Sex by deception - consultation

[Imnobody4]

Just posting reminder about this consultation. This closes December 19th

www.cps.gov.uk/consultation/consultation-deception-gender-section-rape-and-serious-sexual-offences-rasso-legal

There have been 2 other threads but just to give latest.

fairplayforwomen.com/sex-by-deception-respond-to-the-cps-consultation/

This is quite a succinct response to the consultation.

Why does this matter?

We believe that justice would be undermined if this proposal were to be passed. The proposal is basically that if a person appears sufficiently genuine in their belief that they are the other sex, this will mean there is no deliberate deception. Hence no case to answer. Contrast that with the prevailing interpretation of harassment, hate crime and non-crime hate incidents where the intention of the perpetrator is irrelevant, and only the perception of the victim, or even a bystander, counts.

All trans-identifying people know that their birth sex differs from their desired sex. Therefore, the deception can only be deliberate. Their only reason for withholding it must be a fear that consent will be withdrawn. In any case, how is their genuineness of belief, or commitment to living as the other sex, to be determined? The guidance also talks about how some people can be gender-fluid so they may present differently at different times. All of this is a free pass to anyone accused of sex by deception.

Gay Men's Network have done a more in depth response. At the end of this doc is a template letter you can use to write in support of their submission

twitter.com/Jebadoo2/status/1602045852230586368?t=S7DpNFnm23gsUK1LftdmQg&s=19

Gender capture of the @CPSUK threatens fairness in rape trials. Defendants claiming novel gender identities get special treatment and the guidance creates second class victims.

There have been Freedom of Info requests to the CPS asking which groups have been consulted which have not been replied to.

I am writing to request an internal review of Crown Prosecution Service's handling of my FOI request 'Which bodies were consulted for the proposed changes to " the Deception as to Gender section in the Rape and Serious Sexual Offences (RASSO) "'.

Your FOI Reference is 10828.

Your response was due on October 24th. On that date you emailed and said:"The CPS are required to conduct a public interest test in relation to your request. This public interest test is required because some of the information you have requested may engage section 31 of the FoI Act (Law Enforcement)."and "We hope to issue substantive responses to your FOI request as soon as possible, and in any event within 20 working days of this email. This will be 21 November at the latest."

I replied on the 25th October, and asked you which subsection of S31 you considered was engaged. You did not respond.

I emailed again on November 24th to remind you that the deadline had passed. Again, I have had no response.

It is now November 30th, 7 working days past the November 21st deadline. This delay is unacceptable, hence my request for an internal review.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/w...

The CPS is quite clearly captured and I think it's really important to challenge the language and assumptions. Remember the CPS guidance to schools which they withdrew in the face of a judicial review.

More thoughts from CFW
www.conservativesforwomen.org/proposed-new-guidance-from-the-crown-prosecution-service-promotes-more-gender-ideology

Bump

Also there is a curious note at the beginning, does anyone know what they mean by this?:

https://www.cps.gov.uk/consultation/consultation-deception-gender-secti…
Since the consultation was published, we have removed the UK Government’s definitions of “sex” and “gender” from the consultation document. This is because it has come to our attention that the Office for National Statistics (ONS) has added a guidance note to the article from which the definition was taken, which states that:

"The government definitions of ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ included in this article are not current and do not reflect a current cross-government agreed position. They are only intended for use within the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) context.

Accordingly, we do not think it appropriate to continue to rely on these definitions.

That's extraordinary. The UN Sustainable Development Goals are monumental concepts used across climate science and environmental endeavours. It's as if the pesky fiddling details of the real world can't be allowed to affect our local discussions.

Seems to be related to this article:

www.ons.gov.uk/economy/environmentalaccounts/articles/whatisthedifferencebetweensexandgender/2019-02-21

I say, beware the Sex Fudge.

Relevant part:

'2. Definitions and differences

The UK government defines sex as:

referring to the biological aspects of an individual as determined by their anatomy, which is produced by their chromosomes, hormones and their interactions

generally male or female

something that is assigned at birth

The UK government defines gender as:

a social construction relating to behaviours and attributes based on labels of masculinity and femininity; gender identity is a personal, internal perception of oneself and so the gender category someone identifies with may not match the sex they were assigned at birth

where an individual may see themselves as a man, a woman, as having no gender, or as having a non-binary gender – where people identify as somewhere on a spectrum between man and woman

The World Health Organisation regional office for Europe describes sex as characteristics that are biologically defined, whereas gender is based on socially constructed features. They recognise that there are variations in how people experience gender based upon self-perception and expression, and how they behave.

Essentially, nearly all people are born with physical characteristics that are labelled male or female. In 1964, Robert Stoller1 coined the term gender identity, which refers to an individual’s personal concept about their gender and how they feel inside. It is a deeply held internal sense of self and is typically self-identified. Gender identity differs from sexual identity and is not related to an individual’s sexual orientation (for more information, see the Terminology page of the Gender Identity Research and Education Society). As such, the gender category with which a person identifies may not match the sex they were assigned at birth.

Gender is increasingly understood as not binary but on a spectrum. Growing numbers of people are identifying as somewhere along a continuum between man and woman, or as non-gendered (neither man nor woman) (see Gender Spectrum). Therefore, they often have their own words to describe themselves rather than using pre-defined categories of male and female (for more information, see Gender Identity Workshop, Summary of Discussions). While more people are identifying as non-binary, this is not a new concept and has existed for many years across different cultures around the world.'

This is what the CPS seem to be explicitly rejecting. They're not specifying how they actually do define it, though?

Absolutely Arabella. The sex fudge is positively rancid by now, but still it keeps getting brought out by various actors.

Under no circumstances should any woman ever accept the offer of Sex Fudge.

I would be a bit careful with the Sustainable Development Goals, no.5 is Gender Equality.

blog.hypeinnovation.com/sdg-5

Gender equality is not only a fundamental human right but also the basis for a peaceful, prosperous and sustainable world. SDG 5 aims at gender equality, equal opportunities, and the right to self-determination. Making up half of the world's population, women and girls are the strong focus of this goal, but it is not limited by gender. This includes LGBTQIA+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer) or the LGBTTIQ community (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Transsexual, Intersex, Queer people).
Furthermore, Goal 5 focuses on inclusion and on integrating people with disabilities; so, a very broad field.

Sounds like Sex Fudge time.

So they've removed the definitions but not replaced them? That makes the whole thing a nonsense then (even more than it was). You can't respond meaningfully to a legal change where the words could mean anything.