Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Rapes committed by women - JKR got me thinking

322 replies

scratchedbymycat · 13/12/2021 19:10

JKR just tweeted again. I agree wholeheartedly with her views, but some of the responses have got me thinking.

Why does it matter if crime stats say women rape?

(I promise I'm not trolling here. In fact, I'm hoping for some startlingly clear objective responses to fuel my arguments.)

For me, I find it downright hateful, after all the violence and hate directed towards women by men, that stats will now say 'women are doing it to women'. That makes me so damn angry. But is feeling offended by this, on principle, enough?

On crime stats and recording... Seth Abramson (I know) on Twitter commented that the fact the perpetrator has a penis will come up in the court case. So the court will know they are not biologically female.

Also, if we say a woman raped another, doesn't that also immediately tell us the rapist was transgender? (The only group who identify as women but are also bepenised).

How does a biological women rape another? Because I've seen claims on Twitter that some biological women have been found guilty of rape. Is this a lie?

I'm trying to tease my thoughts out. Only just starting to comment about the gender identity consequences for women to friends etc, and just want to be super clear when I say anything, and not to slip into emotional anger (which happens a lot for me).

OP posts:
PurgatoryOfPotholes · 14/12/2021 07:22

Here's the statement from A Woman's Place UK.

Content Warning: direct quotes from the activists' misogynistic and racist attacks.

After attendees, staff and volunteers were subject to an abusive protest at our recent meeting, A Woman’s Place is NOT in prison, we have written the following letter to the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) calling on them to repudiate racism, misogyny and other abuse at any protests they are associated with.

As this is a matter of great importance for feminists, socialists, people of colour and trade unionists we feel it is essential that any exchange of views is in the public domain.

This blog contains details of misogynistic, racist and other abuse.

Dear SWP,

Yourpaper’s coverageof the protests against Professor Kathleen Stock at the University of Sussex made it clear that the SWP believes it is legitimate for women who recognise that sex is a material reality to be harassed and intimidated at their workplace. The protests have now resulted in Professor Stockbeing obliged to leavethe university. While the piece does say that women like us should not be driven out of our jobs, it gave a signal to your members that they have your organisation’s support if they take part in such protests, whatever the professional or personal impact on the targeted woman.

D, who identifies as an SWP member on Twitter, organised just such a protest at our public meeting AWoman’s Place Is (Not) In Prisonon Wednesday October 27that the QE2 Centre in London.

D’s public Twitter feed encourages people to join the SWP. D has retweeted statements suggesting that protesting at events like ours is a form of “anti-fascist solidarity”. The same individual also tweeted the time and location of our meeting encouraging people to protest at it and described Joanna Cherry MP and women who share her opinions as “absolute Nazis”.

Almost 600 women had bought tickets to hear an all-woman panel discuss how prison punishes women for being poor, violently abused and vulnerable. It was a meeting which would have been of interest to any socialist or feminist as it was discussing the cruelties of the prison system and alternatives to it for vulnerable working-class women. [bold mine]

There were only about six protestors and videos of them are circulating widely online.

Our event coincided with a conference for Black people in business as part of Black History Month.

People attending our event and the Black business meeting, venue staff and our stewards were subjected to the most extreme outpouring of racist and misogynistic abuse. The apparent organiser and leader of the protest, D, and the SWP by association, bear responsibility for the protestors’ language and behaviour.

These include comments such as:

“Shut the fck up, you cnt”shouted into the face of our chief steward.

“Call Weightwatchers, your body’s not doing it.”

“Your hair is minging, buy a weave.”

“Your breath smells like you’ve been eating are, have you been eating her ase?”

“Are you a lesbian? No man would want that.”

“Your breasts are on the floor, buy a bra and some hair dye too.”

“You fucking bald b*tch.”

“You’re a stuck-up b*tch.”

“I have a better body than you. Like, you have no bum. How do you sit down? What kind of man would want you? A blind man?”

