Sussex Police claim gc views are 'hate' when women call a paedophile a man

[ArabellaScott]

Extraordinary exchange on Twitter.

'This is a man, committing sexual offences against children'

'Hi, Sussex Police do not tolerate any hateful comments towards their gender identity regardless of crimes committed. This is irrelevant to the crime that has been committed and investigated. Sussex Police'

'Sussex Police, I am exercising my gender critical views, which are protected in law. Can you advise whether making such statements is a crime?'

'Hi, you can familiarise yourself with what is regarding as hate on our website here: orlo.uk/k3sOL. If you have gender critical views you wish to express this can be done on other platforms or your own page, not targeted at an individual. Sussex Police'

twitter.com/sussex_police/status/1574708767287115780

One way I suppose would be to go to the local press - stating the times and dates of writing and how you've never got a response?

But that might out you as GC and I understand that's a very frightening prospect for women these days given the real threats (that the police do nothing about) against women for understanding that biological sex is real. The masked aggressors hassling women at Posie's events are scary.

Especially since the police seem to be on the side of the paedophiles, rapists and murderers rather than victims as this thread so clearly demonstrates.

Tg for that

Huge error

I think part of the reason we are where we are is that social media is manned by people who have no knowledge of or training in the actual law or ability to think beyond a very narrow and exclusive set of experiences.

So people think the bollocks they come out with is an official position when it's not.

We need court cases and people being fired for this overt discrimination against people with a grip on reality and a tiny shred of decency and consideration towards the victims of CSA.

Agreed but why aren't the Tory Party which seem to being lauded for women's rights on this forum challenging this?

They are more concerned about lining the pockets of the rich than the poor women who are stuck in prison with this man.

Ultimately they don't give a shit about women either. If they did they'd do more.

Truly depressing.

Yep, quite right the Tories care more about getting rich than women, they're happy to let us have free speech (which is more than Labour to be fair) to keep our votes but that seems to be about it.

We need another choice. I hope KJK / PP goes into Politics. I'd vote for her and leaflet for her. We need a proper woman's party an XX party, or perhaps a reality party as it's not just sex and gender where a grip on basic facts is missing.

Well there is the SDP who are I think, to the left economically but believe in reality, free speech and women’s rights. I would vote for them if I had the opportunity. Since I don’t, I haven’t voted at all in recent elections. I am in a safe seat anyway so my vote is unlikely to make a difference either way.

What happened to Sandi Toksvig’s Womens Equality Party, does anyone know?

Good point @lifeturnsonadime. I see Suella Braverman has spoken out against Sussex Police playing identity politics but in the report I read there was no mention of this man being placed in a women's prison. What's SB going to do about that?

Unfortunately it believes that men can be women.

What on earth are the Women's Equality Party doing these days? Have they got off the fence yet?

THIS!

In spades!

Hear, Hear!

The DoJ had a judicial review last year, and decided that males can be put in women's prisons.

If they have a GRC there is no safety review/risk assessment process, they are treated 100% precisely as if they are a woman.

If they do not have a GRC there is a risk assessment process, but they can still be placed in a woman's prison.

I hope I've got this correct. There are some differences between England and Scotland, iirc.

Info here: kpssinfo.org/

Here's the page on the JR:

'the acknowledged negative impact on women was not perceived as significant enough to outweigh the desire of some male prisoners to share accommodation with women'

kpssinfo.org/r-fdj-v-ssj-2021-the-judicial-review/

Sorry, when I say 'The DoJ' had a JR, I mean a woman who was sexually assaulted in prison by a transwoman brought a JR against the DoJ.

I guess if they'd sent him to a man's prison looking like that he'd get lynched .

Nothing to do with the way he looks, and everything to do with the fact that he committed sex offences against children. Lags don't take kindly to sex offenders, particularly those who offend against children.

I havent read the full thread and I dont always understand all of the ongoing discussions about this gender, that gender, etc

But I would have said that you dont even have to have strong views about 'gender' to be able to hold a position that a man can call himself a woman if he wants, can even change his name to Sally but is actually a man and has committed offences as a man and actually committed those offences BECAUSE he is a man and still has the urges most likely to do that.

Thats not negating his wish to consider himself female but simply stating the facts that this was a man committing offences very usually and almost exclusively committed by men.

He shouldnt be in a female prison.

The Tories are currently in government. If they cannot stop this male paedophile being sent to a women's prison with a baby and child unit then their "supportive" words are useless.

Yes, I want the right to state this is a man, but if that doesn't also give us the power to protect some of the most vulnerable women in society, then what is the point? Actions not words Tories.

It does say the youngest was 6 in this article

www.itv.com/news/meridian/2022-09-27/transgender-woman-jailed-for-sexually-abusing-children-when-she-was-a-man

We can thank Tara Hudson for being the wedge that drove the destruction of the fig leaf of the GRC in prison placement

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34675778

2015!

At the time, I recall that even people who were broadly supportive of the rehousing of Tara (an intact male imprisoned for assault with no GRC) into a womens prison were at pains to say that this case-by-case analysis of which male persons were sufficiently female enough to merit a place in the womens estate would definitely exclude anyone convicted of sexual offences. It was obvious that the powers that be wouldn’t be THATcrazy, wasn’t it? Good Lord, feminists are so paranoid.

oh, look.

'Don't put paedophiles in prison with mothers and babies' is pretty basic. Whatever your politics. Whatever your thoughts on gender.

I note none of the usual TRAs have popped up to support Sally so far.

Because not even the most ardent genderist can support paedophiles in women's prisons.

Sorry, I know “I told you so” is completely not constructive at all.

I just get so cross when the drip-drip-drip of the slow erosion of the law, and frankly common fucking decency, I find it hard to engage positively.

Off to write to my MP instead, who is fence sitting like a good un but at least responds, if only to say I’m in a moral panic, calm down dear.

Glad they've apologised. However, I'm pretty sure they would not have issued this apology if he had been ID-ing as a woman when he committed the crimes so there's still a long way to go.

The BBC report said Hudson had had reconstructive surgery. No idea what that means: did they mean GRS? If so, not an intact male. Not that that should make any difference because Hudson was still male and had a 'worrying record of criminal offences' which included 8 offences including battery...

A reminder of how much optics count. If Hudson had looked like Karen White no one would have been out campaigning for him.

Quite.

I imagine that none of our defenders of the faith in these parts will want to weigh in either. Even the urge to be magnanimous to violent threatening thugs and bullies seems to run out of steam when it comes to white knighting paedophiles…