A woman has been found guilty of raping two women

[AngelicaSchuylerAndHerSisters]

A woman has been found guilty of raping two women when she was a man. Happened in Scotland. She hasn’t been sentenced yet - but where will she serve her sentence? In the womens prison?!
This is going to mean some serious discussions and tough times for the Scottish government. But it was surely only a matter of time before something like this happened.

Nick Robinson asking Yvette Cooper if she agrees that someone anatomically male shouldn't be in a women's prison now on R4

Not listening at mo, what is response?

I'm going to rewind. It was mostly the usual waffle about the Equality Act providing for gender (but this is why I need to rewind and I think she might have meant to say gender reassignment).

She said it's clear in this case, a women's prison should be out.

But mostly it was no -committal. No news - in short!

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11677693/Rishi-Sunak-Dominic-Raab-slam-Nicola-Sturgeon-not-moving-trans-rapist-womens-prison.html

She's refusing to move him

MiladeeBeserko · Today 08:12

^Nicola-Sturgeon-not-moving-trans-rapist-womens-prison.html
She's refusing to move him^

If that's not a clear signal to all right minded Scots, I don't know what is.

Radio 4. I rewound as I did lose concentration at the gender being legally recognised part, because that's such a red flag to me that whoever says it may have another agenda. So this is what was said. Nick Robinson and Yvette Cooper:

NR: you raised the issue of violence against women and girls. You'll know that there's a controversial case in Scotland - different legal system, different government, of course - in which a man called Adam Graham who raped two women is identifying as a woman and says he wants to serve his sentence in a women's prison. Now, that would not be possible as I understand it under English law, if Labour gets into government, do you agree that it should not be possible for a man who chooses to identify as a woman - someone who's still anatomically male - to serve their sentence in a woman's prison?

YC: this dangerous rapist should not be in a woman's prison. I think it should be really clear cut, if someone poses a danger to women, has committed crimes against women, they should not be being housed among women prisoners. I think that...that should just be straightforward and I think most people would agree with that.

NR: So, the fact that they identify as a woman, the fact that this person - Isla Bryson - is called in court, a woman, is referred to as "she" - all that should be ignored, and "she" - if she is she - should not serve in a woman's prison, in your view?

YC: There...there is...the Equality Act already provides for recognising that there is a difference between, between gender and whether...however that's legally recognised, and also for biological sex, and provides for there to be safe spaces for biological women, and prisons is one of the cases that's been highlighted as part of that. So, I think this has been something that's been long - you know, had those arrangements in place in the law, and it's right that there should be so. It is possible to, er, have a framework that both supports who are vulnerable who are trans, and also makes sure there are protections for women in these sorts of circumstances.

Whilst it is awful for the women who will be forced to deal with the bastard (and I am mot making light of that), this case is excellent from a sunlight perspective.

The timing is spectacular, the imagery is very stark and it's putting people in some very uncomfortable corners. Even those who are fundamentally TWAW can't defend this and for many people it's this kind of thing that will start off the thought process which ends with the realisation that there is no meaningful difference between TW and male. It's a process many of us have worked through.

And for Sturgeon et al, they are in a very difficult place. Only the most hard core believe that this creature belongs in the women's estate and very few are that hard core - most who aren't opposed are more soft "be kinds". It's had massive publicity so large numbers of people are collectively going "what the fuuuuck". But they can't say "this person shouldn't be with women" because it blows a hole in the entire ideology. Because how do you differentiate between this TW and "genuine" TW...

And the longer she takes to do nothing the noisier it gets.

It's quite amusing from a political perspective.

The tide must be turning if Cooper is starting to police her words - she was "TW are women" not five minutes ago IIRC and nearly choked on her own tongue trying not to admit what a woman is when she was asked to define the word

She sounded much more confident in her first answer on Radio 4 just now than her second, that's for sure

Thank you for that transcript, I was just going to try to listen when I saw it.

if someone poses a danger to women, has committed crimes against women, they should not be being housed among women prisoners

That if is worrying. There are men who are bad in all sorts of ways besides a rape conviction (which we all know is infinitely rarer than the act). That’s why they are all (not just rapists) deemed too dangerous for the men who say they are women.

And all men would mean an invasion of women’s privacy. None of them should be in a women’s prison.

It is possible to, er, have a framework that both supports who are vulnerable who are trans, and also makes sure there are protections for women in these sorts of circumstance

Why is it the men who say they are women who get this framework ? Other vulnerable men are gay gay men, very young men, and some other categories too .

Full discussion on R4 Today starting 8.45.30. Yvette Cooper followed by a very sensible discussion with Ken MacDonald.

And it made the 9 o'clock news headlines. This is getting a lot of sunlight on R4. Nick Robinson was like a dog with a bone this morning.

THIS ⬆

ALL of THIS

She was on the £5 note from 2002-2016 (might come in handy for a pub quiz one day).

