Hm. We are allowed to correctly sex males who have been convicted of sexual assault. That's a relief. It is backwards, though. Women's need to risk assess, discuss and decide on whether warnings about men are necessary is entirely hobbled by our inability to name them as men.
I think this is one of the most sinister aspects of the whole ferrago. Women are now not able to speak freely about their fears, concerns, questions or worries about specific males. For fear of offending said males. We are self policing.
Remember years back the names of problematic local males would be written on toilet doors? Girls would tell each other which males to avoid. Which boys were unsafe. Why not to walk down a certain route. Women would let each other know if they had concerns about a man they knew, if he was 'handsy' or a bit of a creep. This has happened - I imagine - for many generations. It's a fact of life for women that we need to map out risk for ourselves, our children and each other.
Would we still do this now? Are there some males whom we would be cautious about raising concerns about? Are we more worried about being called bigoted than we are about looking out for each others' safety?
Women's safety relies to an extent on our networking of other women; on talking freely and looking out for each other. It worries me that this ages-old system of taking care of each other is compromised, and it suggests some glaring increases in risks to me.