Rapes committed by women - JKR got me thinking

[scratchedbymycat]

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).

That situation seems to have already been accepted by the MOJ; they cannot risk assess convicted sex offenders who identify as women. They aren't doing anything about it.

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1410929146503614464.html

(Thread has been archived at archive dot md.)

In her original tweet she talks about "penised individuals" only males have a penis however they identify. All of this "women do it too" is an irrelevant distraction from the fact that regardless of how a rapist chooses to identify they are male and should serve whichever sentence they get in a men's prison.

I wrote a lengthy response last night, then the battery on my laptop died and I lost the whole thing, so I'm trying again. This is going to be long.

@Adelino:

That the rapist can end up in a woman's prison is the main one.

Is it though? Again, I was under the impression that a man could identify as a woman at any stage and be moved into a woman's prison. Or is it only biological males who rape while actually living as a woman who move into woman's prisons? i.e. I don't think recording rapes as being perpetrated by a male will necessarily stop male bodied people moving into female prisons.

@Linguini :

If you say a woman raped another, it means you believe transwomen are women.

I think for many though, it means that transwomen identify as women, not that they are literally biological females. As I said previously, the definition of rape tells us that these rapists are not biological females. So it brings me back to needing to work out a succinct response to why biological reality matters enough in rape crimes that it needs to be explicitly stated irrespective of gender identity.

@Zerogravity

Exactly. It is already traumatic to be a victim of rape. Having to refer to your male attacker as a woman is awful.

People who adhere to Queer Theory as reality won't agree with this, so I'm not sure its a useful point to make in trying to change things. For example, I once worked at a charity that provided support to rape victims and heard a woman who was raped claim, in a group session, that the fact she was white and her attacker was black was particularly difficult for her. This may well be true for her - as a racist - but for others its not something that would ordinarily be seen as additionally harming. The same could be said of gender identity.

@NecessaryScene

So what we see in the stats for rape must be either males, or female accomplices. I don't believe we've managed to pull this apart.

...

But for all other violent offences, there's no way to just say "oh, well that must have been male".

Yes ... I think these two are key points to make regarding the necessity of recording biological sex.

@allmywhat

It’s worth being extremely clear on this because a lot of mendacious/stupid people have distorted what she was saying into “women never commit rape.”

Including me I suppose

The distortion of crime statistics matters in the aggregate because there’s an intensive and ongoing propaganda effort on multiple fronts to disguise the realities of male violence against women.

I'm with you on this - and extend it to other things as well. I'm constantly struck by how I can switch from Twitter, where someone is shrieking about they ARE a woman through and through, to turning on the radio to hear Sheila Fogarty talking about the massive challenges of getting treatment for menopause. The cognitive dissonance is just massive.

@Snowdancer385

Does that mean it's not rape for a man to rape his wife in those countries, if it's not in that country's legal definition of rape?

FFS

@ginandbearit

I recall two cases , one from my home town , where women passing as men were tried for sexual.assault and deception , by using a fake penis or dildo (and hiding under clothes or bedding so never seen naked) to penetrate their female partners

I would assume to, that if the perpetrators were biological males and used only a dildo, that wouldn't be rape either.

@Omicrone

If he has raped you with his penis, he is a he. Why is this so hard to understand?

It's not hard to understand. But it is difficult to counter if people believe equally that 'she can rape with her penis'. I have friends who will NOT want to be seen as transphobic, and denying that men can identify as women would be a step too far for them. Somehow the argument that sex really matters has to be made more succinctly and accessibly for people like this.

@AssassinatedBeauty

The joint enterprise concept was an effort to be able to convict people acting in gangs and participating in serious crime, whilst not actually physically committing the crime themselves.

It seems to me that feminists missed something here that's established a position now that there are cases where women can be guilty of rape. We should have demanded that they are not guilty of 'rape', but at least guilty of 'rape by joint enterprise'. Because just as with the transgender issue now, it still creates a perception that biological women CAN rape. They just can't. Why didn't this piss us off in 2001?

