Hospital told police patient not raped because attacker transgender

[Snoodsy]

A hospital told the police that a patient could not have been raped because her alleged attacker was trans, the House of Lords has heard.

The attack took place a year ago and the woman reported it but when officers contacted the hospital, which has not been named, they were told “that there was no male in the hospital, therefore the rape could not have happened”.

Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne, who raised the issue during a debate on single-sex wards, continued: “They forgot that there was CCTV, nurses and observers.

“None the less, it has taken nearly a year for the hospital to agree that there was a male on the ward and, yes, this rape happened.

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20220317203204/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/03/17/hospital-told-police-patient-not-raped-alleged-attacker-transgender/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20220317203204/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/03/17/hospital-told-police-patient-not-raped-alleged-attacker-transgender/

And yes…i have a ‘tone’ and ive no intention of going high either

My heart absolute broke reading this last night, that poor woman, the trauma she was put through when raped & then systematically re-traumatised. That the system creates opportunity for rape in this context & its actually legislation now to gaslight women in this way, that staff will have to have lied or potentially lost their job - it's utterly appalling. The fact that their initial response the moment the rape happened wasnt we fucked up, we need a full & **independent review of our safeguarding procedures. Instead no we will gaslight this victim & cause her severe emotional distress, fuck that. I hope she sues the shit out of them. Isn't it something too that I'm finding its a lifelong Tory who is representing the views of vulnerable women, Baroness Nicholson is an incredible advocate for women whereas my natural resting place on the left, lie & bullshit & pretend they don't know what a woman is to pander to fucking kids on twitter. I have had e-fucking-nough!!!!!

@loislovesstewie

Sorry to keep harping on; but it has occurred to me that if we now have 100million gender identities (exaggeration my me, I know) then perhaps we need a new definition of rape. I mean how long before a person says they are some other gender and couldn't possibly have done it?

There is already a school of thought amongst some TAs that it's not actually possible for males with gender identities to commit rape/sexual assault as they are the oppressed group in comparison with women. I kid you not.

@ResisterRex

I would also support legal action against the hospital. I would imagine it may not be being named because that means people who know this lady but don't know about the attack, might then be able to put pieces of information together. That's what I would guess.

If there is an ongoing criminal investigation, we wouldn't want it compromised.

@Oblomov22

Lady Nicholson’s proposals were opposed by Lord Etherton QC, who argued that the current policy was “entirely appropriate and consistent with the anti-discrimination law in the Equality Act”.

Why is it being opposed by Lord Etherton QC? Who is no longer the Rolls. Having retired, ill with a genetic blood disorder. Opposed on what stance? The current policy is appropriate? No. It's not.

He's in the Cashman/Tatchell mould of gay mam rather than the lovely James Dreyfus. Women come waaay down the list of his concerns.

Firstly to that woman, we hear you, we see what’s happened to you and we are angry on your behalf.

Secondly, I would love to say I’m shocked but I’m not. This surely is the obvious outcome if you put men in women’s ‘safe’ spaces.

I will not call this person a trans woman. He is a man. Delete me for midgendering all you like. But HE used HIS penis to rape a WOMAN.

We can not be scared of saying this.

@RobotValkyrie

he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,

Ooh, misgendering much, clearly the law is transphobic and should say "his, her or their penis"
Funny there's been no trans-advocate campaign asking for the phrasing to be altered...

I suspect that "he" was the default at the time the law was written anyway. "A person is guilty of an offence if he—" is how Section 4 of the Public Order Act starts, even though women can be prosecuted for threatening people too.

I’ve just started calling them penis people.
It’s actually not that different to what I’ve called men since I was in my early 20s for a laugh.
You can’t forget a penis person has a penis.

If only there was a MN barrister with specialised gender-based knowledge who might be able to share their considered legal insights into this type of thing.

[quote]Quote removed by MNHQ[/quote]
Couldn't agree more with this.

That poor women. I can't say what I really want to say as I'll probably get banned. This is what we have been fighting against all these years. We knew there would be victims of this ideology but no one listened. So many women who have suffered when they should never have been put in that situation.