“We don’t want pensioners. We don’t want dinosaurs like all you lot. You are not going to be around in 40 years. Well, 40’s a push.”

“You call yourself a woman? DIE! DIE! DIE!”

To people arriving for the Black Business event (who did not interact with the protestors): [bold mine]

“You went through slavery, you went through discrimination, rape, sexual harassment, the slave masters raped and sexually abused you and now you are abusing me, as a trans woman?”

“You were persecuted. You were nothing under slavery.”

“You look me in the eye. Your ancestors went through slavery and you are here. Hang your head in shame. Slave Master! Yes! Slave Master!”

“You call yourself Black people?”

“Why are you here? Are you supporting these Nazis? Are you supporting neo-Nazis?”

We are asking that the SWP openly stands up to racism and misogyny organised and facilitated by one of its members. As a self-described socialist taking part in the protest and someone who has spoken on behalf of Stand Up To Racism, D had a duty either to tell his collaborators to stop the racism, misogyny and offensive behaviour against women at the venue or to walk away from it. D did neither but instead contributed to it.

It will be apparent to you from watching the videos that our activists refused to engage with the abuse. We are committed to respectful debate on questions of sex and gender with people who disagree with us.

The intimidation to which we were subjected by people who are practising what you preach will not prevent us from organising other major events in the coming months.

We are part of aresurgent women’s liberation movement to which your group is hostile. We accept that, but we would like an assurance that if your members take your paper’s advice and protest against us that they will not permit abusive, racist, misogynistic behaviour at mobilisations for which you are politically responsible.

Some of our activists work alongside SWP members in unions and campaigns. This is an impossible relationship to maintain if people in the SWP are saying in public that we are equivalent to fascists. If this is now the approved position of the SWP it needs to be stated explicitly. If it is not, that also needs to be stated explicitly, if only for the benefit of your members who seem unclear on the question.

The best way for your organisation to do that is to publish a public statement unequivocally repudiating racism, ageism and misogyny which will remind your supporters that they are unacceptable in every circumstance.

WPUK

womansplaceuk.org/2021/10/30/open-letter-swp-abusive-protest/

AllTheUsernamesAreAlreadyTaken · 14/12/2021 07:45

When we already have such woefully low conviction rates for rapists, why is it even a discussion that further trauma should be shouldered by the victim?
We know so many women fear taking their attacker to court. Add in the fact they have to refer to the person who raped them with their penis as “she” during their evidence or face disciplinary action, how many more women will drop the charges?

Or maybe that’s the point and aim.

Beckert · 14/12/2021 07:48

Excellent point: WHY can women in prison not be protected from other violent offenders? Why don't people argue for prison reform that a) puts fewer women in prison and that b) offers a structure protecting inmates from violence?

Can you outline how you think that structure would look? How do you see violence in women's prisons ending? What strategies do you think would put an end to this? And what would be the most effective way of stopping transwomen from sexually assaulting women in women's prisons?

And what about men's prisons. Surely they deserve to be protected from male violence too. So that they don't need to identify as female to get out of it. How would that structure look?

PurgatoryOfPotholes · 14/12/2021 07:48

There are some people here who may say that no-one would have protested a meeting that addressed the appropriateness of incarceration for women, if they had not taken a stance on the suitability of mixed-sex prisons, and confined themselves only to the subjects Catherina suggests.

Incidentally, Catherina? Those violent offenders you mention?

In 2013, the House of Commons Justice Committee stated that only 3.2 per cent of females in prison 'were assessed as posing "a high or very high risk of harm to other people".' Taken as a basis for imprisonment this would equate 'to around 125 women' in prison.

www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/news/end-out-dated-prison-women-new-report-call?

I cannot agree, as I have seen the anti-FGM activist Hibo Wardere (and FGM survivor) viciously attacked, over and over again, for not centring transwomen. She only focuses on women and girls subjected to FGM, and that alone has been enough to draw the ire of the TRAs. They seem to feel that because she works on one massive issue (eliminating a specific human rights abuse) that could be bracketed under the umbrella of social justice, that she therefore owes it to the world to also talk about trans rights too.