The fact that one is labelled as rapist and the other as a sexual assaulter says nothing about the gravity and horror of either crime.

Totally agree. I think this is an issue that people have with the notion that rape only applies to penis penetration. They think not calling other assault rape as well implies everything else is less harmful.

@SlipperyLizard

These are not women’s crimes, and we should resist all attempts to make it seem like women commit rape on a regular basis (rather than, rarely, as an accomplice).

I'd go further, and say the fact that they were accomplices should be stated too. They're still not actually physically doing the penetrating. Only biological males are doing that.

@TiddlesTheTiger

What is important is that the correct sex is recorded for all suspects and criminals.

Sure, but the argument why needs to be made without sliding into anything considered transphobic by ordinary people. (I know that everything is transphobic to certain activists)

@littlbrowndog

Don’t overthink this OP

I have to overthink it. If I'm going to start talking publicly to friends about this stuff I'm not going to go in hard with a view they will instantly be suspicious of. I'm afraid refusing to accept that men can identify as woman wouldn't be a good start. And I know its happening in Scotland. I live here. And I was BADLY triggered yesterday. But we can't just lob phrases backwards and forwards.

@AnyOldPrion

I think perhaps the point is that the sex of the perpetrators of other crimes cannot be determined in this way. There is an uptick in “women’s” violent crime as well, but we have no way of determining the sex of the perpetrators and therefore the statistics are useless for telling us what is actually occurring. [...] So perhaps it could be argued that it doesn’t really matter if rape is recorded under the wrong sex as the sex of the perpetrator is very likely to be male. However, I think we have to assume exactly the same thing is happening with other crimes and using rape (with it’s particularly unpleasant connotations) is a powerful way to demonstrate that what is currently happening is the falsification of crime statistics.

Yes. Yes!

Had they begun recording “claimed gender identity” in addition to sex, back in 2009, then by now we’d have had a very useful and clear record of criminal offending rates in this group. As it is, we don’t have any idea at all. I am cynical enough to believe there’s a reason why transactivists actively don’t want those stats recorded.

Totally agree. But the counter argument would be that recording 'sex' is othering. This is why the discussion of why sex is so important needs to be made, so it can be applied irrespective of inclusion policies (in the same way we have sex based exemptions for good reasons).

@PickAChew

Which suggests that accurate, sex based, reporting should be as important to the trans community as the rest of us.

Yes. I do quite often see transwoman arguing that the TRA position undermines trans rights. I wish there was a lot more explicit discussion of this.

@snowdropsandcrocuses

I can totally believe that.

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

I skimmed through the link. What is the TRAs specific objection to Hibo's work? I'm baffled.

@RepentMotherfucker

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

Or, trying to be 'inclusive' as well. Be all things to everyone. Don't get me wrong, I don't think males should be in female prisons. But I do think a lot of people will not want to stop being 'inclusive'. I'm remembering Sturgeon's horrible view that the concerns women have about safety are 'not valid'.

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

I need to find a way to keep these numbers at my fingertips. This is exactly what I need.

@brokendark

Its a lie, to pretend gender had anything to do with either party involved/ affected by this crime.

I agree, because I'm a feminist. But how do you argue that feminist theory is more valid or should take priority over, in this case, queer identity theory? There needs to be more than theory. At what point does theory become reality? And if theory can become reality, can new theories become the new reality?

@Needaholidayplease

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?

Regarding ' authentic experience', see my response to @zerogravity earlier. How do you argue that recording a rape crime according to identity is additionally harmful to women? But I agree, you can tie yourself up in knots. And I am doing that, because I know that I've spent hours of time working things out - hours that friends are not predisposed to do (I have experienced male violence) - so I want to find ways of talking about this that cuts through instantly.

@Runningupthecurtains

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.

I agree.

@PermanentTemporary

I feel betrayed by them tbh. It does give me pause, like I must be missing something if thats their stance.

