Misgendering only happens if your born male

[SD1978]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11054803/Victim-tricked-having-sex-transgender-man-used-prosthetic-penis.html

I know, it's a DM thread- but newspapers try so hard to use gender affirming language with obvious male bodied offenders- and yet have no issue with repeatedly misgendering a trans man. It's almost as if it only really matters if you misgender a man, and women are held accountable for their crimes in the sex they are born with

The paper has used male pronouns for Singh throughout.

My thoughts are with the victims, what utterly horrible experiences. You should maybe ask MN to add a CW for the newspaper article? Abuse, violence, sexual abuse.

Absolutely- what these women went through, is horrendous, and not trying to detract from that. They do refer to Singh as she- not just in the victim impact statements, and I found that the interesting part- not the abuse they were put through by Singh. How would you add a TW?

A reminder that Stonewall campaigned to get rid of sex by deception as a crime:

https://www.stonewall.org.uk/system/files/avisionnforchange.pdf

"SEX BY DECEPTION
Recent ‘sex by deception’ cases involving trans people and gender identity issues have revealed an alarming lack of clarity around trans people’s rights and obligations to disclose or not disclose their trans history to their sexual partners. These cases demonstrate that it is possible for non-disclosure of a person’s trans status to impair the validity of consent. This leaves a great many trans individuals at risk of prosecution for a criminal offence. It is, however, still unclear as to whether the courts regard this to be the case for a trans person who has undergone medical transition, and it is further greyed by whether or not an individual can be defined as trans, based on their appearance, by the court. Clarity is urgently needed."
p31

"Vision for change

1. Judicial clarity of ‘sex by deception’ cases to define the legal position on what constitutes sex by deception based on gender, and to ensure trans people’s privacy is protected."

p32

"Stonewall will support calls for a judicial review to clarify prosecution policy and guidance, and amend it where necessary with due regard to the trans person’s right to privacy."
p33

This sentence stood out for me.

‘The police didn’t take it seriously. They just thought it was normal abuse.’

normal abuse what the fuck? How low can the Police go, I think we are now well beneath sewer level.

Didn't see any details of the sentence imposed in that article? Wonder where they will serve their prison time if they are indeed sentenced to prison as they should be.

No it hasn't.

The Mail have amended the article. I read it earlier and they did indeed refer to the perpetrator as "he/him" throughout and I nearly posted about it on here.

They've now altered it.

They seem to be confused (can't imagine why 🤔) as they're using male and female pronouns throughout.

Singh, 32, hid her true identity by strapping down her breasts while insisting sex took place in the dark.

She gave the names of five other women who had been targeted by Singh after discovering letters they had written to her.

By then Singh had already taken control of the victim’s life and the revelation only enraged her further.

Why did they change their name to ‘Tarjit Singh’ ie. From a different racial background from their own?? It’s incredible as it’s likely that people will tie themselves into knots using correct pronouns but we can quite rightly recognise that this is cultural/ religious appropriation too. Unbelievable.

Thank you, I thought I was going mad!

If you like, you can report your own post to MN and ask them to add a warning, although it's not in the thread, only in the article.

I agree

I posted a story on here due to the earlier confusion -"ZaraSizeMedium · Today 20:55
The Mail have amended the article. I read it earlier and they did indeed refer to the perpetrator as "he/him" throughout and I nearly posted about it on here.
They've now altered it."

I have asked for it to be removed now the newspaper has changed the details

Yep just mentioned this on the other thread.

I'm not defending what this person did as clearly it was abusive, but if this had been the other way around - a transwoman keeping their natal sex a secret - absolutely none of this would be happening. Instead the victims would be torn apart on social media and in the press and demonised as t*rfs who need to be re-educated to accept that twaw.

It's astounding how trans rights only seem to apply to people born with a penis (by the same people who claim that "biological essentialism" is bigoted!).

Rule 8. "Men are whatever men say they are and women are whatever men say they are." There was no way the men's crimes were committed by women thingy was ever really going to work in reverse was there...

I guess the "they thought it was just normal abuse" is one of the most heart rending lines. She impersonated a man so well she nearly got away with it / got away with it for a year.