Impact of crime records? A question

[Vehivle]

Hi,

Please correct me if I am being inappropriate as it is hard to know what is viewed as transphobic to ask vs what is just acceptable to ask.

But my understanding is that crimes committed by transwomen are recorded for crime stats as committed by natal women. Is that correct?

I dont know why it bothers me so much. But it makes me feel like it is deeply unfair that a natal male uses male violence and rapes a women, but then as they identify as transwomen, this rape is recorded as by a woman. There isnt even like an asterix or something to indicate for future records that this was a transwomen - not natal. If I'm wrong on this, please let me know! But if I'm right - this means for for now and for the future looking back on women crime rates - rapes committed by women are being recorded as higher than they should be.

Like I said, I'm unsure why this bothers me. It just feels like a false home goal in a sense. Done by the opposite team but treated as a home goal all the same.

Is there a way we can request government keep accurate records? Like I recognise transwomen with a GRC are allowed to be recorded as women - but just like they cannot legally access some spaces - could an asterix not be added in the event they commit a crime? Especially when it is violent/ sexual and against women/children?

And does anybody know what the crime records impact upon? Like beyond just record keeping, is it also used for other things like tailoring inmate support based on the crimes committed or for shaping societal interventions to reduce crimes of a particular nature? Because if so - then doesnt the counting of natal men as women then skew all of this?

I dont know. Hopefully someone more intelligent than me can help me figure it out. But all I know is that it feels deeply unfair. And that's without even considering when rape victims are then forced to refer to their rapists as "she" in court cases. That should also be stopped if a transwoman has used her male anatomy to commit crime. Victims come first.

I believe many police forces use an offender's own stated identity when recording crimes.

It seems official police guidance on this has been 'captured' by ideology but the current court case by Harry the Owl may have some impact, depending in the outcome.

It's obviously a big problem for official data collection and can lead to highly misleading newspaper headlines or TV programmes bewailing a huge rise in, for example, women sex offenders.

So yes, counting natal men as women in official data, including criminality and the national census, does indeed have enormous implications for all of us.

It's hard to see how an actual rape can be recorded as having been committed by a women, because the crime is specific in the 2003 Sexual Offences Act www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/1/crossheading/rape

1Rape
(1)A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a)he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b)B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c)A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

You do have to have a penis to commit this particular crime. So if you have been found guilty of having committed it, you can't not-have one. This will be utterly obvious to anyone reading the statistics on that particular crime.

Police forces record suspects according to how they identify, following guidance from the NPCC. It took me several weeks to find that out for a piece for a national because the guidance was so old the NPCC didn't know it came from them. Some forces record suspects slightly differently. For instance, if they already have a record as a male, for some forces it's impossible to change that record so they will continue to be recorded as a male.

The Miller case won't have any impact on this. And it's against the College of Policing, not the NPCC or the police service in general.

As far as rape goes I think it would still be recorded as a female crime.

@Tartyflette - so its true then? Natal men are actually being recorded as women, adding to women stats, simply because they say so?

@AskingQuestionsAllTheTime - this makes me wonder when they said women in prison were sexually assaulted by transwomen - maybe this meant raped but because they are by definition women, rape couldnt apply so it was defined as sexual assault instead? Or maybe I'm wrong as I'm sure I read that Karen White "raped" not sexually assaulted.

It wouldn't take much to skew stats re women's crime because they're so small in certain crimes such as sex and murder. But, to be fair, it does look as though women are increasing in numbers in those areas - there have been several high-profile cases of women in education grooming and abusing boy pupils in the past couple of years, one just last week where the case was so serious the woman was given a six-year sentence.

Does nobody else feel this is wrong? That it is completely unfair that these crimes are being recorded as having been committed by natal women when they have in fact not been!

Seeing that ONS have just had a wrist slap for confusing sex and gender on the official census- surely police should also follow and record sex as defined by LAW. Not self ID!

Even with that though, I still rile at the idea that natal male - even with a GRC - being recorded as natal woman without an asterix or small side note to record that they were born male but reclassed legally as a woman.