You can read about that here: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4170253-Anti-FGM-campaigner-Hibo-Wardere-comes-under-attack?pg=1

I rather think it would be exactly the same with campaigns to improve the welfare of female prisoners.

RepentMotherfucker · 14/12/2021 08:02

Why don't people argue for prison reform that a) puts fewer women in prison and that b) offers a structure protecting inmates from violence?

Women here are arguing for a simple policy (which has been in place until very recently) that bars 90+% of violent offenders from women's prisons and you don't think that's (b) above? 🤔

It's almost like your agenda is not protecting women in prison at all...

Helleofabore · 14/12/2021 08:14

Why don't people argue for prison reform that a) puts fewer women in prison and that b) offers a structure protecting inmates from violence?

I have a feeling of deja vu. Haven’t you tried this line of rhetoric before catherina. To shame others who are discussing this particular issue.

If not you, then certainly you have been on threads where it has been deployed. Either way, it amounts to the same.

Women, unsurprisingly, can work on many fronts at one time. And sometimes parts of campaigns overlap. Of course there are posters on this thread who are actively campaigning for general prison reform for women as well. And we contribute to court cases that challenge the conditions that improve prison for all females who are there.

It is just YOUR own prejudice which shows in your petty comment.

PurgatoryOfPotholes · 14/12/2021 08:20

@RepentMotherfucker

Why don't people argue for prison reform that a) puts fewer women in prison and that b) offers a structure protecting inmates from violence?

Women here are arguing for a simple policy (which has been in place until very recently) that bars 90+% of violent offenders from women's prisons and you don't think that's (b) above? 🤔

It's almost like your agenda is not protecting women in prison at all...

Excellent point, succinctly expressed!

I already quoted this previously.
In 2013, the House of Commons Justice Committee stated that only 3.2 per cent of females in prison 'were assessed as posing "a high or very high risk of harm to other people".' Taken as a basis for imprisonment this would equate 'to around 125 women' in prison.

www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/news/end-out-dated-prison-women-new-report-call

Why is the presence of approximately 125 violent female offenders a justification to place additional violent male offenders there, too? Keep that number of 125 in mind.

This is a quote from the judicial review this year.

What can be said, however, is that data collected across the prison estate in March/April 2019 recorded the following:

i) There were 163 transgender prisoners, of whom 81 had been convicted of one or more sexual offences.

ii) 129 of those prisoners were allocated to the male estate, 34 to the female estate. Of the 129 in the male estate, 74 had been convicted of one or more sexual offences.

iii) Although no records are kept, the number of transgender prisoners with a GRC is thought to be very low: a single-figure total across the estate as a whole.

If all male prisoners with a transgender identity were placed in women's prisons, the number of male prisoners would dwarf the number of violent female prisoners already there. And approximately half of these males were sexual offenders!

This is like realising you have added slightly too much salt when cooking, and then deciding you might as well throw the entire box of salt in!

brokendark · 14/12/2021 08:28

Because its a lie.

A man has used his physical size and strength of his male sexed body to overpower the weaker female sexed body.

Because he wants to rape a woman because he is a heterosexual male.

Because he wants to rape her because she has a female sexed body.

Because he uses his male sex organ to rape her female sexed organs.

There is little else so firmly rooted in sex-based realities than the crime of rape.

Its a lie, to pretend gender had anything to do with either party involved/ affected by this crime. Its deeply insulting to the victim for the system to support a lie about this crime. It means crimes stats are lying, and we collect stats to understand reality and form policy based in reality. It means the rapist may be locked up with women.

Beckert · 14/12/2021 08:43

A deliberate attempt to obfuscate the meaning of the word rape and in turn who the perpetrators of this crime are. Who are men. Always men.

Sophoclesthefox · 14/12/2021 08:47

@RepentMotherfucker

Why don't people argue for prison reform that a) puts fewer women in prison and that b) offers a structure protecting inmates from violence?