Must be a bit of a shock to the eyes for all those Be Kinders, indignant that some awful wimmins were being mean to that nice Hayley off Corrie, to realise they now have to defend a thug rapist flaunting his cock in woman fancy dress. Or acknowledge that perhaps when a man says he identifies as a woman, maybe he just isn't one? That sort of brain-churn must be quite exhausting.

Only the most hard core believe that this creature belongs in the women's estate and very few are that hard core - most who aren't opposed are more soft "be kinds".

Exactly! In a way I would have more admiration (wrong word but you know what I mean) for somebody insisting the rapist man belongs in a woman’s prison ‘because they’re a woman’. It’s the sly, flip flopping, writhing-off-the-hook squirming types that I get angry with - because they clearly know the risks to women shouldn’t be trumped by ‘gender identity’ but can’t quite bring themselves to say it for fear of their woke reputation.

One has to realise that this trans mania is a cult. There is no reasoning or logic behind it. Once you are captured by it you lose any reasoning that science or common sense would apply to your brain. That’s why shouting and intimidation replaces argument.

Yep. I mean there have always been ‘sex changes’ and ‘transvestites’ - men who dress in ‘women’s’ clothing and adopt a ‘female’ persona. But I think the number of people for whom those feelings are so extreme that they need treatment (mental health support) is absolutely tiny. What we’re seeing now is gender and various sexual identities replacing emo/goth/punk as ‘teen rebellion’. The good thing is they’ll grow out of it because they always do, the bad news is that a load of dodgy adult characters have jumped onboard and decided to be useful idiots in encouraging them or sinister creeps making out they’re ‘enlightening’ children and ‘liberating them to be themselves’.

I remember a conversation with DH where he said no normal man would get involved with any of this - which right thinking bloke do you know that would suddenly take it upon themselves to get involved with children/adolescents and their gender/sexual identity? Campaigning for them to have more underage ‘bodily autonomy’ (🤮) and turning them against anybody who doesn’t instantly enable whatever they ask for? There’s a word for people like that and it begins with P.

Russell Findlay in the Scottish Daily Mail:

The rights of women must trump those of a rapist
twitter.com/russellfindlay1/status/1618549542580015106?s=46&t=7RR9PA8vNE1UDx_ENJOjNA

Sturgeon was extremely foolish to allow males convicted or accused of a sexual offense to apply for a GRC. Pushing that through has discredited the whole Scottish GRC bill and made it look like an abusers charter. Labour should not have whipped their MSPs to vote for the bill either once their amendments were defeated by the SNP and SGP, they are guilty of letting down women too.

Musing on this - the prison issue is in itself horrific but this arsehole makes the perfect poster boy for highlighting the wider issues...

• given he arrived at court daily with a snazzy pink suitcase, he appears to have been on bail.
• under the GRR he'd have already had a GRC. That means that if he'd got sick, he'd have been in a woman's ward in hospital
• in reality, he'd probably be in one anyway as most Scottish institutions have moved "ahead of the law" anyway
• where did he buy his nifty pink wardrobe? It all appears to fit - bet he enjoyed his trip to Primark or wherever's changing rooms
• when he works out, which changing facilities will he be using at the gym? Bet it's the woman's- you know, the ones which often only have one or two curtained cubicles with most people changing at the central benches...

Etc, etc, etc

And of course he'll be out in a few years, having learned for a fact that pretending to be a woman is an open access ticket to our spaces. If he didn't do the above before you can bet your arse he will after.

Thanks I'd never heard of her. I'm away to look her up. Feeling almost ashamed not to know about the many amazing women who've gone before us and who make the place a better place for us.

An absolutely fantastic book about this is Dale Spender's "Women of Ideas - and what men have done to them". It's about the many brilliant women in history who achieved great things, but who we've largely forgotten about because men simply wrote them out of the history books. It was published in the 1980s, but it's still true and relevant today.

Remember Sturgeon has only one agenda and that is to be seen as different as possible to England.

Where is she now, has she spoken out to defend her policy ?

No because it doesn't affect her and unlikely to affect her. She is not at risk from him or his type. I bet she never uses a gym with communal changing areas. Shes unlikely ever to end up in an NHS hospital with a man in the bed beside her. She doesn't have kids to worry about in school and girls in the boys or vice versa. She probably has 24hr bodyguards around her.

Exactly. Labour at least fielded a couple of amendments that would have softened the worst of it. If they had followed through by dropping the whip or abstaining, it would have been a better look. A bit tin hat, but perhaps they knew that Nicola was challenging Westminster, so wanted to remain on the side of the SNP, potential allies should the next general election be close.

As for Nicola, it is as if she is deliberately oppositional when it comes to the Tories. It worked well for a long time, including on Covid, but long term is not a replacement for actual policies. Perhaps she failed to consider that at some point the Tories might get something right.

Sturgeon was extremely foolish to allow males convicted or accused of a sexual offense to apply for a GRC

Convictions don't prevent anyone in England or Wales getting a GRC either, Sturgeon just wanted to make it even easier.

Agree @Ridemeginger . Pronouns everywhere reinforce this madness. They need challenging.