More than one “woman” a week prosecuted for rape?!?!

[Cwenthryth]

I just saw this on Twitter

twitter.com/profalices/status/1442415750497509380?s=21

Between 2012 and 2018, 436 individuals prosecuted for rape in England and Wales were recorded as women.
www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/committees/current-and-previous-committees/session-6-citizen-participation-and-public-petitions-committee/correspondence/2021/pe1876_h-professor-alice-sullivan-submission-of-27-august-2021

I’m shocked at this statistic. Yes, a small proportion of these may be women charged with rape by joint enterprise. Prof Sullivan posted on Twitter she has requested to separate out those cases. But, as under the law in England and Wales, rape is a crime committed with a penis….. so these (alleged) rapists are “bodies with penises” being recorded as women in crime stats. So transwomen, right? So what does this mean….436 (alleged) transwomen rapists in 6 years? That is more than one a week. In England & Wales.

Have I misunderstood that? I’m really shocked.

robin, neither of those statements make any sense. Sorry. Maybe try again?

Both of those statements are appalling, robin

Is option 2 really what you think women here think? Jesus Christ.

Oh goodie. A THOUGHT EXPERIMENT, everyone gather around because we have never been issued one of these... for a day any way...

You are now going down the path of saying that safeguarding should be thrown asunder for any person who is a male transitioner. That is what I make of your two sentences.

And that YOU believe we have said anywhere that all transitioned males are rapists (not one poster has stated this so it is yet another lie from you).

Sorry, both those statements as a whole are absolute bollocks and also incredibly offensive.

They are also made up of a number of different sub statements. Some also incredibly offensive. It gives me a head ache to try to line them all up and refute them one by one.

Could we start with a single statement or two?

So, to recap.

You are still attributing negative generalisations to posters as well as doing some pretty damining personal attacks on this thread.

And you have not addressed the issue of the fat fingers as far as I can see. Care to do that and stop attributing MN posters with the hateful attitudes that you keep posting are there but that actually are not.

By the way, that kind of activity is what MN was deleting you for initially.

I thought we were getting somewhere with the thought experiment. I tried. But both statements don't make sense. I would agree with the previous poster about starting with a single statement or two.

Gender is a biological characteristic No, sex is a biological characteristic.
Men are men and women are women and that can't be changed - I agree with this.
Anyone who says they're transgender is lying because being transgender isn't real - no. Changing sex is impossible. People being trans is real- real in the sense that that is their conception of themself, and they exist.
It's a choice - it absolutely can be. Otherwise the population of trans people would stay fairly constand across times and societies, the same way that the number of gay men and lesbians does, regardless of how accepting the society around them is. If it was truly innate, youwouldn’t see things like the 4000% increase of teenage girls being referred for gender identity issues that has happened recently, or the groups of friends all coming out as trans/non binary in quick succession.
We should make sure that transgender people can't use the women's toilets because they're only doing so to rape women - no. Not least for the fact that the population of trans people who are trans men certainly have my support to use the women’s toilets as necessary. And no feminist has ever framed it like this. It’s the worst possible interpretation.

@robinr66

Apologies, it was actually you (and a half a dozen other people now) who finally decided to break cover and admit their issue actually has nothing to do with statistics but is rather predicted on a belief that transgender people don't exist at all.

I call it a "belief" because that's what is - like a believing in unicorns, anyone who rejects scientific fact in favour of their own personal option isn't being rationale.

I know lots of transgender people. They exist.

I'm not breaking cover? How bizzare.

I know what transgender means. It's not a scientific fact that the word transgender means males are female. Transgender is an identity.

I'll have a go at statement 1

Sexuality is a biological characteristic. Yes, and apparently some studies say a little bit of nurture too.

Men like women and women like men.. We have plenty of proof otherwise and some people aren't into either.

..and that can't be changed I guess people may realise they like women and men or neither.

Anyone who says they're gay is lying because homosexuality isn't real. It's a choice. Wrong, it's provable by the way the body reacts when you fancy someone.

We should make sure that gay people can't join the Scouts because they're only doing so to rape little boys. Not sure how that links to any of the above?

Both of those are nonsense statements made up of unrelated pieces of nonsense.

*Statement 1

Sexuality is a biological characteristic. Men like women and women like men and that can't be changed. Anyone who says they're gay is lying because homosexuality isn't real. It's a choice. We should make sure that gay people can't join the Scouts because they're only doing so to rape little boys.*

Are you accusing the posters on here of not believing in the existence of lesbians or gay people? Do you realise that many of the posters on here are lesbians? How does the first part of this 'statement' relate to the nonsense statement 'homosexuality isn't real. It's a choice'? As for the last part of your 'statement' which is deeply offensive and which no-one here believes, I really think you've outdone yourself in being offensive and hateful.

