Rape suspects can choose to self-identify as female - Times Scotland

[Igneococcus]

Yousaf claims they would need a full GRC but:
"Detective Superintendent Fil Capaldi said: “The sex/gender identification of individuals who come into contact with the police will be based on how they present or how they self- declare, which is consistent with the values of the organisation."
Does that mean the "values of the organisation" potentially trump the justice secretary and the Scottish parliament?

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/aba95fce-9ef0-11eb-a908-ec96e110073e?shareToken=828b6f29f363f02863b00aa4b523a1c0

And of course in addition to the police recording them as female, presumably in court they will be referred to a "she" and then sent to a female prison (if they don't get let off because of the trauma of being transgender).

If rapists are identifying as women, won't there come a time in the future when they can't be rapists because they will be seen as women and as women, they would be charged with sexual assault? That's the logical conclusion, right?

The comments are taking a while to be approved - the newest one that I can see is from three hours ago.
I hope that the press in Scotland will actually report on this - and not just in the Scottish section of a national newspaper. Although I am very grateful that the Times have written about it.

@WarOnWomen

If rapists are identifying as women, won't there come a time in the future when they can't be rapists because they will be seen as women and as women, they would be charged with sexual assault? That's the logical conclusion, right?

Does sexual assault carry a lighter sentence than rape?

@WarOnWomen

If rapists are identifying as women, won't there come a time in the future when they can't be rapists because they will be seen as women and as women, they would be charged with sexual assault? That's the logical conclusion, right?

That was were I was going before I decided not to put that in my head. Along with the growth in a niche crime category that I doubt currently exists - but I don't know if there is a plan to bring claimed sexual orientation into records or if it will just be a defence tactic to claim that a client is a lesbian who was engaged in assaulting a non-consenting woman.

What a criminal, legal, and social state of affairs that such self-evident nonsense might be supported and the victims' perspective considered irrelevant. Glinner, Helen, and Arty were discussing something recently about the importance of pronouns in crime-reporting and similar. Glinner quoted this from a recently published piece (I didn't catch the author):

It matters because this kind of imprecise, inaccurate reporting is at odds with our basic perceptions about men and women. Enough of it will lead us to believe that the perceptions themselves are wrong. The danger of this is two-fold. Violent men will be treated more leniently than they have any right to expect and women will be saddled with the reputation for violence that men have earned for themselves. Not only will men have succeeded in appropriating the mantle of womanhood but they will remake it in their own distorted image.

NB: I was transcribing from a video - I haven't seen the full piece - around 21min mark.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXjPMdHO148

@EmbarrassingAdmissions

Rape and sexual assault are not necessarily driven by sex. It's about power, and about humiliation. Having forced that on women without our consent, even in a justice system which seems to favour the perpetrators every step of the way, the final indignity is that they are using the system to reinforce that humiliation.

From my limited understanding of some philias, isn't that appalling experience quite a popular one in some philic groups? If your interest in transgression is being able to enforce it on others and compel its acceptance, having the legal system even more explicitly backing you up than previously, and knowing that your victim is being further victimised on your behalf, with that system as its proxy - that must be quite the headrush for transgressors who enjoy that sort of abuse of power.

I think saying that it "isn't about sex" is a little misleading, TBH. Closer to the truth is that power and transgression and aggression, just like love or physical attraction, can be very tied into sex for some people. The law could totally be a mechanism for that.

It matters because this kind of imprecise, inaccurate reporting is at odds with our basic perceptions about men and women. Enough of it will lead us to believe that the perceptions themselves are wrong. The danger of this is two-fold. Violent men will be treated more leniently than they have any right to expect and women will be saddled with the reputation for violence that men have earned for themselves. Not only will men have succeeded in appropriating the mantle of womanhood but they will remake it in their own distorted image.

This is already happening given the reports in the media and the light sentencing of some individuals. It beggars belief that it's been allowed to happen and organisations and people in power refuse to or can't see the crisis these lies create.

@WarOnWomen

If rapists are identifying as women, won't there come a time in the future when they can't be rapists because they will be seen as women and as women, they would be charged with sexual assault? That's the logical conclusion, right?

I wondered this a while ago too. Surely we are heading to a situation where a woman can be a victim of rape by a ‘woman’. How will the legal system square a case where the victim and the accused are both ‘women’ and use of biology as a distinguishing category is deemed bigoted? (Well, more to the point how will they square that case in a way that treats the woman - the victim - with dignity, respect and justice?)

THIS is what happens when you say TWAW and not TWATW. Surely?

This kind of stuff is why the SNP have kept misogyny out of their hate crime Bill

@WarOnWomen

If rapists are identifying as women, won't there come a time in the future when they can't be rapists because they will be seen as women and as women, they would be charged with sexual assault? That's the logical conclusion, right?