Karen White didn't rape in prison. There were two assaults, one involved a woman prisoner seeing White's penis poking over the top of, um, her trousers and I think the other was White groping another prisoner's breasts. But I'm pretty sure White's original crimes involved rape.

@joaniwalsh ah I see. Ok that's my misremembering. I'm glad I was wrong to be honest!

There would have to be a challenge to the NPCC guidance. But then there would need also to be a challenge to IPSO and NUJ and internal guidelines as to how crimes are reported, too. And another against the NHS - particularly with regard to self-IDing onto hospital wards if Hancock and Stevens don't change that guidance once Covid's dealt with.

Good god. How did we even get to this level of mess. It feels like all too much to undo - yet it all feels so against common sense and accuracy of recording data! Like why even record natal men as natal women at all. Individuals with a GRC should be recorded as their legal sex with an asterix to indicate this is not their natal sex to ensure records are wholly truthful. Otherwise what's the point!

Innit.

It is, so wrong. Like you say, down the road it will look like all these women have suddenly had an uptick in crime, whereas, in actual fact, it wasn't us...as they say, history is written by the winners. His-story.

It bothers you because if inflates the number of violent and sex offences committed by women

Two results

MRA types have more 'women do it too' ammunition

The press love stories about women carrying out crimes that are unusual for women. They report on them disproportionately often. This means more of those stories and an increase in public perception that women are just as bad as men

The OSR are looking into this
osr.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/publication/draft-guidance-collecting-and-reporting-data-about-sex-in-official-statistics/

Our law on rape (England Wales) is quite unusual in that it requires a penis.

It has turned into a useful indicator of sex of sex offenders though.

@ChazsBrilliantAttitude - hey that link you posted invites people to send in their views on the matter with the deadline being April! I think we should all send a message about our concerns. I'm definitely going to! My argument being this isnt a political thing - I purely think for the purposes of having accurate truthful data that captures truth not fabrication - then natal sex must be recorded. Legal sex too - of course!- if it is different from the individuals natal sex. But the evidence shows us that males commit more of a certain crime than females. Biology matters. And so accurate data recording that is needed too. So I'm going to write in - the worst thing that can happen is that it gets thrown in the bin. Best case, it gets taken on board!

I am also concerned about data being collected for Equality monitoring

Crime records are unlikely to be affected to a point of statistical significance by a hundred or so trans offenders at the moment. As it stands, small police forces are recording around 10,000 crimes per month pre Covid. Larger forces for example, The Met, GMP and WMP will be way beyond that number. Admittedly, men offend at a much higher rate than women but, if you get into the figures and separate out trans people we are looking at offending rates of: Women 0.01% trans 0.02% and men 0.24% Taking into account those shocking numbers, around 99.8% of people in the UK have never been convicted of a crime. Those that have been convicted are far more likely to have been found guilty of socio-economic related crimes associated with the UK's determination to keep class structures in place.

'Those that have been convicted are far more likely to have been found guilty of socio-economic related crimes associated with the UK's determination to keep class structures in place.'

That's quite a broad statement!

The women's estate and the men's have very different profiles.

And when women are rarely convicted of sex offences compared to men, and don't even have the apparatus to rape, of course it will skew the stats.

@NiceGerbil

'Those that have been convicted are far more likely to have been found guilty of socio-economic related crimes associated with the UK's determination to keep class structures in place.'

That's quite a broad statement!

The women's estate and the men's have very different profiles.

And when women are rarely convicted of sex offences compared to men, and don't even have the apparatus to rape, of course it will skew the stats.

You are absolutely right that it is a broad statement and one that holds true. The majority of both women and men incarcerated in the UK are doing time for'non violent crime'. You are right that the male prison estate holds a proportionately higher number of violent offenders but, trans women, although higher in proportion than females do not offend violently at the same rate as males. In fact figures suggest, their violent offending rate is much lower.

You are right about rape and the associated points to prove. Of course there is the offence of conspiracy to rape and the seeming increase of female teachers who seem to be caught enjoying the company of teenage boys.

As with anything else, the numbers around the trans population are minute and i would suggest we are long way from being able to say they have statistical significance one way or the other.

As with anything else, the numbers around the trans population are minute and i would suggest we are long way from being able to say they have statistical significance one way or the other.