I've spent the last five years wrestling with that. I've worked in human rights etc, and the seeming widespread acceptance that my views are transphobic have really made me wonder what it is I'm not getting. I think that's why I'm labouring over this issue right now.

@Blibbyblobby

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.

Very useful way to explain it.

@heruka

t’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.

I don't think this has been said as fully as this. Thank you. That's a damn good point. Obvious, but I totally missed it.

Lots of great points OP.

I think it's interesting some people incorrectly use the word literally. He literally became a women is a prime example. She is an equivalent female athlete despite being born male is another.

*I meant to say is literally equivalent.

Quite literally Joint enterprise exists

Also quote literally only men have a penis

Obfuscating crime statistics has one main outcome - women lose a few more rights and protections.

Quite literally!

Can I get urgent answers/arguments to this article? poisonedwell.wordpress.com/2013/10/19/40-of-rapists-are-women/ I was given it by a TRA just now, adamant that 40% of rapes are by women.

Now, I know this cannot be true.

Someone smarter than me please help me wade through this.

I’m going to not look at your link Claudia, and guess it’s an old chestnut from American MRAs. Old CDC data. Numbers of women and men reporting rape in the last year when including being “made to penetrate” are closer to parity than you’d think. However the number of women reporting ever being raped in their lifetime is far higher than for men.

The survey is only distributed to over 18s. Lots of women already learned to be careful around men, the hard way, before they ever got old enough to do the survey. Hence the odd disparity.

The data absolutely does not show that 40% of rapes are committed by women. They show that a lot of the women men rape are teenagers or younger.

I do think someone should study the epidemiology of men being “made to penetrate” and find out how it impacts them and how it can be prevented. But MRAs don’t actually give a shit. They trot out those stats to claim that women are as bad as men, not to help the men.

Okay let me look. Did I get it right?

Yes! 2010 CDC data. It’s always that. I don’t think they have any other source for the claim.

Don't wade through it. That means you are giving thought to whatver twaddle it contains.

Your ONLY answer can be that, with the very rare exceptions of rape by joint enterprise, UK law is clear that it takes a penis to rape and, as human beings cannot change sex, that means anyone who commits rape is male.

Be clear. Rape is a male crime. Anyone trying to make such stupid claims is displaying their disdain, no hatred for women very clearly on their sleeve.

I've given up trying to reason with TRA arguments. It's too much like trying to juggle jelly. Just state the facts and throw some emotional blackmail back at them.

Oh! And state the blindingly obvious - US law is different from UK law, as are their crime statistics.

But if you do want to engage with it there is one really good comment:

Your methodology is flawed, plain and simple. Since this study was not one of perpetrators, but one of victims, there is no way to effectively reverse the numbers. You are making a very bold, definitive statement based on assumptions and faulty methodology. You’re ignoring lifetime numbers which are not 50/50, while using the lifetime numbers of perpetrators to calculate the number of perpetrators of the past year. It’s incredibly hypocritical to have a tagline that says, “the poisonous language of feminism” when you’re using this blog to make unproven assertions in this way.

While it’s important to discuss female on male rape (and female on female rape), making unsubstantiated claims like this only weakens your cause.

It is isn't it @allmywhat@all

And an utterly batshit interpretation of data that, if you said it out loud in words, rather than read it in a table, the illogic would be so bloody obvious you'd laugh and tell them to go back and count it again!

If the statistics are accurate what is the point of having them at all?
If, for example, you look at causes of house fires and see that there is rise in fires caused by mobile devices on charge you can crack down on dodgy counterfeit chargers, campaign to raise awareness of the danger of leaving devices unattended on charge and require warning on packaging. If 20% of fires are caused by unattended lit candles you can address that and hopefully reduced numbers but if someone decides that reed defusers are much the same as scented candles and decides to record fires started by some candles as actually being caused by reed defusers it would be a total waste of time and resources to research how defusers can be made safer or it make it law that all defusers must carry a warning label to say do not leave unattended or to run a massive public awareness campaign into the fire danger of defusers. They are not the danger, candles are and the fact that a different thing fulfills the same purpose it doesn't mean that other thing is equally dangerous.

