No Evidence to suggest abuse of self ID

[Signalbox]

This is an interesting thread on Twitter by journalist Róisín Michael on Twitter.

How can governments and organisations continue to get away with saying "there is no evidence" that allowing males to self ID into women's spaces will result in increased predatory behaviour within those spaces when the data is not even being collected.

We already know this happens in the UK in relation to Males in the female prison estate and convictions of male sex offenders being recorded as being carried out by women.

I hadn't quite realised the extent of the problem though and how deep this actually goes. It's horrifying...

@ RóisínMichaux

Belgium has had self ID for almost 5 years. Not a single report of a trans woman crime? Not a single one. No stories of men attacking women in prisons? Not one.

I asked the police why. “We don’t communicate that”.

I asked the press ombudsman: “Why is there not one single report about any crime sexual or otherwise in the Belgian press of either of the country’s languages involving a trans woman since January 2018.”

He said he doesn’t know

I contact lots of journalist. No réponse. I follow up. No answer. Is there a rule, spoken or otherwise? Silence. Try to yourself: search the archives of Belgian papers in Dutch or French for the term “transwoman”

It’s all trans sob stories about living their truth.

Weird no? So I try to find out if sex crimes committed by women have gone up. But the stats are hard to parse, especially when COVID arrives. The police record everything about a crimes except sex. I ask the police repeatedly: when did you stop recording sex and why? Silence

Are there trans women in prison? We don’t record that, fellow Belgian terfs were told. But I got to know some researchers who told me yea, plenty of men in with the women. In fact, there will be more of that soon

The council of Europe apparently has decided that to separate women and men is not a familiar enough environment for reinsertion in the real world (i haven’t confirmed this). So eventually all prisons should be as mixed as possible

So Belgium being the progressive little stalwart it is has gone ahead and carried out 3 separate mixed prison experiments (ongoing, results out 2023). My main takeaway (though I’m a terf so I’m biased):

The top-tier alpha men get women, and pair off. The men who don’t pair off? They get upset and angry and tense. And the prison guards have to deal with the fallout. Prison incels. They are creating prison incels.

The people carrying out this research are young queer theory idealists. One of the prison projects roughly translates as de-gendering prisons (in French). I asked one of them: aren’t the women afraid? She said they would never let anything happen to each other.

One researcher told me that there was a case of a trans “woman” that she was aware of who had a psychotic break and attacked a female prisoner. “But that person was mentally unwell” she told me. Oh ok then!

I contacted social workers from inside prisons “I have a lot to say about that but I can’t” was one response. “I’m burnt out, I need a break” was another. I even contacted journalists who made names for themselves uncovering stories that powerful people wanted hidden. Nope.

So is the fact that there have been no stories (as far as I can tell - and I have searched on and off for months) about transwomen committing sexual crimes evidence that transwomen are not doing so? There is no reason to think this is true.

More likely: as many have pointed out, small chill countries (more dependent on institutions like the EU) like Malta, Ireland and Belgium are the laboratories where this bullshit was tested out on an unsuspecting populace.

The most shameful of all, I believe, Is an organisation I thought would be the last place we could put some hope:

@ investigate_eu : how did this all happen so fast? Where is the pressure coming from? Why the silence?

Investigate Europe didn’t even answer my email.

What a time to be alive: massive changes being stealthily made by shady American donors to our very understanding of reality itself. The investigators? The truth-seekers? Absent. Afraid. Cowed.

But then you look at their donor list: it’s the same people who fund @ ILGAEurope and @ TGEUorg and the lobbies that push this sexist regressive men’s rights movement on us.

We’re all alone. It’s up to us. Start searching, asking questions. They have fucking abandoned us.

Because there is no evidence of it.

Unwilling. And it's up to them.

How DARE you speak for them. There are women on this very forum who provide services for rape victims who've spoken here about how difficult it is to keep men and "trans women" out of their services and how difficult it is to find funding for female-only services.

How DARE you arrogantly talk about the inner lives and feelings of women you don't know anything about, who are dedicating their lives to helping abused women, and appoint yourself their spokesman. Why do you post here? What do you think you're accomplishing?

If you record everything done by a TW aka a biological man as being done by a woman because your systems don’t differentiate between the two then astonishingly you’ll never have any evidence of there being a difference between the actions of adult human females and trans women. TRA have lobbied for years for exactly that outcome.

absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

DJ posts are always welcome because it enables us to demonstrate to the lurkers the complete utter bollocks that their so called arguments are

Because there is no evidence of it.

Thanks for giving another demonstration of the problem described in the OP. Any fool can say there's no evidence when they've buried their head where the sun doesn't shine to look for it.

Self ID makes absolutely no difference under the EA2010 to provisions which allow transgender people to be excluded from single sex spaces.

