Why the hate?

[Aqublu]

One thing I really don’t get about mumsnet is all the trans- hate could anyone really explain why there’s so much hate really. I’d just like to add really that there needs to be a separation from misogyny and transphobia when mumsnet mums talk about trans people they’re both issues but trans people haven’t started misogyny so I don’t know why they’re blamed for it all the time.

Agreed!

I have asked if a thread here recording, collating and highlighting crimes by trans people constitutes 'hate'.

Which thread are you referring to?

that thread has plenty of posts that are simply documenting crimes committed by trans people.

What kind of crimes would these be?

Shoplifting? TV licence evasion? Jaywalking? Speeding?

Or do we focus on the offences that trans activists keep saying no-one trans would ever commit?

Nobody seems to have addressed these core points, that I can see, preferring to side track instead.

Yes they have but (as you say yourself, immediately before this sentence) you don't accept what people are saying about why they engage in these discussions.

So rather than engage with people's arguments you just keep repeating the same point as if it's a gotcha. It's disappointing because your point about how the 'never happens' threads might be perceived is a reasonable one but where does that get us if we can never move forward with a conversation?

HELLO?! No one there - how strange.

Its an imaginary thread full of imaginary people making imaginary posts

I've given you evidence that lesbians are statistically supposedly far, far more likely to commit crimes that straight women. What do you have to say about that?

I must be a statistical anomaly, since I have been repeatedly offended against by men but never by lesbians. Where are these gangs of violent lesbians, mugging and raping people? Where are the grooming gangs of lesbians? Where are the high profile trafficking groups with links to royalty? Where are the lesbians making me feel unsafe in the street?

I mean if 98% of sex offences were committed by lesbians, we could talk.

Point of note for ploppers and those that like to keep tabs on responses to ploppers - do better.

There are probably more lurkers than posters on this board. Tactics like this don’t do ploppers/observers any favours. Because the often silent lurkers aren’t learning anything helpful from your POV.

Once more for those at the back - there is nothing wrong with wanting to secure safe spaces based on sex. Most people want safe spaces for everyone - but not at the expense of safe spaces for Women.

TBH, I’ve lost track of what terminology I’m allowed to use. Hopefully the above is ok.

It has been repeated on this thread about the context of collating the crimes of transitioned males. It seems like some posters like to forget why.

If there wasn’t the forced dishonesty about recording these crimes into the sex category of human that is not the group that rarely commits sex crimes, the threads, the web sites would not be needed.

Why aren’t poster’s understanding how hateful it is to females to have males being recorded, reported and incarcerated as females?

Or do some posters think it is ok in anyway for crimes that are rare for a sex class, to be recorded and reported and viewed as that sex class.

And that males should be ever incarcerated with females?

Why do posters think allowing people to believe that females are now becoming more likely to rape someone, when the people are viewing the statistics, but also through media reporting, is ok?

Why does anyone think it is ok to not highlight that males do not stop committing particular crimes at the same rate as other males when they have transitioned? Who benefits from a sub group of males being viewed as ‘safer’ than others when there is no evidence to suggest they are not?

To address the lesbian crimes. If lesbians, or any group of females, ARE committing sex crime more frequently than any other demographic of females, let’s have that collected and analysed. What would be the point of hiding it?

If people think collecting the data is ‘hate’, what do you think the future victims will think? If the crime against them could have been prevented because a new pattern of crime was identified clearly and steps taken to address that pattern so that crime against that person never happened, I doubt they would call it hateful.

Analyse the fuck out of the data.

Collect it, understand it, address it.

Why is one group of females doing this? What can be done to lower this incidence in reality not on paper, or to prevent the crimes?

Awareness is the very first step.

The entire point of women having to collect the data has been addressed on this thread.

Because the people in authority stopped doing their jobs.

Thanks to lobby groups.

All this continued discussion on lesbian sex crimes has done is…. nothing. If there is ANY group committing sex crimes at a higher rate than another group, it needs to be known. It is sparple.

However, to repeat for the nth time.

People outside the relevant authorities are now doing this collectively using the power of the internet. Because those authorities are not doing their job.

And for proof that they are not doing their job, shall we post the links to the case where the MoJ admitted they had no statistics about this? We can do this.

Or… are we just going to continue this spiral because some posters wish to ignore male crime patterns are being attributed to females ?

And some people (general) don’t want it known that males don’t magically commit sex crime as the sex they identify themselves as.

I am struggling to find figures which split female and male gay inmate numbers. However, it seems that contrary to the us, where gay people are represented in the prison population at numbers far higher than the general population, 1.4% of U.K. prisoners declare their sexuality as gay or lesbian, 1.5 as bisexual (HMPPS offenders equality report 2021). This compares closely with an estimated 2.7% of the U.K. population identifying as lgb (ins figures).
I conclude that any greater propensity for lesbians to be found guilty of committing crime is a cultural phenomenon linked to attitudes in the us.

ons not ins.

