When trans rights trumps children's safety

[ReunitedThorns]

This story has come about in my local area:

An elderly man spotted wearing a girl’s school uniform near a Leigh secondary school and on a bus “does not pose a risk”, according to police who have urged the public to stop sharing photos of him.

uk.news.yahoo.com/police-man-seen-outside-leigh-163212326.html

This old man is riding school buses and hanging around schools in full girl's uniform and bad wig.

Apparently the schools have had to arrange special assemblies to brief children not to travel alone.

But police don't want anyone to share images of this man online and he has told them that he is not a risk.

He's clearly not trans, but I fear that the police are so scared of the subject that they're allowing this behaviour to continue.

If he doesn't present a risk, why are the schools advising children not to travel alone?

On the bus to school from home and back, mind.

The schools evidently don't believe the police and do believe he presents a risk.

Why is that "good advice regardless"? Is it because there are old men loitering around schools and buses who may be a risk? And why does everyone else have to modify their behaviour to fit in around ill-behaviour?

Five years ago, no one would be defending old men hanging around schools in girls uniform. It is already harassment. But now because of the climate, people are "be kind, he hasn't done anything yet".

The police have given a green light to anyone with nefarious reasons to come to Essex where you can loiter around schools as long as you cross-dress.

If this has got nothing to do with trans rights, why are you defending him? Would you employ him as a babysitter for your children or grand-children? If not, why not? The police have said that he is "no risk".

DSIL told DH yesterday that he trespassed onto school grounds at one point (DNiece goes to Belfairs). That's the limit of DH's knowledge at present, but assume he was removed pretty quickly.

But if we listen to politicians in the recent GRA debates then many of them would argue that this man is in fact a woman, genuine about being a woman, acting in good faith and not using gender as a loophole for predatory behaviour. Those of us who see him as a risk to children are creating a moral panic to whip up hate against men ( also known as society's most vulnerable group).

If those politicians want to stand by their words then they also need to stand by this man and support him in living as his authentic self. If his authentic self is a 10 year old schoolgirl then so be it.

This is good advice regardless.

Telling girls not to travel alone on public transport to and from school? How is that "good advice regardless"? How is that a normal happy childhood, scared to go to school by yourself?

I notice that despite Pie coming back to the thread she missed my post so I'll ask again

Boiledbeetle · Today 03:01

MargaritaPie · Today 02:51

...and concluded he hasn't committed any crime and doesn't pose any risk. Police have also asked the public to stop sharing photos of him on social media.

I also don't see what this has to do with transpeople or trans-rights?

At any point in the recent past this man, who also has a PRIMARY SCHOOL UNIFORM THAT HE WEARS IN PUBLIC would have been dealt with appropriately. He is loitering outside schools wearing a girl's school uniform, following the children onto the bus and taking photos. He has uniforms for both primary and secondary schools.

Up until recently everyone called this gentleman exactly what i can't call him on here, we all see it we all recognise it for what it is.

What has changed in the last few years that suddenly means a man with a thing for children can brazenly dress in a girl's school uniform and stare at, photograph and harass children?

Come on Marge, think. Join the dots.

What's so different about the world now?

Why has this man been allowed to continue with his frankly worrying behaviour?

What has changed?

Why is a grown man suddenly getting away with this?

Why does he feel free suddenly to be able to do this now and not ten years ago?

Come on Pie, it's not that difficult.

I don't like the idea of the state being able to tell people what they can and can't wear but there are clearly people (almost always men) who are getting a sexual thrill by forcing people to become unwilling participants in their fetish. The discomfort felt around a man like this comes from the absolute knowledge that you are taking part in a sexual act with him. We know this is beyond creepy, we know it is sexually motivated, but it seems difficult to legislate against it. Again, it's an example of predators finding loopholes and in no way being shamed by the 'sissification' of becoming a 'woman' in exploiting them. The fact that the police want us to play along and pretend this is completely harmless is totally stupid and beyond disturbing.