I blame you fucking cowards supporting the erosion of our rights. I despise you.

@howtomoveforwards

Cannot say there is a man when there is a man

It’s not even that, is it? A woman with a penis can still use it to rape another woman. There is no need to worry about getting the language wrong or upsetting the trans woman by stating she is actually a man and opening yourself up to lawsuits or job loss. A trans woman raped a woman. It makes perfect sense.

A woman cannot have a penis

Jk Rowling where are you when we need you? When did this shit start?

I don’t think we need to obfuscate the laws or language more than it already is, that’s what got us into this mess. We don’t want rape victims having to call their rapists meow/meowself in court.

I’ve just started calling them penis people.
It’s actually not that different to what I’ve called men since I was in my early 20s for a laugh.
You can’t forget a penis person has a penis.

Penis People is a fully inclusive term, after all. It includes anyone with a penis, including those trans and non binary people who have one.

Like "people with a cervix", it suggests a certain body type, but is probably more accessible to those who are not clued up on reproductive anatomy.

@Rainbowshit

I'm speechless. So much harm caused by this ideology. Directly to this poor woman by allowing her rape, gaslighting her at detriment to her mental health and not allowing her justice. What other harms have been allowed by letting a rapist evade punishment?

It's not ideology it's delusion

It's both.

@RufustheFloralmissingreindeer my worry is they care so little for women that they will logic away this whole story.

@jay55

Stonewall are directly responsible for women being raped in hospital and in prison. And yet we're on the wrong side of history.

I hope they lose every bit of funding they ever had.

The people who did not do their due diligence and accepted Stonewall's guidance or the influence of lobbying groups ( Press for Change ) are at the heart of this.

Our institutions are thoroughly captured. It's extraordinary: almost no institution is perturbed by their treatment of other protected characteristics beyond performative handwringing but for a sacred caste, the pace and trajectory of change has been a sight to behold. It's almost as if one privileged, entitled group of people is somehow supporting people like them. I have a feeling that I would know why if I were allowed to think about it or discuss it, but Maya Forstater's ongoing tribunal is testament to the fact that we're expected to neither think about not discuss such matters.

@WonderfulYou

If they want to be stupid then they can at least be stupid in a biological way and admit the person who has a penis actually has a penis, iyswim.

I agree.

The law needs to be changed that rape means penetration from a penis regardless of what gender the attacker identifies as.

It should also be penetration by other objects too as there have been cases where the attackers (males & females) have used items but it’s not classed as rape.

There is no need for a change in law.

Rape is penetration by a penis, the gender identity of the person attached to the penis is irrelevant.

There is an alternative offence of sexual assault by penetration that covers other objects and has the same sentence. It is important to keep the two separate for accurate records.

If the police refused to take action due to the gender identity of the perpetrator then they should be sued too. It is a wilful misinterpretation of the law that has put women at risk.

Did I miss this on the national news?

Which hospital was this? If I’m unlucky enough to be on a hospital ward with a male bodied person I will complain and encourage others to do the same. Women and men have fought for years for single sex wards for good reason.

People can be stupid and say that women can have penises.

We, however, are not stupid. Women do not have penises.

So did the woman get any kind of treatment after the rape, like STI and pregnancy testing? Were hospital staff denying intercourse took place at all?

How can people with fucking pronouns in their email signatures read about this and not see where the ideology leads?

No we do not need to mess with the law. The law is already very clear and muddling it up with all sorts of nonsense to try to fit it around this ideology is not the way to go.

A penis person is always a penis person.

That poor woman. I’m surprised that anyone is shocked at this. We’ve been saying this was going to happen for years now. It’s not an unfortunate byproduct either. It’s being deliberately directed.

This argument that their gender identity doesn’t matter it is whether they have a penis or not.

Their fucking ‘gender’ does matter to a key person…the victim.

This is the problem if we accept TWAW when a TW rapes a woman the victim has to accept that they were raped by a woman.

That is just fucked up and abusive.