Oh. I saw the title and thought this thread was going to be asking why there’s so much hate against women in society: why so many male people hate female people so much and why so many women are so full of internalised misogyny.

That’ll be an interesting discussion, I thought.

Imagine my surprise to open the thread and find out it was yet another thread by a person unknown characterising women’s defence of their own human rights in the face of male appropriation and destruction of those rights as “transphobia”!

Colour me shocked! And deeply disappointed of course.

Although I note there is one poster on here who’s giving a very good demonstration of the internalised misogyny side of things.

What is it that makes otherwise rational women so deeply prejudiced against their own sex? So desperately determined to prioritise male people over and above female people, even at the cost of denying the reality that’s right in front of them? And yet still claim, in a truly absurd plot twist, to be feminists?

That’s the kind of (self) hate it would be really worthwhile exploring here on FWR.

I also don't understand how/why ploppers can repeatedly plop, prompt us to explain our rational and evidence-supported views (which I'm happy to do in the interests of discussion and debate, hearing others' views, revising my thoughts, and for any lurkers) - and not see (presumably) that the fact that they can't make an argument for theirs could be a problem?

I have the same thing with the TRA in my family. I try to keep things calm and rational and state my logic-informed opinion and ask questions/for evidence. They can't answer. They just say things like "I'll have to get back to you" or "It's just not like that" (in response to actual evidence and pointing out of logical fallacy). How do they not think "hmm my position is internally inconsistent and is not supported by any evidence?" I mean I'm fine with that, as with religious belief, if that's understood and they leave other people alone. I just don't think I should have to have it imposed on me when it makes no sense and there's no evidence for it. How can anyone not get that?

In short? You misunderstood what you read.

You made assumptions, the data is not fully disaggregated an so won't support your claim.

The answer is contained within the piece you linked to - and it still doesn't say quite what you claim.

There is disproportionate incarceration, mistreatment, harsh punishment, and sexual victimization of sexual minority inmates, which calls for special public policy and health interventions.

that thread has plenty of posts that are simply documenting crimes committed by trans people

The continued misunderstanding of just why 'that thread' exits seems very determined. The analogy with lesbians is flawed because of the very reason why that thread exists.

Why does that thread exist?

If transitioned males did not insist their crimes be recorded and reported as female crimes, to be indistinguishable amongst female crime statistics and articles reported in the media, there would be less need for 'that' thread.

If transitioned males did not continue to commit sex crimes at a similar rate as other males, and nowhere near the rate of females (who some of their crimes are being recorded as) while denying that this is the case, there would be less need for 'that' thread.

If some males were not attempting to insist that for safeguarding purposes they were treated as females, when they are in reality males and therefore there is the same risk that they as males, will commit sex crime at the male rate, there would be less need for 'that' thread.

If some males did not then wish to be placed into a female prison and even sharing cells with females, there would be less need for 'that' thread.

If all those four things were not happening, 'that' thread would not exist on this feminist board.

But keep on bringing up the lesbian analogy like it is relevant.

Let's see how it doesn't really work.

Are lesbians insisting on being counted as a sex class that they are not? No?

Are lesbians insisting on being considered as a lower risk than their general sex class? No?

If lesbians are a greater risk in a female prison to other females or lesbians, we need to deal with that. Not use that increased risk as a wedge to get males into female prisons.

By framing this subset of males as being a 'minority' seeks to section off their risk profile as being less than other males. We learned from history that no males should be treated as a sacred subset and yet.... here we are.

What is even worse is we are being told to disbelieve what we can see from the evidence that we are supplied with.

I've given you evidence that lesbians are statistically supposedly far, far more likely to commit crimes that straight women. What do you have to say about that?

That it's irrelevant whataboutery and I don't know the truth of it, the confounders and how reliable the evidence is. I do know that male people are responsible for 98% of sex crime and most other violent crime. Hope that clears that up.

Also, as you mention, lots of places have full self ID. How do I know how many of the lesbians were actually male?

Here's an example of a sex offender experiencing disproportionate treatment in the penal stystem after identifying as trans. But you could hardly call it harsh.

extract

A transgender woman, now 26, has been ordered to serve just two years in a juvenile detention center for sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl, after LA DA George Gascon refused to prosecute her as an adult.

Hannah Tubbs, formerly known as James, now 26, pleaded guilty in 2020 to sexually assaulting the young girl in a Denny's bathroom in 2014, when she was 17.

Prosecutors had pushed for her to stay in a Los Angeles County Jail and be tried as an adult but Gascón declined to file a motion to move the case out of juvenile court, where it was filed because of Tubbs' age at the time of offense.