Did the Police in making their risk assessment take into account the case of Michael Wilson? His sentence seemed mild though compared to the trauma he caused. I won’t post a link, just search on ‘Michael Wilson school uniform’ if you are not clued in on this.

The police are going to have find a way to stop this man from indulging in this socially unacceptable behaviour, because if they don't, someone else will.

I fear that the outcome of police inaction could be very serious one way or another. Either his behaviour will escalate and child will be assauted and traumatised, or he his behaviour will be addressed by a member(s) of the community which would be a very bad outcome for this individual.

@EsmaCannonball
I believe it is about 75% of men who are trans because of a sexual fetish.

And the many, many children who have no choice but to travel alone?

Are they just collateral damage?

With no-one but themselves to blame - for travelling alone?

You’ll back-track now and say something mealy-mouthed, like ‘well, every effort should be made to travel with others’.

But the point is - that just is not always possible. So some people automatically become at (more) risk.

Too bad for them, huh?

There are further claims that his family are saying that he has mental health problems and is harmless (yet seemingly are doing nothing to prevent this behaviour).

If police and mental health services don't see grounds to intervene then what should the family do? They can't imprison him at home or follow him around all day.

If he is intimidating people (children), he is not harmless.

They could denounce him and say nothing to do with us but he needs help though. Instead of oh he's harmless.

He patently bloody not. We can all see that. Some may choose to find 101 reasons for why he should be allowed to continue, but none can serially honestly look at this and think it's fine and that this guy is harmless.

O h and families lie! Especially when they have a creep in their family. if they don't denounce then they jump straight to dismiss and deny.

It takes a woman or girl to be raped before the police will act.

And even then they often don't. Same goes for stalking. I speak on both counts from bitter experience.

It beggars belief we are even questioning whether he's done anything wrong. He's a fucking nuisance pest with or without mental health issues, that in normal times would be dealt with by the police. He shouldn't be anywhere near children or schools.

Essex Police (particularly in these towns) have history with this.

There is different individual who is known to be a predator, and has propositioned a number of school boys. An incident has occurred with a boy, the father found out, gave the man a good seeing to and is currently awaiting trail whilst the perpetrator is free.

Christ on a bike. We pay for justice systems thats riddled with misogyny at every level. Police forces infested with rapists, so few rape cases taken to court its virtually legal to assault women, women being arrested for holding a vigil for a murder victim, women being arrested for hurting a man pretending to be a woman's feelings, and now they won't/can't protect school children from the local pervert.

And 'lessons are never will be learned.' And deepest sympathy will be offered to the victim and their family, while urging for calm from locals and reminding them to take no action of their own to protect the hurty feels of the perpetrator.
How about some resortsative justice so he can then get off further on hearing how his behaviour has affected them no doubt!

Probably a bit of a tangent, but for some time I have observed the local schoolgirls and comapred their uniforms with what I was compelled to wear - knee-length. I don't know one local school that doesn't have skirts further up than college PE skirts (3 inches above knee measured when kneeling - we measured from the back, but no-one picked up on it.) Local teens all look like St Trinian's sixth form, and as far as I can tell are not rolling the waistband up.
So who designs these skirts aimed at observers? Something more respectable, like trousers, wouldn't attract deviance, would it?

@Treaclemine fuck off and fuck off some more with your victim blaming and girl shaming. The length of a schoolgirl's skirt has nothing to do with whether she is raped or attacked by a male predator. Stop blaming women and girls for male violence!

Something more respectable, like trousers, wouldn't attract deviance, would it?

JFC.

One of the schools that this man owns a uniform to (which is my old school) allows for girls to wear trousers. So there's that argument gone.

@Treaclemine it would make no sodding difference at all, girls and women are raped in hijabs, pyjamas, jeans, leggings, mini skirts and nuns habits. Its predatory men thats the fucking problem, not the women or girls, EVER. They'd find a way to assault a woman wearing iron knickers and a full suit of armour. The patriarchy has done a job on you with internalised misogeny.

Treaclemine · Today 17:17

Something more respectable, like trousers, wouldn't attract deviance, would it?

Get away to fuck, you gobshite.