Teeside woman in court for exposing her penis and masturbating in public

[SocialConnection]

News report here - unlike on their other articles, there appear to be no comments listed ................................

www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/teesside-woman-accused-using-sex-22260053

Their hands are tied by IPSO All IPSO guidelines were adhered to. The man in charge is Lord Edward Faulks QC, Chair of IPSO and of the IPSO Complaints Committee:

[email protected]

@ChakaFridaMendips

When it’s the menopause it’s ‘people’. When it’s crime it’s ‘woman’.

Exactly this.

Sorry, haven't rtft, late to the party generally, and sure someone has prob already mentioned, but won't this interfere with gender-based crime stats over time?

DoubleTweenQueen

Yes. Hence the need to collect ‘sex’ based stats and ‘gender’ stats. For a complete and accurate reflection on what is happening, crime wise, in society.

The constant conflation of gender and sex means there is ambiguity in what is meant and what has been meant in the past. And that is exactly what activists have used to progress their aims.

There has been a few discussions about this in the House of Lords over the past few weeks. Awareness grows everyday and the public are not buying what the activists have been selling, despite the gaslighting that the activists attempt to tell us the majority agrees with them.

This is one issue that many people are realising that mantra doesn’t work. That a subset of males are never females.

@Helleofabore Ah yes! Realised my rookie error, using gender when I should have written sex. I'm on rapid catch-up

The vast majority of people don't realise this stuff is now endemic in society - including schools. If sex is a legally-protected characteristic then we need to demand it's protection, not just take for granted that it is, sadly.

Hope voices will get louder very quickly.

Yes. Years of calling sex gender is hard to untangle. But the importance is that you see the issues in the first place.

And once that happens, you cannot unsee it. No amount of being told to be ‘kind’ will put reality back on the locked box.

Rod Liddle picked it up under the subheading 'A quiet night on Teeside for Chloe and John Thomas'.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/theres-nothing-like-a-virus-to-remind-us-no-one-has-a-god-given-right-to-go-skiing-vpxz6h7nj?shareToken=57634f4c2edefedb81dbb25f45170b41

@NotBadConsidering

But TRAs are still happy that this person has been “correctly” gendered, based on Twitter threads. See also Chris Chan, who’s accused of raping his own mother. Plenty of people complained about him being misgendered. It doesn’t matter if the article is clever, or it “peaks” people or it’s strategically positioned with photos to tell the real truth, it’s still a lie that TRAs want to perpetuate, because if you can call a male sex offender “she”, then there’s no way you can call anyone less offensive anything but too.

Fair point. I suppose I was celebrating that it was at least better than if his penis and ergo his sex hadn’t actually been referenced at all, given how many reports we see these days of “women” exposing themselves or downloading images of child abuse, and other sexual offences, and how much that’s clouding public perception of women’s propensity to commit sexual offences.

I was also working under the assumption that the IPSO guidelines really are pretty binding; it’s not an area I know a lot about. I would certainly welcome it if some brave journalists felt inclined to go against them and their editors backed them up.

But it’s the guidelines themselves that need to be challenged, along with the Equal Treatment Bench Book. It would be good if a journalist wanted to do a story actually on these issues of reporting and recording.

Because yes, I agree, as it is it’s a win for TRAs and a lose for us, every time that lie is reinforced. I hate that lie as deeply as you do, and I want it gone entirely from public life - but I still think it’s better to have reporting that implicitly points out the lie than doesn’t.

Still think it’s better that readers who might be genuinely confused in some of these cases over the sex of the offender will know without a doubt in this case that he is male. And that some of those people will come away from reading it thinking “WTAF?” and start to look further into it.

Because the only way we’re going to turn this around is through sheer force of numbers, ultimately. We need people to be aware to be on board in the first place. That article had more chance of raising awareness than one that left out the word “penis” - the very fact of calling him a “woman” while referring to his penis will itself have informed some people that were previously unaware about the madness of the ideology, and that is the small win here for me.

I was also working under the assumption that the IPSO guidelines really are pretty binding;

Except that every one of these stories about 'women' who are male contravenes the very first clause of the first section :
The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information or images, including headlines not supported by the text.

www.ipso.co.uk/editors-code-of-practice/

Some are worse than others, of course.

@ErrolTheDragon

I was also working under the assumption that the IPSO guidelines really are pretty binding;

Except that every one of these stories about 'women' who are male contravenes the very first clause of the first section :
The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information or images, including headlines not supported by the text.

www.ipso.co.uk/editors-code-of-practice/

Some are worse than others, of course.

But remember some people believe TWAW and therefore don't think it is inaccurate reporting

But remember some people believe TWAW and therefore don’t think it is accurate reporting

By that logic you’re saying royal family reporting should include mention of them being lizards because some people believe the royal family are lizards.

