Woman exposes herself in car park ...

[Bobkitten]

www.westerntelegraph.co.uk/news/19264825.woman-exposed-glebe-house-car-park-haverfordwest/

The headline caught my eye; the article refers to this person as a woman and uses she/her pronouns. No info about the victim.

I wondered aloud whether this person was likely to have been a natal woman, given the nature of the offence. DH suggested I was being prejudiced; I was leaping to conclusions; I didn’t have all the facts, etc, etc. (Despite the report indicating this person’s middle name is ‘Peter’, along with ‘Diva’.)

This person’s Twitter account appears to confirm this person is trans.

Will this (sexual) offence have been recorded as committed by a woman? I am assuming yes, though perhaps I’m leaping to conclusions again.

What sense does that make?

It doesn't make real world sense. It does make sense to those people for whom this is all an intellectual game and believe that they and their family (by virtue of their class status) are never likely to be affected by it.

However, iirc, it's been discussed that some work arounds are not acceptable because they are, in effect, commenting on someone. So - a 3rd space that is gender-neutral alongside sex-restricted provision has been argued to be prejudicial because the assumption is that only an excluded class of people would use it.

Neutral pronouns are not accepted in the ETBB that some judges adhere too in a remarkably zealous manner. It's not an adequate compromise that a crime victim should testify with neutral pronouns (still difficult for some) but that they should be compelled to use the pronoun of the suspect's/defendant's choice.

There are objections to the suggestion that there should be a prison estate which is solely for people who are trans identified because such spaces are not gender affirming. (Other logical problems apply.) However, several years ago, this was one of the reasons, iirc, that a very humane plan to develop some more localised, family-friendly female prison estate wasn't developed.

I'm starting to think they only way back from this madness is for sane people to start an orchestrated campaign of fucking with officially collated figures and stats on how we identify. On race, gender, religious affiliation, ethnicity and absolutely everything else, at every single possible opportunity until those stats become so inaccurate as to be absolutely meaningless.

And get your gender critical teenagers to do the same. If 85% of six formers in a largely white intake school suddenly self identify as trans, or gay, and mixed race, what then?

@334bu

mobile.twitter.com/PaulEmbery/status/1388945339382648838

Another " female" criminal.

I think that kind of headline helps make people become aware of the situation. The sex of the offender should be correctly recorded by the police, courts etc though.

@Bobkitten why does your OH think this "And that none of this affects me personally, since... and after all, I’ve never had a problem in a toilet and nor am I likely to" ? Unless you never use a public toilet, that's quite an assumption, I would say.

Sorry but just reporting this as an offence carried out by a woman (when clearly wasn’t) is seriously offensive to me as a Woman. Male crime - men need to own it.
(Actually I’m not sorry either).

Why own it when they can blame a ‘woman’ for it?

Must have accidentally switched from ‘girl’ mode to ‘pervy bassad rubbing his penis furiously in public’ mode.

@Iootraw1

Sorry but just reporting this as an offence carried out by a woman (when clearly wasn’t) is seriously offensive to me as a Woman. Male crime - men need to own it. (Actually I’m not sorry either).

Yes quite. I should think that as soon as you start flashing your erection at unsuspecting people (waves to former NUS officer) then your status as a woman should be revoked?

Identity is a matter of agreement after all.

@GNCQ

I think when it comes to breasts, being seen breastfeeding a baby in public is a massive problem that requires women to cover themselves in a huge sheet, but throwing your top up for the lads is A-OK.

Yes, mustn't forget to cover up when breastfeeding. Oh, you didn't mean like this? www.cbsnews.com/news/woman-told-to-cover-up-while-breastfeeding-responds-with-now-viral-photo/

@334bu

mobile.twitter.com/PaulEmbery/status/1388945339382648838

Another " female" criminal.

The paedophile hunters were surprised to find what they assumed to be a man rather than a woman lurking in a hedge near the designated meeting place.

It turned out to be Smith, in male persona. Police were called and arrested her. A mugshot picture taken shortly afterwards shows a person with obvious stubble.
From the Sidmouth Herald's article. But apparently it "never happens". Just lucky that this time it was a sting and not some real child - got knows what "she" would have done to them.

I’m a reporter and have to write more stories than you’d imagine about trans sex offenders. The original article on this has most likely been written from the court list without the reported being in court. The only details on the list are a name, a ‘gender’ (I know), a date of birth and the wording of the charge. I’m sure the reporter here knows the score, most reporters are fed up to the back teeth of navigating the abuse they get from all angles when reporting this stuff, but they would be in contempt of court if they changed the gender in their reporting of this case to male, and it would also go against all IPSO guidelines.

