Suella Braverman is wrong to tell the police to describe transgender rapists as men.

[theilltemperedclavecinist]

First, calling a trans woman a man is misgendering, which is transphobic even if unintentionally.

Secondly, it is not accurate and precise enough. A trans woman is not a man, but she is not just any woman, either. Accuracy and precision are important for good record keeping, for research purposes, and for correctly informing the public.

Thus, a transgender rapist should be recorded as such in police and cps records, and should be referred to in press releases as per Stonewall guidelines (transgender woman, then trans woman for subsequent mentions).

If there is any doubt, I suggest a default of assuming a suspect is trans, to avoid giving offence. Stonewall guidelines make it clear that trans is an umbrella covering many things, including men who only very occasionally cross-dress, for whatever purpose.

It would help if all press releases included an explainer box about what a trans woman is, given the surprising number of people who don't seem to know.

This approach may make the use of 'cisgender' (eg for other suspects) unavoidable, which I know some will dislike. But avoiding ambiguity about what is really happening seems more of a priority at the moment.

Yup, this, 100%

I reckon a & b.

When OP states "First, calling a trans woman a man is misgendering, which is transphobic even if unintentionally.

Secondly, it is not accurate and precise enough. A trans woman is not a man, but she is not just any woman, either" I think they're playing devil's advocate. Later in the OP it becomes more clear that they are trying to use the TRAs own language to catch them out.

The suggestion about an explanation box again I think comes from a well-intentioned desire to make sure the general public (not MN Feminism boards) understands what the hell is meant by the distorted Orwellian double-speak so beloved of Stonewall et al.

I was confused by the first post too, but am now fairly sure that the OP is a genuine newbie trying to teach her grandmother to suck eggs.

You got me bang to rights. I was looking for a way to disseminate useful information (that TWs are men-who-say-they-are-women and who are much as other men, and that they want any man-who-says-he-is-a-woman to have access to all women's spaces, with the force of law behind him). I know you already know all this, but it's hard to say in public without getting punished for it, so lots of other people remain in an induced state of magical thinking, or just don't see the dangers.

All the things I said are true. Misgendering is transphobia, if by transphobia you mean a thing that will get you demoted or your venue cancelled or your book hidden in the library stacks. I do think that records should include both sex and trans status, because knowledge is always better than ignorance. It was OTT to suggest assuming trans status as default, but I don't mind offending rapists, and, let's face it, Stonewall's definition is ludicrously broad, and that actually serves our purpose.

The experiment seems to have worked in that lots of people assumed I was a trans rights enthusiast, and of course I am! I firmly believe that TWs exist and are human beings. I just neither know nor care why they are men-who-say-they-are-women and I don't want to get into an argument with them about it. Because you know what they say about wrestling with a pig.

I agree with this. I find the term 'trans woman' confusing and offensive. I think the media should describe such individuals as a 'trans identifying man'. I also think pronouns should be they rather than she / her, even though I find it irritatingly clunky.

They sure are. Although "trans identified men" is a more accurate description.

Whilst I want no rapist in a woman's prison, recognising when someone who was born male but has transgendered is something I think should be recorded.

"has transgendered"?

What does that mean?

Has declared that his gender is now female? Has acquired a piece of ID such as a driving licence with a female marker on it on the basis of a form and a letter? Has acquired a Gender Recognition Certificate?

But yes, any "transgender" identity claimed should be recorded. The ensuing data would be relevant, useful and interesting

Hmm, transgender could be a verb I suppose. "To transgender", as opposed to "to transition".

I suppose it might be a tad clearer, since "transition" can refer to any change.

"Transition from male to female" or vice versa is, of course, impossible, since humans cannot change sex.

If "gender" is separate from sex, then *to transgender' as a synonym for changing one's self-described "identity" might work.

You are correct, in part. A transwoman is not a man but is a male.

Attempts like this to redefine "man" won't wash with me any more. I've read too much trans propaganda to be in any doubt about the deliberate attempts to bamboozle us all with pseudoscience and the blurring of language. A transwoman absolutely is a man, and a man is a male (adult) human. Even most transwomen know that they are men, even if they try to deny it to themselves and the rest of us.