Ideological beliefs that are not supported by evidence should not trump facts.

I believe that some of the men in the public eye are right *unts and that lots of other people feel the same way...

Jakey got a question and would be interested if it does anything to understand a little bit, one reason why there are such strong objections to this.

Has happened a few times but remember one in particular.

Can't find link sorry. Was on here so could be searched if wanted to see.

Anyway.

News sites in a certain part of the country issued a police notification.

Police were looking for a woman who had committed a crime. They gave various info and also that the woman may be dressed as a man.

Down the line there were some pics maybe when caught? Can't remember.

The woman was male with a gender ID of woman.

Their features were obviously those of a male.

So if they dressed as a man then they looked like a man. Because male.

Was issuing that description to the public more or less likely to lead to them being spotted?

If it was, a transwoman who may be dressed as a man then that would have been more useful surely?

These sort of situations are a real problem.

In this case if they hadn't been caught.

And police said woman exposing herself around be warned.

Then what are the public to make of that?

Maybe the idea is that educating the population to know that women can have penises would be the way forward?

Just don't know. What are your thoughts?

@CheeseMmmm Am curious how you can accurately assess gender before the perpetrator has been caught and asked ? So you can't describe someone you're looking for as a transwoman dressed as a male unless the person they're after might be already known to them?
Police would just describe outward appearance, so generally if male or female appearance, and clothing, car etc
And if it's someone exposing their penis, then surely they would describe that person as a male, and identifiable features and clothing, because that would be the most direct way for a member of the public or CCTV to find that person - and that's what their job is.

Police were looking for a woman who had committed a crime. They gave various info and also that the woman may be dressed as a man.

That was Derbyshire. It's why I reached the zenith of coping with this dangerous practice of pretending men are women. It was about 4 or 5 years ago.

This is the kind of reporting that I prefer to see regarding this kind of crime

rational, factual and lacking that not very magical gaslighting component

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9969855/Police-hunt-man-wearing-womens-clothing-exposed-12-different-women.html

Got to love the Daily Mail for that and also for getting in a mention of house prices in passing.

[quote DoubleTweenQueen]@CheeseMmmm Am curious how you can accurately assess gender before the perpetrator has been caught and asked ? So you can't describe someone you're looking for as a transwoman dressed as a male unless the person they're after might be already known to them?
Police would just describe outward appearance, so generally if male or female appearance, and clothing, car etc
And if it's someone exposing their penis, then surely they would describe that person as a male, and identifiable features and clothing, because that would be the most direct way for a member of the public or CCTV to find that person - and that's what their job is.[/quote]
Yes. It doesn't make any sense to be falling all over themselves with wrong sex pronouns when presumably they haven't asked the perpetrator.

It's funny how the police are always willing to misgender boring old biological female victims who they haven't bothered to ask about their gender identity, though. As an example - from the daily mail article 'Police in Camden are appealing for information relating to a series of indecent exposures and unwanted approaches toward women' - have they asked them if they all id as women? Bet they haven't.

Either everyone's super special gender identity is the most important thing and everyone gets called 'they' until asked, or it's not and we're still allowed to use sex-based pronouns - and I'd say this is especially important for sex criminals.

Otherwise it's just a massive exercise in covering up and enabling male criminality and violence against women (biological women).

But remember some people believe TWAW and therefore don't think it is inaccurate reporting

If they believe TWAW then why object to a TW being described as a TW? That's accurate and won't be misleading regardless of whether you have a subjective rather than objective view of what the word 'woman' means.

Afaik the media generally manage to do this if a TW is the victim of a crime rather than an alleged or proven perpetrator.

Very good point Errol. Transwomen when victims, women when perpetrators.

How convenient.

@Haveyoubrushedyourteethtoday

Man exposes dick.. same old same old.

Yep.

• If they believe TWAW then why object to a TW being described as a TW? That's accurate and won't be misleading regardless of whether you have a subjective rather than objective view of what the word 'woman' means.

Afaik the media generally manage to do this if a TW is the victim of a crime rather than an alleged or proven perpetrator.*

I'm not saying I'm agreeing with them in the slightest. It's fucked up but a "hands tied" situation. IPSO guidelines do call for accuracy, but there is also clear guidance on how TW should be referred to.

As for TW when victims issues, I'd guess the reasoning that would be given is that you wouldn't say "a black woman", as they are women but you might if they were a victim as their colour is a potential motive. (Again I do not agree with them, that's racist as hell, but just purely thinking in terms of arguments used).

I emailed the editor at reach and the answer I got back was they used the information from the charge sheet and they had to follow IPSO guidelines.

The place to get this corrected for future stories is for the police to start recording by sex. Wasn’t Priti Patel going to tackle this?

Yet again. State sanctioned abuse of women propped up by the media.