Gascon said previously that he was concerned Tubbs could be victimized due to her gender identity in an adult facility, and had even recommended she simply be sentenced to home confinement. [bold mine]

Before handing down the light sentence of just two years in a juvenile facility and no requirement to register as a sex offender, Judge Mario Barrera said his hands were tied by Gascón.

'I want to be clear,' Barrera said at the Lancaster, California, court sentencing Thursday. 'The filing of a transfer motion is entirely within the discretion of the district attorney.'

Gascon's decision has sparked fury among prosecutors in LA.

Deputy District Attorney Shea Sanna slammed the move after the hearing, telling the New York Post: 'You have a violent sexual predator sentenced to two years in a juvenile facility.

'It doesn't change the fact that the public is safer, but we just preferred Tubbs to be with other adults and not prey on others.'

L.A. Deputy District Attorney Jon Hatami, assigned to the Complex Child Abuse Unit,, told Fox News: 'Tubbs is 26 years old. Unlike George Gascon's false narrative, she is not a 'kid.'

'There was evidence presented at the juvenile proceedings which showed that Tubbs sexually assaulted two young girls in different incidents in the past. The child victims will suffer lifelong trauma. Tubbs also has prior violent convictions and conduct as an adult.'

Tubbs, who identified as male at the time of the crime had followed the girl into the bathroom, held her by the throat and forced his hand down the girl's pants. She only stopped when someone came into the restroom, and then ran away before she could be stopped.

Gascon's decision has sparked fury among prosecutors in LA.

It took years before Tubbs was identified as the attacker after being arrested in Idaho in 2019 on suspicion of battery.

She has since transitioned.

DNA entered into a database that matched Tubbs with the sexual assault at Denny's, and the accused was brought back to California - by which point there were arrests, according to Fox, for battery, drug possession and probation violations in Idaho and Washington.

Despite the prior convictions, Tubbs will serve her time in isolation, away from the other juveniles and will be housed with female inmates.

Two years is the maximum sentence a juvenile can receive up until the age of 25. The DA recently change the rule and said he would 'immediately' stop prosecuting children as adults.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10450891/LA-judge-orders-transgender-woman-26-serve-two-years-juvenile-facility-sexually-assault.html

I think home confinement would have been better. Why lock up an adult male who is accused of sexually assaulting two female children with female children? If you're concerned for the sexual offenders' safety, put them in a vulnerable prisoners unit in an adult prison. Juvenile detention in california looks like it contains children as young as 12. Is California now rewarding child abusers with access to locked up children?

Oh, btw, Tubbs has since been charged with murder, in connection with a man found dead in 2019.

Now, now Purgs The nasty habit we GC wimmin have of actually being able to research, read, understand all of that data is really irritating. Stop it!

I'm still not sure what Suggestions is insinuating. Some may think I am being flippant. Sadly, I'm not.

Apparently Suggestions did not mean that sex offenders who are trans are institutionally discriminated against and it's not that they go to prison where someone else would not. It's a good thing she's not suggesting that, as I can remember instances where judges have declined to impose a prison sentence because the sex offender asserted that they were trans.

But all this leaves me feeling very confused because that's what her posts seem to be driving at, over and over and over again, and I thought I had a handle on what her point was, even if I didn't agree.

What was the point of all the questions about same-sex attracted women in prison then? And why is sentencing for women in prison for non-violent crime relevant to a discussion about crimes of sexual violence? 84% of women in prison are there for non-violent crime. The remaining percentage are almost entirely not there for crimes of sexual violence, because consistently, 99% of sexual violence convictions are committed by male offenders. If the point isn't an attempt to reference unfair sentencing of minoritised groups, what is it?

And if she were saying that sex offenders who are trans are institutionally discriminated against in the judicial system, then what would the next step be? An annual cap, or limit, on the number of trans identifying sex offenders prosecuted? Should the Crown Prosecution Service tell the police, "sorry, can't prosecute this rapist because they've IDed as trans, and if we convict any more rapists from that subset, we'll look institutionally transphobic?"

We are talking about rapists, not young women caught shoplifting. I have read of sentencing for non-violent offenders of both sexes, which I thought was unjust and indicative of bias in the judicial system.

But I have never, but never, read of a rapist's court case in this country and thought that the sentence for them was disproportionately harsh. Never. I've often thought the sentencing was far too lenient. If anyone is looking at our records of UK sex offenders in the news and thinking the ones claiming to be trans are being punished too harshly, then come out and tell us right here, right now, what you think the sentence for rape should be.

As I've said before, I'm really just trying to address the original purpose of this thread - which is about whether hate is directed towards trans people on these boards.

It's not really terribly elaborate, it's quite a simple question I am asking...

There is a thread on FWR, which documents a collection of crimes committed by trans people which anyone can add to. The stated rationale behind this is to counter anti-safeguarding relaxations, but I think it could also be argued that it might contribute to feelings of hostility to trans people in general.

