Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

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

492 replies

Cwenthryth · 27/09/2021 23:07

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.

OP posts:
Reptar · 28/10/2021 00:21

No human can change sex. Its a ridiculous belief and its not one you can force us to agree with.

ErrolTheDragon · 28/10/2021 00:24

Multistorey - I thought this was a different robin, not the barrister (who I don't believe would make blasé claims about the figure just being bad data entry)

RufustheBadgeringReindeer · 28/10/2021 00:24

Dude

Youve got no fucking idea what I believe

Youve not taken the time to find out

And youve lied…constantly

No one at all has ever said that transwomen are purposefully saying they are trans just to rape women

Not one person

RufustheBadgeringReindeer · 28/10/2021 00:25

Oh just to clarify…that was to robin

Wildfart · 28/10/2021 00:26

It’s amazing how you’re a barrister and you won’t debate your points.

A barrister!

Ho ho.

So all that "I've been gentle with you" is your legal patter is it?

ErrolTheDragon · 28/10/2021 00:27

Babdocs post is not saying trans women are only pretending to be women so they can rape men. It's saying men are liable to pretend be transwomen.

RufustheBadgeringReindeer · 28/10/2021 00:28

Dude, I don't get this. You do understand that we can all see the thread, right? You can't hide what was said

Evidence chum…

Where are people saying that transwomen don’t exist?

Who are the half dozen breaking cover?

RufustheBadgeringReindeer · 28/10/2021 00:28

@ErrolTheDragon

Babdocs post is not saying trans women are only pretending to be women so they can rape men. It's saying men are liable to pretend be transwomen.
Abso-fucking-lutely
Wildfart · 28/10/2021 00:29

A literal statement that men are pretending to be women so they can get into women's prisons to rape women.

Even the prison system is admitting this is happening.

For a barrister you are remarkably naive about criminal behaviour. Are you a contract lawyer or something. A bit out of your depth here?

MultiStorey · 28/10/2021 00:29

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

RufustheBadgeringReindeer · 28/10/2021 00:30

12.30

Night all

robinr66 · 28/10/2021 00:31

Are you now denying that this is a threat? It certainly sounds threatening.

It's a real shame for you that this isn't Twitter. There's no deleting or editing posts here. If you make a threat (which you did), it stands for all to see.

Do I really have to explain this again? This was not a threat and its ridiculous to pretend that it was.

My point was that if OP walked into work on Monday and said this nonsense, they'd be fired. If they started banging on at a family dinner, they'd be shunned. No one would want anything to do with someone like OP.

If they tried this they'd quickly learn "the value society places" on this type of thing and they'd quickly learn what real consequences are. But they won't do that because they don't want the consequences.

Wildfart · 28/10/2021 00:32

Ah, wrong barrister.

So this is just straight forward mansplainer of the gender neutral variety.

Data entry errors, no knowledge of the current position in prisons, makes up lies, and tries to drag in racism.

Bog standard.

Wildfart · 28/10/2021 00:33

My point was that if OP walked into work on Monday and said this nonsense, they'd be fired.

No they wouldn't. You are wrong there.

Wildfart · 28/10/2021 00:34

I regularly discuss this with my colleagues IN HR. We haven't fired each other.

timeisnotaline · 28/10/2021 00:35

@robinr66 And I literally, explicitly said that I thought trans people should be upset that some men are pretending to be trans to get into women’s prisons. It’s hardly a good look is it? You are ignoring everything we say that is the exact opposite of what you are claiming we say.

timeisnotaline · 28/10/2021 00:35

@Wildfart

My point was that if OP walked into work on Monday and said this nonsense, they'd be fired.

No they wouldn't. You are wrong there.

I wouldn’t be fired. My work is pretty woke too.
Wildfart · 28/10/2021 00:39

I work in a university.

Wildfart · 28/10/2021 00:41

With a criminology department, with faculty that agree with Prof Sullivan.
So there you go. We won't be firing anyone for knowing what transgender means.

robinr66 · 28/10/2021 00:41

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Cailleach1 · 28/10/2021 00:42

Oh dear. That is rather an ugly statement. Is this the new and mutated route for misogyny, practiced under the guise of virtuosity? Some are finding this quite the handy vehicle. An old jalopy with a new lick of paint!

Do you really think your posts would have gained any rhyme or reason whatsoever more credibility if you had laid on the insults and invective even more then?

Here's a tip - it looks bad when you start making up stuff and attributing it to others. It is dishonest and everyone can see it for what it is.

Yes, most people in the world recognise only two biological sexes. They also consider them immutable. Take the highly esteemed Professor Robert Winston. It is based in hard, factual scientific fact and is also a protected belief. If you are not being disingenuous, it seems to be very difficult for you to accept that many, if not most, people have not adopted a belief in gender identity changing your sex. Or maybe even a belief in some sort of innate 'gender identity'.

The answer is not to become so aggressive. Others will just dismiss someone who has no real argument and who resorts to anger, aggression and intimidation.

ErrolTheDragon · 28/10/2021 00:43

I don't think I'd be fired for discussing peculiar and worrying statistics.

I might have my competence questioned if I couldn't understand quite simple logic though.

Wildfart · 28/10/2021 00:46

If that is your attitude to women with their own opinions on things that affect women, then so be it. You have been unable to manipulate with your shaming which is not very surprising as you are unaware that you have quite controversial opinions on how women are permitted to speak about their lives and how the law affects them.

I can see it's a surprise when people don't capitulate to you.

Wildfart · 28/10/2021 00:47

I'm flattered but I assure you I'm definitely not a barrister or solicitor or anything to do with the legal profession.

Don't be flattered, it was a mistaken identity and you seem to have missed how bad I thought you were.

Waitwhat23 · 28/10/2021 00:47

@robinr66

>Are you now denying that this is a threat? It certainly sounds threatening.

It's a real shame for you that this isn't Twitter. There's no deleting or editing posts here. If you make a threat (which you did), it stands for all to see.

Do I really have to explain this again? This was not a threat and its ridiculous to pretend that it was.

My point was that if OP walked into work on Monday and said this nonsense, they'd be fired. If they started banging on at a family dinner, they'd be shunned. No one would want anything to do with someone like OP.

If they tried this they'd quickly learn "the value society places" on this type of thing and they'd quickly learn what real consequences are. But they won't do that because they don't want the consequences.

It's quite obviously a threat - feel free to keep denying it but we can all see it.

If OP walked into work on Monday and said 'there are only two sexes' (which is a factual, reality based statement), she would be protected because it is a protected belief (Maya Forstater judgement). If the OP said to a transwoman's face, 'you are not a woman', it certainly wouldn't be a pleasant thing to do but again, is a factually based statement.

If they talked about it at a family dinner, in normal circumstances (if there wasn't 'no debate', the chilling effect etc), people would be able to discuss it, as they would other controversial issues such as politics or religion.

You seem to be convinced (and have been embolded by the chilling effect which is thankfully started to lift) that you can force people to believe that human beings can change sex and that twaw. I do not share your belief and consider your insistence that I do really quite disturbing given the absolute lack of any evidence to back up your belief.

Swipe left for the next trending thread