No, it's not, not in the jurisdiction relevant to the thread. Rape is defined in Scotland in terms of body parts not the sex or gender of either the rapist or the victim.

crime.scot/rape/

The law in England does still use man and 'he', I think - I don't believe any TW rapist has tried to get their prosecution or conviction overturned because of this. I'd take a bet that any such attempt would be met with a sane response by the legal system.

ErrolTheDragon this is a relief, thank you for the information.

Thanks Errol that is good to know.

English forces have been recording crime by self id for years.

There was an foi request and of the forces that responded they said

Self id for sex of offender
None had any records or information as to when this change had been made or why, what consideration was given etc

And of course they didn't make the change public or anything just let everyone go on thinking crime stats by male female were meaning sex

Dodgy as fuck

'The Scottish government declined to comment, saying that “this is a matter for Police Scotland”.'

Fucking cowards. Put your money where your mouth is FFS

This is part of accepting the female penis. ie as rape can only be committed by someone with a penis, but they are saying that person could be a female it means females can have a penis.

ie the law (like the medical profession) is now putting a personal belief ahead of biological reality.

I'd take a bet that any such attempt would be met with a sane response by the legal system.

Seriously, I've given up expecting a sane response from the legal system since Maria McL's compelled speech in that trial.

@EmbarrassingAdmissions

Unfortunately that thread is dead now. A lot of suspended accounts and deleted tweets. Would love to know the gist of it.

Transbadger

Maria MacLachlan www.peaktrans.org/

www.feministcurrent.com/2018/04/27/trans-identified-male-tara-wolf-charged-assault-hyde-park-attack/

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/12/radical-feminist-warned-refer-transgender-defendant-assault/amp/

[quote Gibbonsgibbonsgibbons]Transbadger

Maria MacLachlan www.peaktrans.org/

www.feministcurrent.com/2018/04/27/trans-identified-male-tara-wolf-charged-assault-hyde-park-attack/

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/12/radical-feminist-warned-refer-transgender-defendant-assault/amp/[/quote]

Thanks.

Excellent user name!

🦡🌈🤍

[quote transbadger]@EmbarrassingAdmissions

Unfortunately that thread is dead now. A lot of suspended accounts and deleted tweets. Would love to know the gist of it. [/quote]
This search might partly fill it in for you:

twitter.com/hashtag/RapistHill?src=hashtag_click

#RapistHill was a hashtag created by people who made the Niemöller argument about why pronoun preferences are a right and not a courtesy or privilege. They argued that the preferred pronouns should always be used irrespective of the character/behaviour/criminal convictions or even notoriety of the person concerned. It's been a tag used in association with Karen White, Jacinta Brooks and others who've cropped up in the news.

When some who made the claim were challenged on it, they declared that #rapisthill was a hill on which they were prepared to die to make a stand given their espoused argument that if they didn't, all trans rights would eventually be removed. (That screen shot or something like it might still be in the remnants of that thread.)

@EmbarrassingAdmissions

Thanks for this. Incredible stuff. That's what happens when you stretch these arguments to their logical conclusions though.

[quote transbadger]@EmbarrassingAdmissions

Thanks for this. Incredible stuff. That's what happens when you stretch these arguments to their logical conclusions though. [/quote]
It's exactly what happened with GRA 2004. So many speakers in the HoL anticipated what would happen and yet they were assured that it wouldn't.

Tweets from Hansard - the index thread:

twitter.com/hairyleggdharpy/status/1177699186361458688

The men who were so convinced of their inside track on understanding that they didn't need any input from women for the Yogyakarta Principles in 2006 - well, welcome to the party Prof Wintemute but it's not as if there was a lack of women who might have disabused you of your fanciful beliefs that nobody would seek to abuse these provisions:

Professor Wintemute says that women’s rights were not considered during the meeting where the principles were written and the authors “failed to consider” that fully intact males would seek to access female-only spaces.

Wintemute now wonders whether the GRA should have been passed at all. Instead of changing the person’s legal sex, the law could have simply sought to protect people from violence, harassment or discrimination based on gender non-conforming appearance or behaviour.

sex-matters.org/posts/updates/yogyakarta-principles/

Eighteen months ago, DCI Fil Capaldi said to rape victims “we will listen to you and we will give you a voice.” theferret.scot/rape-helpline-calls-unanswered/

Now his values are to say “you can use your voice, but you can only describe what happened with the words that the man who raped you allows you to”.

Under Capaldi's Eye is the New Order so I've corrected this to the Approved Version (Scotland) Forgotthebins

Now his values are to say “you can use your voice, but you can only describe what happened with the words that the man woman who raped you carried out a serious sexual assault allows you to”.

Oh, I'd forgotten about #RapistHill.

You’re right EmbarrassingAdmissions some reality-based thinking wrongthink slipped out there.