Nearly half the transwomen in prison are sex offenders.

fairplayforwomen.com/transgender-male-criminality-sex-offences/

If those 60 transwomen were counted as women it would increase the number of women sex offenders in prison by nearly 50% (there are about 125 women in prison for sex offences according to the FPFW article ).

trans women, although higher in proportion than females do not offend violently at the same rate as males. In fact figures suggest, their violent offending rate is much lower.

The only study that examined this concluded that even after meaningful medical transition, males who transitioned continued to offend at the same level as other men.

journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885

If you have further information that says different, statsgeek, please supply it so we can assess the veracity of your source.

I think you’d find keep-prisons-single-sex.org.uk interesting, OP.

Crime records are unlikely to be affected to a point of statistical significance by a hundred or so trans offenders at the moment.

It would indeed be hard to spot the downtick in "male" offenders - there are so many. But the increase in serious "female" offenders is very significant.

Women hardly ever commit violent or sexual offenses. It would be very easy for a tiny percentage of male offenders to declare themselves female and outnumber actual women.

I recall Helen Joyce noting the other day that the total number of "women" in prison in Ireland for sexual assault (I think) is now 3. Two of them are (self-declared) transwomen.

And at that point, even given small numbers, you've got strong statistical evidence. Given that 50% of the population are female and zero-point-something are transwomen - what are the odds that the transwomen are offending at anything like female offending rates, if total women vs transwomen numbers are similar. Their offending rate is almost certainly many times higher, otherwise you would hardly ever see them among the "female" population.

Plus you can cross-check against transmen - what's the ratio of transwomen-to-transmen violent offending? It appears to be far closer to the male:female ratio than vice versa.

Okay, with low numbers, you'll never get a tight bound on offending rates, but given the gulf between male and female you will be able to quite easily confidently say which end it's closer to.

I think a lot of posters here are now fairly confident, when they see a headline about a "woman" being arrested for child porn or other sexual offenses, that the "woman" is male. I certainly will take that bet every time, if you're going to offer me even odds.

I guess that's the question for you - if I'm going to lay the bet "I think that's woman's male" on a sexual offense headline, based purely on the offense and the knowledge that papers will report males as women, what odds would you offer me?

@statsgeek1

Crime records are unlikely to be affected to a point of statistical significance by a hundred or so trans offenders at the moment. As it stands, small police forces are recording around 10,000 crimes per month pre Covid. Larger forces for example, The Met, GMP and WMP will be way beyond that number. Admittedly, men offend at a much higher rate than women but, if you get into the figures and separate out trans people we are looking at offending rates of: Women 0.01% trans 0.02% and men 0.24% Taking into account those shocking numbers, around 99.8% of people in the UK have never been convicted of a crime. Those that have been convicted are far more likely to have been found guilty of socio-economic related crimes associated with the UK's determination to keep class structures in place.

Interested to know where you are getting this “Women 0.01% trans 0.02% and men 0.24%” data from, can you link to source please? My understanding is we are not currently recording trans status of all offenders, and, as we are already recording self-declared gender for some, rather than sex, how can you know how many male and female offenders there actually are? My recollection is that MOJ don’t actually know this when it comes to prison inmates, as they don’t know how many transgender inmates they hold and admit their figures are an underestimate. www.keep-prisons-single-sex.org.uk/how-many-males-in-women-s-prisons

Even if your figures are in any way accurate - and making an assumption for a second that the “0.02% trans” is overwhelmingly transwomen/the proportion of transmen is so small as to be insignificant; if the transwomen are counted with the 0.01% women, that triples the female offending rate. Even if only half of that 0.02% trans are transwomen - that would still double the female offending rate. And you don’t think that’s significant? Just because numbers are small numbers, that does not make them insignificant. It is surprising that a self-titled “statsgeek” doesn’t seem to think so!

Btw - one slight technicality - women can be convicted of rape in England & Wales, by joint enterprise - it doesn’t need to be their penis that does the raping, if they are involved in planning and facilitating the crime, the joint enterprise mechanism means they are convicted as if they carried out the actual rape itself and sentenced accordingly. This is however a very rare occurrence and would be recorded as such I believe.