Women here are arguing for a simple policy (which has been in place until very recently) that bars 90+% of violent offenders from women's prisons and you don't think that's (b) above? 🤔

It's almost like your agenda is not protecting women in prison at all...

Exactly this.

The first and most important plank in protecting women from violence is and always has been the provision, availability and protection of spaces away from men.

I don’t think your heart’s in this any more, Cath. This isn’t your a-game. Maybe you’ve been here too long and we have actually managed to get through to you? You did accidentally do a minor oopsie yesterday by suggesting that men might ID as women to shit stir, after all Grin

Would be very interested to hear your reaction to purgatorys posts. Do you see the point she’s making that the net effect of people taking your position is to prevent discussion about women in the prison system at all? Because if we can’t talk about how and why women end up in prison without talking more about how and why transwomen end up in prison, then the end result is that nothing gets done at all, because everything melts down into an ideological slanging match.

Needaholidayplease · 14/12/2021 08:47

Thanks for starting this thread OP, it got me thinking too, a few issues to unpick.
A big one for me is the fact that a lot of public policy is made off the back of these kind of stats. It's conceivable that policy makers look at crime stats and think 'male violence against women is going down', proportionately. It's not, it's just that more men are identifying as women. But that really hides the problem.

Of course the very definition of rape involves a penis, which, as you say, basically highlights the fact that these must be males who are identifying as women. But for most people, who don't know that the definition of rape is a penis, could look at the stats and think, hmm women are suddenly become much more rapey these days.

God you could tie yourself in knots thinking about this (which is what the TRAs want I guess). But at the end of the day, the question is- who deserves more respect- the victim of rape or the perpetrator? Whose 'authentic' experience matters more? The woman raped by a man, or the rapist who demands you call him a woman, despite all empirical evidence.

EmpressaurusWitchDoesntBurn · 14/12/2021 08:54

I have a feeling of deja vu. Haven’t you tried this line of rhetoric before catherina. To shame others who are discussing this particular issue. If not you, then certainly you have been on threads where it has been deployed. Either way, it amounts to the same.

Is anyone else reminded of Ash Sarkar accusing Julie Bindel, founder of Justice for Women, of not caring about women in prison, on the basis of one Twitter search? lesbianandgaynews.com/2021/09/julie-bindel-what-lessons-can-the-womens-liberation-movement-teach-lesbians-and-gay-men/

Helleofabore · 14/12/2021 09:09

EmpressaurusWitchDoesntBurn

It also reminds me of this classic from Rhonda Hotchkiss.

twitter.com/fondofbeetles/status/1311369010995441665?s=21

Helleofabore · 14/12/2021 09:12

Because reading the implication of catharina’s post, women are focused on one aspect of prison reform .

And by further implication Catharina doesn’t think this is important. Good thing Rhonda does!

EmpressaurusWitchDoesntBurn · 14/12/2021 09:27

[quote Helleofabore]EmpressaurusWitchDoesntBurn

It also reminds me of this classic from Rhonda Hotchkiss.

twitter.com/fondofbeetles/status/1311369010995441665?s=21[/quote]
GrinGrinGrin

Runningupthecurtains · 14/12/2021 09:49

Back to the question of why does how the sex of offender is recorded matter? Well crime statistics are used in all sorts of ways. If you can identify that a particular cohort is most likely to commit a crime you can try to identify why and put prevention programs in place. It would be a waste of resources to launch a big anti-rape campaign at females because even if we broaden the category out to serious sexual assaults very few are committed by women. Men are responsible for the vast majority of sex crimes. The statistics need to show this to protect female spaces, to enable targeted prevention work, to enable the press to accurately describe the suspect when appealing for witnesses. The same applies to all sorts of offences (or why bother to record the information at all?)