Self ID allows men to hide the fact that they are men on ALL of their identity documents. Can you honestly not comprehend that this will make it more difficult for organisations offering single-sex services to ascertain who should be permitted to use the service? I already posted a link on this thread about Hostelling Scotland who basically use identity documents to ascertain whether someone should count as female. Services simply have to rely on the integrity of the service user and we know that increasingly male people are refusing to adhere to the social convention that when something is stated as being only for female people they don't attempt to use it. Allowing self ID and pretending that males can magically transform into females (along with the bullying of anyone who rejects this lie) exacerbates this culture of male people completely disrespecting women's boundaries.

Incredible. No engagement with the OP at all 🙄

Supporting men's rights, eh Dadjoke? Quelle surprise.

We seem to be heading towards a pre-Elizabeth Fry era. Battles that were won two hundred years ago are under attack. What next, tours of Bedlam?

Well, Dadjoke admitting JK's service can legally exclude all male people, including male transwomen, is something at least. Unlike the social media mob that is dying to try and force their way in just so they can sue the service for discrimination....

The question is though, dadjoke, why do women have to fund these services themselves and does the government refuse to provide these type of services, whilst simultaneously funding trans centric services?

Rowling's trans exclusionary support centre is almost certainly legal.

Think you mean "female only". It doesn't exclude any female person who needs and wishes to use it.

Yes I had assumed that the service is inclusive of female people who identify as “trans”. Is there anything to suggest that these people are excluded from the service? The service is male exclusionary rather than trans exclusionary.

It is unsurprising to see MRA style posts again on this forum board.

And it is unsurprising that some posters continue to ignore the issues we read about from service providers here, in favour of their own version of affairs which is fed only by extremist activism.

How very unsurprising considering how many males lately (thankfully many don’t) seem to delight in telling traumatised females that they are no longer the priority of the services set up to support and protect them.

That has come about through males asserting their own political agenda over policy making, financial regulation and media engagement. Males who may, or may not, have taken roles designated for females to ensure the prioritisation of female needs. However, the role of Lobby groups who have prioritised male needs over those of females have even been more significant.

This will always be ignored because it is inconvenient.

No, there are no surprises in seeing posts of the nature that deny reality for a version that has been twisted to better suit a male centred political agenda.

It is just another day on FWR.

It's utterly bonkers to consider that men are choosing to invade women's spaces based on what neuro imaging is showing is a basic self perception difference.

Talk about narcissistic rage.

References

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30084980/

And
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21467211/

Does any reasonable adult with critical thinking ability think that an organisation dependent on government funding would publicly release any statement that would reveal that they were coerced into allowing males into their service while expecting to maintain that funding?

Anyone? Anyone at all?

Or just a poster with an obvious misogynistic political agenda who thinks that because no organisations have made such announcements that there is ‘no evidence’?

I have noticed that this ‘no evidence’ narrative has been ramped up since Sturgeon’s team has been pushing it.

It is like the similar bizarre ‘no evidence’ claims for puberty blockers and males in women’s sports and that males don’t retain male patterns of committing sex offences.

This is truly horrific. It's like a dystopian horror story. I can't even begin to comprehend the terror and trauma of those women.

It makes me grateful to live on terf Island where we are going to put a stop to this abuse.

No, it's trans exclusionary - legally so - but nontheless. People with a GRC are legally female, so they are not including some people who are female.

There are already services in place for people who are legally female, but male bodied.
There is only one for women who need same a sex service. HTH

I'm not "admitting" it, I'm stating it.

I've advocated before that if gender critical people want to exclude transgender people, they should set up their own trans-exclusionary services, which Rowling has done, rather than trying to undermine provision which accept all women.

I suspect if a trans women sues Rowling's trans exclusionary support center, they would lose.

There are no charitable foundations which offer trans exclusionary support tfor the government to fund. The ones they support support men, women and non-binary people. Set them up, apply for funding - knowing this government, if one were set up, they'd probably fund it.

That said, JKR's fortune is many times greater than the entire annual budget for such support. LGB Alliance could do this "when they get round to it" - perhaps their Tufton St backers could throw in some cash.

MRAs are always whining about the lack of support for men, but instead of devoting their time to support which meets the needs of men, they simply attack women. GCs play the same game.

It's not legal to ask for birth certificates or GRCs, so, once again, it makes no difference.

Hostelling Scotland welcome transgender people and allow them to self-ID, with or without a GRC, so that is irrelevant. "“regardless of transgendered status, we will book an accommodation based on how our guests choose to be recognised."

The fact you want them to exclude transgender people is not their problem, and JKR's centre is literally the only one which uses this exemption. And my understanding is "you can always tell."

And that is fine. See EA2010.

However, you seem to forget that trans men exist, and they are female bodied and can be treated there.

I see you've blatantly ignored this question DadJoke.... care to comment?

I haven't forgotten them - and yes, they can be included.

However, the website doesn't mention them. It would help in the FAQ, if they want trans men to be included, and trans women not to apply, if they simply said so, in language such people would not find offensive. They are, after all supposed to be non-political.

Surely trans men identify as men? So would use the existing services designated for men?