*Statement 2

Gender is a biological characteristic. Men are men and women are women and that can't be changed. Anyone who says they're transgender is lying because being transgender isn't real. It's a choice. We should make sure that transgender people can't use the women's toilets because they're only doing so to rape women.*

Yet again, no-one is saying transgender people don't exist. You have yet to show a single quote from any poster here to back up this statement so you are just repeating a lie. Transgender women are male and are not entitled (due to their sex) to access single sex spaces which are exemptions set out in the Equality Act 2010.

I have a sentence. One of robin's sentences has been very illuminating.

My point is that prejudice doesn't disappear simply because it becomes socially unacceptable. It mutates into more acceptable forms.

Very succinct explanation of how the socially acceptable form of misogyny has mutated using 'gender identity' (trumping sex) as the vehicle. Reframing women as inherently more privileged than any male who wants it to be declared so. Yet (and this is where this thread started as can't be sure of the data) oddly not a discrete biological reality. This can be used as a vehicle to browbeat women, and even adopt a virtuous air whilst doing so. You can even take away safety and fairness from women and call it levelling up.

If that doesn't wash, people can always unleash scurrilous accusations on the women who aren't buying this rebranding. Or indeed insult or threaten them with violence, and criminalise them for thought crimes.

Anyone who says they're gay is lying because homosexuality isn't real.

Yes, this what Stonewall appear to believe.

Gender is a biological characteristic

No, gender is social and cultural expectations of how a man or woman should behave. Concepts of masculinity and femininity differ with time and place so are not stable, but they have fairly consistently been used to oppress women.

Sex is biological and relates to reproduction in all species.

Cultural and social constructs are certainly real, but they don’t impact on biology. People like Judith Butler believe gender is performative.

You seem a little confused by this subject - would you like some book recommendations?

I was assuming that statement 1 was intended to represent what homophobic people think, statement 2 was intended to be what the “transphobic” women here think, and they were constructed and presented in that way to demonstrate how homophobic people and supposedly transphobic posters here are two equivalent cheeks of the same bigoted arse.

It doesn’t work because I don’t think Robin has grasped the fundamentals of the Gc position in order to be able to represent it properly.

This is why the data should always record sex. The biological reality bit should not be lost. This doesn't change and is independent of any 'gender identity'.

How can women's prisons even provide or plan for women's needs if they don't record this?

Merrymouse, those statements are so much clearer. And maybe we can add that women on this board of course believe that homosexuality is real.

I honestly don’t know who would make any such offensive statements. Extremely religious US right wing groups?

This is a fairly left wing feminist board. Mainly concerned with safeguarding and the rights of women and girls.

Oh! That was disappointing. I thought we were going to be offered a meaningful set of scenarios to debate.

But we got hogwash instead.

Sorry, Rob it doesn't make sense, is fairly offensive and, assuming it was an honest attempt, highlights your lack of knowledge.

Try again, we'll still be here

It is amazing how much nonsense gets attributed to people for simply knowing the truth about what transgender means!

Perhaps Robin has gone away to find some scientific facts.

That's going to be interesting.

We should make sure that transgender people can't use the women's toilets because they're only doing so to rape women

Substitute 'male' for 'transgender people' here (after all transgender people come in both sexes) and 'because statistically they commit 98% of sexual abuse' with 'because they're only doing so to rape women' and you'd be far closer to the argument made here.

Both of the statements you are offer are nonsense, @robinr66.

Surely, everyone can distinguish 'gender identity' from sexual orientation? Maybe SOGI wasn't the best acronym to use, as it may confuse them in some people's minds. Of course, that is probably why it was used. One provides the imprimatur for the other.

Of course, that is probably why it was used.

yes, I would believe so.

After all it seems that so many activists rely on the tropish arguments about sexual orientation to prop up why gender must be prioritised over sex.

Okay, but hear me out, what about THESE scenarioos:

1. Gender barriers are inhibiting, bulky and tend to rub, therefore women should clap harder.

1. If you don't believe that seahorses can be horses by the power of wishes, you are literally killing sealife and should be IMPRISONED

CHOOSE ONE

I am clapping loudly arabella, I want to see the unicorn again!

So nothing to do with your post. Sorry.

Yes, Helleofabore, yes!

Come on, ladies! If we all clap harder maybe the unicorn will appear! Come on!