the problems they have created. They couldn't have cared less. They told us the human right of a male to have his identity acknowledged took priority over our need to recover from trauma.

So little fucks did they give about harming women with their policies, that immediately after our meeting its director was on social media proclaiming that there have never been any problems ever with their service including males.

So yeah. Keep on pretending that women like me don't exist. But I'm here and I've taken action including speaking about this in my own name in real life. At meetings and in the media. And I'm not going to stop until these harmful practices stop.

Ah ok so even though in one post you say “I and all sensible trans women agree that occasional crossdressers should be excluded from female spaces” in the next youve moved on to “well Boy George and drag queens used women’s spaces and there was no issue, So what’s the problem now ladies”. Those goalposts have moved pretty suddenly.

So which is it jj? Should women be allowed to say NO or must we accept any male who wants to elbow his way in, regardless of gender identity?

@CharlieParley I don't find autogynephilia theory very persuasive and don't think it is well evidenced (and also contains some highly reactionary assumptions) but perhaps that's for another thread. In any event 1 in 4 is significantly higher than 1%, and I'm not really sure there's any clear figure on trans people's sexuality. Equally testosterone suppression is often highly successful and many trans women have low levels of testosterone than non trans women. And the evidence of chemical castration is not conclusive and there does seem to be some quite strong evidence it reduces offending. Theres a big long article about it here: www.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check-with-polly-curtis/2012/mar/13/prisons-and-probation-criminal-justice

"I do not question the need for vulnerable transsexuals to be protected from male violence. But we will not achieve this by not tackling the root cause - the attitude of the male sex class as a whole towards gender-non-conforming males. "

And nor will it be solved by the removal of current protections for trans women. I don't think that will make women safer, I just think it will make life very dangerous for trans women.

@FWRLurker

Ah ok so even though in one post you say “I and all sensible trans women agree that occasional crossdressers should be excluded from female spaces” in the next youve moved on to “well Boy George and drag queens used women’s spaces and there was no issue, So what’s the problem now ladies”. Those goalposts have moved pretty suddenly.

So which is it jj? Should women be allowed to say NO or must we accept any male who wants to elbow his way in, regardless of gender identity?

I'm not sure I did say that. And I'm not even saying I supported drag queens using women's toilets, just that it happened, and I'm not aware of that causing any harm to women. I just don't think you're going to get to a situation where such hard lines can be drawn. I think individuals, and spaces and how people see themselves are so diverse then reaching for absolutes is futile. I mean if a young trans girl was in your care would you really force her to use the mens toilets in a bus station late at night full of boozy blokes? You might even sneak a feminine gay male friend into te womens in such circumstances. All these things are an ongoing negotiation, and I don't think this solution will be solved by statute, clear definitions or arguments on the internet but by people workng this out for themselves hopefully with a mixture of caution, compassion and common sense. I think that's what young people are doing in fact, and it isn;t turning into the horror show that so many predict which is why they seem quite befuddled at the furious reactions.