When I see this kind of bullshit in court I make a point of going along (often on my day off) to listen to the case to ensure I can report it accurately. But I’m still bound by IPSO and tbh I can’t afford to lose my job. The way I get around it is to use no pronouns at all so nobody gets offended. Some examples of my stories are in the thread referred to above. It’s really, really hard work to write 500 words without ever referring to someone’s sex but it is possible.

I think in this case my headline would have been ‘Suspected flasher to appear at crown court’. But you have to get that past an editor and most of them are men who have no interest in and no knowledge of the gender critical movement.

Thanks for that, Janice - I think we all appreciate the difficult position the current situations re court reports and IPSO put journalists in.

I think in this case my headline would have been ‘Suspected flasher to appear at crown court’. But you have to get that past an editor and most of them are men who have no interest in and no knowledge of the gender critical movement.

Aren't newspaper editors usually somewhat interested in some or all of: freedom of speech, accurate (or at least, not grossly misleading) information and 'the public interest' (not merely 'the interest of the public')?

Newspaper editors these days are so incredibly stretched that they’re mostly interested in filling papers, not getting sued and not getting on the wrong side of IPSO, I’m afraid. People who want them to be more than that are going to have to start paying for the news they consume!

@NecessaryScene1

One was an impulsive grab of my crotch as I tried to squeeze past a woman to buy a pint. She was a bit pissed and didn't mean any harm.

Well, that's the thing. Even if she meant any harm, she couldn't realistically cause any, could she?

This is not symmetrical.

What struck me about this post was the ability to remember all the times of being groped by a woman. Because it only happened twice to a (presumably adult) male. I'm a 42 year old woman - when I used to go out to pubs and clubs I'd be lucky if I only got groped twice a night by men!

@JaniceBattersby

I’m a reporter and have to write more stories than you’d imagine about trans sex offenders. The original article on this has most likely been written from the court list without the reported being in court. The only details on the list are a name, a ‘gender’ (I know), a date of birth and the wording of the charge. I’m sure the reporter here knows the score, most reporters are fed up to the back teeth of navigating the abuse they get from all angles when reporting this stuff, but they would be in contempt of court if they changed the gender in their reporting of this case to male, and it would also go against all IPSO guidelines.

When I see this kind of bullshit in court I make a point of going along (often on my day off) to listen to the case to ensure I can report it accurately. But I’m still bound by IPSO and tbh I can’t afford to lose my job. The way I get around it is to use no pronouns at all so nobody gets offended. Some examples of my stories are in the thread referred to above. It’s really, really hard work to write 500 words without ever referring to someone’s sex but it is possible.

I think in this case my headline would have been ‘Suspected flasher to appear at crown court’. But you have to get that past an editor and most of them are men who have no interest in and no knowledge of the gender critical movement.

I want to set up a trust for women reporters like you...you deserve a spa weekend at the very least.

Thank you.

A thank you, Janice, from me as well. I know you have to tread a fine line.

Given the genitals are relevant here, why aren't the woke demanding these types of crimes are reported as "a person exposed their penis"?

If we have to be people with a vagina when we need period products, why aren't flashers "people with a penis"?

Unless the feelings of male sex offenders matter more than logic, consistency, accuracy or women's rights?

Given the genitals are relevant here, why aren't the woke demanding these types of crimes are reported as "a person exposed their penis"?

Yep. For reductio ad adsurbum , 'a woman exposed her penis'. Isn't that what the 'ladydick' folk would want? If not, why not?

Given the genitals are relevant here, why aren't the woke demanding these types of crimes are reported as "a person exposed their penis"?

Sadly, as has been explained above, you can't refer to someone as a 'person' and still show a photo of them because it's considered exclusionary by stealth. And obviously papers want to print photos.

Perhaps 'a woman exposed her penis' would be more fitting.

@YouJustFoldItIn

Given the genitals are relevant here, why aren't the woke demanding these types of crimes are reported as "a person exposed their penis"?

Sadly, as has been explained above, you can't refer to someone as a 'person' and still show a photo of them because it's considered exclusionary by stealth. And obviously papers want to print photos.

Perhaps 'a woman exposed her penis' would be more fitting.

I don't get it!

If women are "people who menstruate" or "vulva owners" then surely male flashers are "people who expose their penis in public"?

Nothing else is consistent, surely?

Person with a penis arrested for indecent exposure. Yes. Makes sense. Logically.

Thing is it's not logical.

1. Trans people must be reported as trans if they are a victim of crime. If a trans person is the criminal, the report must not mention trans status and just report self id. Which usually means woman arrested for xyz reported as such and tbh often seems to be sex crimes. Although papers are obsessed with those and any woman who is the suspect etc gets loads of coverage.

1. It's only female people who are ovulators etc. Men are still men. So in the single crime I've seen committed by s trans man they were described as a trans man and female pronouns were used. Trans women are always just women and female pronouns.

If you're looking for consistency or logic you won't find it. And that has made me twitch from the start (I like things to be consistent and logical iyswim).