PermanentTemporary · 14/12/2021 10:25

That's the issue. I can easily see campaigners on this moving to saying that we shouldn't categorise prisoners by sex at all, but by individual risk level, so that prisoners are grouped purely by risks, eg HMP Downview would be 'risk category G' rather than a women's prison. I can imagine coherent arguments for that, but even if you take someone like Emma Tustin or Joanne whatsername who are violent women, sex-specific risks to them need acknowledging too. And thats what campaigners seem determined to avoid.

PurgatoryOfPotholes · 14/12/2021 10:36

I would ask them to "should babies be conceived and born in prison?"

If babies are born in prison, how long should they stay with their parents? What policies do you suggest for this?

Enough4me · 14/12/2021 10:44

If TWAW and TMAM then sex no longer exists. However, if sex no longer exists then healthcare falls apart as we need defining words so healthcare providers know our biology. New language will need to be invented.

We could let TW have the word women, but we'll go with godesses instead.
TWAW - fine, women are now goddesses.

PermanentTemporary · 14/12/2021 10:45

I have been genuinely quite upset that Birthrights as a charity has gone full TWAW despite their amazing work on pregnant women and births (and horrifyingly, stillbirths) in prison. I feel betrayed by them tbh. It does give me pause, like I must be missing something if thats their stance.

Enough4me · 14/12/2021 10:52

@PermanentTemporary TWAW and need TW rights, but they don't need birthing advice do they?
It's strange birthrights are now having to give these males so much attention. It's like a women ripping pushing a baby out and the father asks if he can have a coffee made as he wants some attention.

PermanentTemporary · 14/12/2021 10:56

I don't think they give it loads of attention. I mean obviously there are plenty of women in prison who aren't pregnant or likely to be. I wonder if they have said anything about the increased risk of pregnancy with males in women's prison. I think that's what upset me tbh.

Blibbyblobby · 14/12/2021 12:12

Why does it matter if crime stats say women rape?

The best way to demonstrate is to forget the labels for now and think about the people.

97ish percent of sexual assaults for which someone was convicted, and 100% of rapes are committed by the natally male-bodied (yes 100% of rapes, because even where someone is convicted of rape by abetting, the fact a rape legally occurred means the person they abetted must have been male.)

Under the until recently accepted definitions of Man and Woman, those people were all men.

If you move the boundaries of Men and Women, some of those males can be women. So you could say "women rape as well" BUT the actual individuals who are rapists have not changed at all. Regardles of what people the language labels, the same individuals rape and the same individuals do not rape. All that has happened is we have lost the language to recognise what the vast vast majority of the people who rape have in common, and what the vast vast majority of people who can suffer rape cannot commit rape have in common.

Another thought experiment...imagine we'd never thought of sex as a meaningful way to group humans. Imagine innate gender identity had always been there up front and recognised. Imagine, in short, the genderist Utopia. Now imagine a social scientist investigating sexual assaults and rapes discovers this tiny thing, this hitherto unconsidered feature of people, is found in almost 100% of the people who commit sexual assaults. That would be an amazing discovery! It would be lauded as a huge breakthrough. They might even get a Nobel prize! And yet here and now we know it, we know it to be a fact and we are being told it doesn't matter and we should just ignore it, pretend this thing that is a known risk factor for sex offending just doesn't exist.

ElvisPresleyHadABaby · 14/12/2021 12:23

@Snowdancer385

Imagine telling a woman who had her vagina forcefully penetrated by another woman that what happened to her wasn't rape due to some technicality of outdated British laws since it wasn't done with a penis.

Genuinely sociopathic shit.

I don't quite understand this, could you explain please?
Heruka · 14/12/2021 12:30

It’s probably been said already but for me one of the main concerns is that when professionals involved in working with these crimes and there victims are training, they need accurate information about the risks. They need to be able to profile offenders. We know that males overwhelmingly perpetrate sexual offences, while women do occasionally, the statistics have always been consistently stark. Do we start teaching something different in police, health, social work education? My instinct is this will lead to less effective research and understanding of crime, that can help prevent or prosecute crime.