• sorry the first sentence should say of the statistics aren't accurate

The point?

I'd get a new deletion if I said what I wanted to.

But, and it sounds absolutely absurd, nobody pushing for this gives a flying fuck about the consequences. They just want a section of society to be able to say categorically that it is something that it cannot be,

No shut the fuck up and get back to being nice!

Arrghhh If the statistics aren't accurate.

S'OK.

It makes sense if the reader assumes a typo rather than you are bereft of all sense

@HoardingSamphireSaurus

S'OK.

It makes sense if the reader assumes a typo rather than you are bereft of all sense

That assumption might be wide of the mark! I feel like I might have totally lost my senses and not just because I can see that this whole situation is completely crazy!

@HoardingSamphireSaurus **

I've given up trying to reason with TRA arguments.

The people I anticipate trying to reason with are not TRAs or very aware of their arguments. But "being inclusive" (whatever that means these days) is important to them. It means there's a psychological barrier to get through before the discussion even starts.

I've had another very odd thought (but anything's possible these days). Given that rape, by definition, identifies rapists as male. Is there a possibility there'll be a campaign at some point that the definition of rape is deemed discriminatory because it exposes the sex of transgender rapists? Is it by default, 'misgendering'?

Sorry @scratchedbymycat that answer was for @ClaudiaJ1, who was trying to repsond to a TRA.

I'm not quite that dismissive of people who haven't managed to think it all through with proper information about what the GC position actually is. That's why I still post here - I was 'turned' a few years ago, so I still post in the hope that I can help clarify it all for someone else!

@scratchedbymycat

I've had another very odd thought (but anything's possible these days). Given that rape, by definition, identifies rapists as male. Is there a possibility there'll be a campaign at some point that the definition of rape is deemed discriminatory because it exposes the sex of transgender rapists? Is it by default, 'misgendering'?

NOW you are getting the real hang of it.

No conspiracy theory too fanciful, no step too far

I don't think it is that direct a link @scratchedbymycat but there is a general dislike particularly by Americans from any departure from an individualist view of life - any attempt to classify people or predict behaviour based on groups. You can certainly see why given the appalling history of past attempts to do this, including positive and negative eugenics. And consider the antifeminist view that if men are told they are inevitably more likely to be oppressors, that they can't avoid it, that more men are going to try to identify away from that dismal prospect. I believe this is a misreading of feminism but it is one of the criticisms levelled at the gender critical, that we are determined to label men as always and inevitably violent and evil.

I was turned years ago too, but I've been quietly reading and reading and reading. But every time I talk about it (which is not often) I find myself ranting about males in female prisons, rape crisis centres etc. This is fine if the person is equally horrified, but if the person thinks there are ways around these things and concerns are most likely 'not valid', this tack doesn't work. The anger can easily be seen as hate. I'm ready to start talking about it. I'm clear on where I stand, just trying to find ways to talk about it that cut through, but relies on reason and fine details rather than wholesale shock. IYKWIM.

@PermanentTemporary

I believe this is a misreading of feminism but it is one of the criticisms levelled at the gender critical, that we are determined to label men as always and inevitably violent and evil.

But imagine a world where men didn't continuously rape, murder and hurt women. Would we care about sex differences in that world?Specifically in relation to women's spaces etc? I suspect not. So couldn't the argument be made that these spaces are necessary until men stop hurting women. Rather than say men will always hurt women and they will always be needed. 'Until' might last forever, but that's up to men really.

I agree. Also that saying, yes men are awful so much so that I can't be one, is not a valid response.

Technically the law encompasses penetration by a penis or a surgically created penis (neo Phallus), so it’s not the case that the law identifies perpetrators by their sex (male) because it is possible a female could have a neo phallus as well as a male. The law isn’t misgendering because it just refers to genitals not gender, and as TRAS are keen to tell us genitals have nothing to do with ones gender.