Can someone explain to to me why this has gone to court? Teenage girl pretending to be a boy.

[placemats]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/08/teenage-girl-georgia-bilham-pretended-to-be-boy-duped-second-girl-sex-court-hears

I'm following this and cannot understand why this is being prosecuted.

No it's not a trans man. It's a feminine presenting woman who was 19 at the time of the offences. She has specifically stated not to have a trans identity. She seems to have built an online character as "George" and then used that character to contact these teenage girls in that persona. From the reported details it seems fairly clear there was deliberate and intentional deception.

Yes. So why on earth use male pronouns for her?

Yes. So why on earth use male pronouns for her?

Because its the Guardian.

@ArabeIIaScott that's a summary of what the witness said in court, who used the name George and "he" because that's how she knew the defendant at the time.

@IwantToRetire I was answering to "what was different about this case".

I understand and agree with your points about rape or deception and I don't support OP's faux innocent stance of "what is there to prosecute" .It's obvious that a crime HAS been committed and what that crime is.

All that being said, the case is also easier to prove/prosecute and I seriously doubt there will be any surprises at the verdict. That does not diminish the crime committed, or the impact on the victim. I suppose it does show my cynicism and low expectations from CPS though.

That's a witness testimony about what happened between her and "George" -whom the defendant was pretending to be. That's why they are using male pronouns, because at the time the witness thought she was meeting a man/boy.

Well yes. I cannot understand why women are criminalised for this. A trans woman can impregnate a lesbian and bisexual woman, which is the greater danger.

Obviously deception is horrendous.

Many thousands of people are deceived of their money/savings and led to believe that they even married a woman, for example, only to find out that person wasn't.

I haven't noticed any cases either. Both of them should have been prosecuted.

"You threw words around like 'deceit'. You accused her of raping you. There is no culpability on your part. She is a woman, that is how she identifies."

Judge Knott added: "Frankly, if you weren't prepared to take the time to know more about her that is on you.

I cannot understand why women are criminalised for this

Just because there are other issues I cannot comprehend someone not understanding why what she did is disgraceful.

Stealthing can also apply to not wearing condoms when previously agreeing to do so

Stealthing is the intentional removing of a condom during sexual intercourse without the consent of the sexual partner. The offence is an example of ‘conditional consent’; a non-consensual act against the conditions of consent given.

In 2019, Lee Hogben from Bournemouth was sentenced to 12 years in prison for raping a woman in a hotel. Although consent for sexual intercourse was given by the victim, it was on the condition that a condom was used. The victim was a sex worker and not only were the terms of ‘conditional consent‘ for intercourse agreed upon beforehand, but they were also clearly stated on her website. Mr Hogben removed the condom being used during sex without the victim’s consent, an act known as stealthing.

https://www.reeds.co.uk/insight/stealthing-and-conditional-consent/

I cannot understand why women are criminalised for this.

Why shouldn't they be?

This isn’t the only sexual assault case being prosecuted…..it’s one of thousands. It’s only in the news because it is a bit unusual.

You can't understand why women are criminalised for this? Really? That's very worrying.

Sex by deception is rape or serious sexual assault (the latter in this case because women don't have penises).

I can understand why women are criminalised for this.

I can't understand why only women are criminalised for this.

Fair enough for direct quotes, but seems odd to even use the name George without putting it in quotes, and the editorial uses 'him' even when clearly referring to someone the jury/court knew to be a woman.

I think they're afraid to misgender even in this situation. Which is surely quite insulting to trans people.

If the deception is of a man by a trans woman then I suspect partly it will be about not reporting.

There have been other cases where man who have made false promises to women have been prosecuted.

It does make me wonder why she didn't just say the magic words like so many men do when with faced with prosecution for a sexual offence.

Maybe she feared being sent to a men's prison.

Maybe she realised from the whole way the case was progressing that actually everyone does know what a woman is, which is why this case progressed to court when the vast majority of rape and sexual assault cases don't get that far.

Yep.

Clearly the dynamic between a male pretending to be a woman and a female pretending to be a man is very different.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_deception

This. Are you related to the defendant OP?????

I can't understand why only women are criminalised for this.

Fair point.

While I can't find any examples of men pretending to be women in order to rape them, there are plenty of examples of men pretending to be many things with the intention to sexually assault/rape women and girls. They pretended to be Cops,taxi drivers, gay/gay couple , disabled (physical impairments and/or learning difficulties) and even a ghost(and yes he was convicted).

The mind boggles.

Yes there are legal precedents for rape by deception. The UK cases on wiki are:

1. The Spycops scandal from 1968, over 4 decades, when 140 male police officers infiltrated activist groups and at least 20 of them formed relationships with female activists, sometimes going as far as setting up second homes and having children with them, all in the name of undercover policing. Helen Steel was a victim of this and was instrumental in revealing the scandal:

None of those men were prosecuted for rape, sexual offences, or any other offences.

2. A case from 2015 (Gayle Newland) that is very similar to this case - a woman duping women into sex by pretending to be a man, while making no claim to actually be a man. She was sentenced to 6 1/2 years in prison.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-40668960

3. An appeal in 2017 by a serial rapist against one of his convictions. He duped a woman into sex by claiming he had had a vasectomy and later admitted that he had lied. He won his appeal, the court said that lying about fertility did not negate consent to sex. All his other convictions remain, he's still a serial rapist and the quashing of this particular conviction made no difference to his life sentence.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-53511729

So the only actual conviction so far in the UK for sex by deception is of a woman who did a very similar thing to Georgia Bilham.

The reason men who say they are women don't get charged and convicted is because they stick to the story that they are women throughout any investigation.

The police and the CPS will not dispute their claim to actually be women because they have been heavily stonewalled. Even the most egregious cases will not be called men. Instead they may stop being 'women' and start being the third gender, AKA 'this individual rapist' after there has been a fuckup over prison placement.

Georgia Bilham (allegedly) and Gayle Newland both pretended to be men to dupe women into sex but neither of them continued to pretend to be men when faced with prosecution. I find that really interesting.

I think it might be more difficult for a man to pretend to be a woman in this kind of scenario.