I made a parallel argument about the possibilities of this happening on another forum, but where the documentation of crimes was regarding those committed by lesbians. (Of course this is likely to be harder to do as sexuality is probably not as immediately obvious as transgender status might be during criminal cases.) I noted that, for people so inclined to do so, they could find stats to shore up their assertions that lesbians are more criminal / dangerous than straight women.

Their argument would follow the same format and principles that the transgender one does: "This population are statistically more prone to criminality and abuse than straight women, don't try to no-debate us on this issue, we are entitled to research this to try to find the truth, document what we find and implement safeguarding measures accordingly.'

Would this be hateful towards lesbians?

I pointed out that, if it is acceptable to follow this process on the FWR boards, why shouldn't others argue that it is acceptable to follow this process on their boards? I don't know whether this is something that is already happening or not, but I would find it hard to see how FWR boards could counter anything like that in the future should it occur elsewhere, because of the rationales that they themselves are applying.

More generally I have alluded to contributing factors to criminality and conviction rates, sentencing, and I'm making a fairly straightforward point that disadvantage, discrimination, prejudice and minority stress can all be considered as contributing factors for any minority. If you recognise these concerns for the lesbian population you can not ignore them for the transgender population and try to claim any objectivity.

This area is worth considering further:

There is the main Swedish cohort study that GC feminists frequently rely on to argue that male-to-female transgender people retain a male pattern of criminality:

journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885

The lead author of that study refutes GC feminist commentary on it:

“Dhejne: The individual in the image who is making claims about trans criminality,
specifically rape likelihood, is misrepresenting the study findings. The study as a whole covers
the period between 1973 and 2003. If one divides the cohort into two groups, 1973 to 1988 and
1989 to 2003, one observes that for the latter group (1989 – 2003), differences in mortality,
suicide attempts, and crime disappear. This means that for the 1989 to 2003 group, we did not
find a male pattern of criminality.
As to the criminality metric itself, we were measuring and comparing the total number of
convictions, not conviction type. We were not saying that cisgender males are convicted of
crimes associated with marginalization and poverty. We didn’t control for that and we were
certainly not saying that we found that trans women were a rape risk. What we were saying was
that for the 1973 to 1988 cohort group and the cisgender male group, both experienced similar
rates of convictions. As I said, this pattern is not observed in the 1989 to 2003 cohort group.
The difference we observed between the 1989 to 2003 cohort and the control group is that the
trans cohort group accessed more mental health care, which is appropriate given the level of
ongoing discrimination the group faces. What the data tells us is that things are getting
measurably better and the issues we found affecting the 1973 to 1988 cohort group likely reflects
a time when trans health and psychological care was less effective and social stigma was far
worse.”

www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/foi-eir-release/2020/03/foi-202000017446/documents/foi-202000017446---information-released---document-1/foi-202000017446---information-released---document-1/govscot%3Adocument/FOI-202000017446%2B-%2BInformation%2Breleased%2B-%2BDocument%2B1.pdf

So the author of the main study relied upon by GC feminists refutes the assertions they are making, notes that latter cohort did not have a male pattern of criminality, and* attributes this to a lessening of social stigma for trans people *and improving health and psychological care.

So if you're someone who really cares about reduced offending perhaps it's important to work towards reducing the social stigma that populations can face?

I made a parallel argument

The parallel of 'trans people' is not 'lesbian'.

Men who identify as trans are now, according to the latest figures, 3 times as likely to commit crimes of a sexual nature than men who do not identify as trans. [60% of the prison population as opposed to 18%]

Lesbians are not women who identify as anything, they are just women who are same sex attracted. The equivalent would be to look at women who identify as trans and those stats. As far as I can see, there is very little crime committed by women who identify as trans. If there was, I'm sure there would already be a website on it [because MRAs are always quick to document female crimes].

And when you consider that:
a - men who identify as trans are less likely to get sentences due to judges not wanting to put them into female prisons [as the judiciary are so captured they would rather let men who identify as women go, because there are no courses designed for women for the crimes they are committing and they don't want violent males locked up with females]...

and

b - the number of sex crimes that result in any sentence of any sort being given to perpetrators [what is it, 1 or 2% of rapes of females we know of, let alone those which are not reported]...

It is a serious issue that needs to be looked at.

If the powers that be refuse to do so, then it becomes something that general run of the mill women have to do. Because it matters.

There is a thread on FWR, which documents a collection of crimes committed by trans people which anyone can add to. The stated rationale behind this is to counter anti-safeguarding relaxations, but I think it could also be argued that it might contribute to feelings of hostility to trans people in general.

Is this the thread you're referring to @suggestionsplease1 ?

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3348290-It-will-never-happen-resource-thread?