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.

😂 Lots of correcting & self-correcting of language going on here. Slippery thing, innit? I guess that‘s Braverman‘s point.

Nope, Catiette‘s free of Clavecin, bar a faint phonetic echo. Different posters. Good to hear, @EarthSight. 😊

If there is any doubt, I suggest a default of assuming a suspect is trans, to avoid giving offence
Yeah, we should all bend ourselves out of shape to avoid offending a male rapist.

Oh, & yeah re: the concern about giving offence. A victim of rape experiences the attacker as male, yet there seems to be not the slightest consideration of protecting her from „offence“, let alone mitigating her distress & trauma, & validating her lived experience or safeguarding her - potentially catastrophically damaged - sense of self. Whatever your thoughts, the absence of debate re: pronoun use at least is telling.

My last post was deleted, so I will repeat hoping this time it won't be.

Stonewall has no authority here. We don't adhere or believe in their quasi-religious, cult-like misogynistic gospel and language rules or 'guidelines'.

Very good point!

More pithy…

Trolls get more from posters getting visibly riled; lurkers get less.

Zero sum game?

We recently had a case of a man who disguised himself as a woman to commit rapes. Stonewall's definition includes any man who sometimes dresses as a woman. So, man-in-disguise becomes indistinguishable from a person with statutory protections and (if their lobbying succeeds) entitlements. This is so crazy we should maybe lean into it to emphasise that.

There is now a thing called "circumgender" where a natal female feels that she should've been born male and then had a sex change to become a woman.

A new nonsense gender, but unfortunately a thing that I've heard spoken on local government councils.

What the fuck? 🤯

Correct except I used male because it is a biological not social descriptor.

Correct except I used male because it is a biological not social descriptor.

'Man' has also always been a biological descriptor - specifying species as well as sex (adult human male). If you want a social descriptor then the word is 'masculine'.

Man and males are both biological descriptions. A man is an adult human male. A boy is a juvenile human male.

if you think man has become a social description, what word would you use for an adult human male?

Until you have a sex change you are what you were born as.
I'd like to identify as a millionaire but sadly I'm not one.

Some men "identify" (whatever that means) as women but do nothing else (except possibly demand special pronouns). No hormones, no dresses.

Also, there are cases of men who have removed their male genetalia and are still extremely violent criminals. These men should never be housed with women.

This

On repeat 👏👏👏👏

"Until you have a sex change..."

Which is never, since humans can't change sex, any more than any other mammal can.

They can make changes to their appearance through surgery and pharmaceuticals, but they remain forever the sex they were at conception.

When will it end ??

I think that the suggestion of a number of posters, to record the crime as male, (as it is) with a marker to say that he "identifies" as a woman. That way, the gentle, harmless transw myth can eventually be put to bed.

As for not "misgendering" rapists, to avoid offending them... well, rape is many orders of magnitude more offensive than not pandering to a rapist's fantasy, isn't it?

@Chersfrozenface
I was trying to be polite

All men are men
Even the ones who call themselves women

No one should list to a word the evil Stonewall says about anything, it should be shut down.

And even after the euphemistically described ‘sex change’ you remain the sex you were born.

when all the hormone suppression is stopped, if the organs are still present in the body and undamaged, the genetic coding in cells will keep doing their roles. As they were programmed to do since those genes developed.

The sex you were as an embryo will be the sex you are until there are no more of your cells remaining on earth.

Unfortunately, being polite leads to ambiguity and allows falsehoods to be spread. Which in turn leads to misinformation which is harmful.