^^^ This

Followed on the same page by 'Stonewall campaigning to make it illegal to exclude TW from women's changing rooms' (which they are)

Lots of people will have sympathy for delicate little trans women who are after all the most oppressed ever, in changing rooms, men not so much. We need to be able to use clear language to describe the problem.

People's choice of language is their own. I admire Posy Parker's clarity on the language she uses. It means she never gets side tracked in a discussion.

I love how Helen Joice uses clear language that make the terms of a discussion completely clear and doesn't back off from the shock value it may have when describing mens' fetishes and crimes. We aren't used to women calling things out so precisely and it has impact.

Kathleen Stock takes a different, more moderate approach to language when it comes to men who want to be women but gets cancelled none the less. When we make concessions we still get cancelled.

If we can't tell children the truth - that men can't be women and women can't be men, we can't offer them an alternative to what they are hearing in the main - that intrusive, painful and life limiting interventions will allow them to change sex.

Personally I'd like a different terminology again for the men who have had their bodies butchered and have no penis or testicles, are left with an unmanageable sore wounded hole, incontinence problems, and lifelong pain. Plus on ludicrous levels of god knows what hormones, steroids, blockers.

I'm not sure I'd feel so violated to know that someone struggling with that level of vulnerability and disability might need a cell in a womens prison or might need a cubicle in M&S mixed / ladies changing room.

If they have a penis, they're a man. That's the actual definition of a man. Their feelings, dress and clothes are no-ones business but their own - that's each person's individual rights and should be protected by the law.

The law however cannot legislate on feelings, in order to apply equally to all, it needs objective fact. Penis = man. Of course there is a simple solution for all men including those who present as women - don't rape. Why are we talking about what whether rapists on trial turn up in a dress or not? Why aren't we asking why men, any man thinks he has the right to rape a woman?

This is a distraction from the real issue, women should be fucking furious.

Still men, though

Still just as likely statistically to attack women verbally or physically for as much as looking at them funny.

Possibly more likely, given that pain rarely improves anyone's temper and that despite enduring that much suffering they are still vanishingly unlikely to pass, causing frustration and resentment

No, not all of them, but how can you tell who will and who won't?

Lots of people will have sympathy for delicate little trans women who are after all the most oppressed ever, in changing rooms, men not so much. We need to be able to use clear language to describe the problem.

Exactly, as Barra Kerr pointed out, first on Mumsnet and then when it was deleted, hosted on other sites. Language is critical.

https://fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns/

They could call them what they are,men pretending to be women.

Aaaand moved as predicted!

OP are you doing that essay?

Heaven forbid there should be a popular discussion in Feminism Chat

Transwomen are men. They're barely even what I would call a subset, since there is no real criteria. Any man can be one, for any reason. Or no reason.

Rape is a crime that always involves a penis and the reader should never be left in any doubt of that.

And I absolutely agree that the 'trans' status of these men should be publicised every time. Of course.

The only other problem is people not realising that the word transwoman refers to a man. I would like for the term to just disappear, and trains identified male take its place.

Until that is widespread, the word transwoman should always be followed by the explanation, 'a biological male'. Not a male at birth, or a male when they committed the crime, or any other such impossible nonsense.

I believe the IPSO guidelines state that you have to call transwomen, women, but they also say that you cannot mislead the public. So there is a contradiction, right there.

If the media started to be truthful, I'm sure it would be upheld in court.

I had to read the OP twice to get where she was coming from but I do think it's interesting.

It is similar to the kind of thinking that might use the conversion therapy ban against therapists who encourage gay children to transition.

And also why I never select "female" on forms where it is clear they mean gender ID, because I don't have a female (or any) gender ID. And I say - with 100% truth - "any" when asked for pronouns and I leave people to infer whatever they want.

Regardless of whether this works from an activist point of view, I find it a helpful position to adopt for every day life because I hate to lie. Lobbyists have changed the language but I can still speak my truth.

Nobody should be doing anything 'as per Stonewall guidelines'.

That's what's created this mess.

I think they should be referred to as 'men disguised as women'