Germany "Neo-Nazi changes gender to serve in women’s prison"

[singthing]

Given the German legislature's bonkers decision last year (that allows 14 year old children to change their names and adults to apply for that for children even younger), let's hope this is their Sturgeon moment.

But more importantly than that, let's hope the female inmates at Chemnitz remain safe from this monstrous man. He'll be easy to spot, what with his full lady-moustache and repellent views.

Main link: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/08/20/neo-nazi-changes-gender-serve-womens-prison/
Archive link: https://archive.ph/F7UFn

No, I'm concluding that Putting both together that means using UK prison stats for criminality of transgender overestimates them - i.e. the number of transgender who are criminals.

Are we in agreement with this at least?

You can't tell the difference

I’m not sure what the point is? I think you’re saying that if the TW in prisons are ‘fakers’, then we shouldn’t be using the statistics about TW in prison with higher rates of sexual assaults as evidence that women are at risk from TW in general because these TW are faking it. Is that what you’re saying?

But the point here is that all TW are potentially dangerous to women as they are all men. That is, all TW are all ‘fakers if you wish. So I’m not sure how there is a logic fail.

So the writer in the book, were they specifically discussing the prisoners who were sex offenders who have not been housed in female prisons since early 2024, or were they referring to other prisoners with the crimes that have allowed male people to be housed in the female prison estates?

Please clarify?

And was she, the writer, referring to past prisoners or those post the new guidance that excluded sex offenders being able to be placed in the female estate.

Also, is this German offender a sex offender? he is not as far as I know.

Possibly you've not seen the types of thread I'm referring to but there was one over the weekend discussing prison stats, you can probably find.

Using these stats to argue that transwoman are more dangerous than cis women and so shouldn't be allowed in women's spaces.

Right well I'm plopping back off again seeing as I am just repeating myself...thanks for responses and do please think about this.

No

We are not in agreement at all.

thanks for responses and do please think about this.

We have thought about it 😂

But with no differentiating criteria between 'real' and 'fake' trans, what difference can it make?

If there are 'fake' transwomen in in prison, how can they be identified?

thanks for responses and do please think about this.

don't be so bloody patronising. We have thought about it long and hard: transwomen are men. And men don't belong in women's prisons

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-transgender-prisoner-policy-comes-into-force

I was out a year, early 2023 the new guidance came in that said that no male people with transgender identities who have committed sex offences will be housed in the female prison.

So, again, what benefit is there for a male person who commits sex crimes to declare that they have a transgender identity? And if they believed they were to get leniency because of it, why would they continue to identity as transgender while in male prison?

We have been told that logic means the stats are wrong. But the current stats we have are for 31 March 2024. So, a full year after this new guidance came in.

And yet, the numbers of sex offenders with transgender identities nearly doubled in the year since the guidance came out. Despite there being no benefit in having that transgender identity because those male people did not get placed in female prisons.

Now, if someone claimed that the ones who didn't have transgender identities may be 'faking' in the UK, they could potentially have an point. But that is not what is being argued here. And that sections of the male prison population is not going to change much of the % of sex offenders in that sub group below what can be considered the risk in the general male population.

We know that in the past there were male people in the prison system who got into the female prison estate by declaring they were women. That loop hole was closed for those with sex crimes and violent crimes in February 2023. There is no evidence that the male people with sex crimes with transgender identities in the current prison system have declared they are female when they are not.

The logic the poster is using is not really making sense here.

So, apparently, the 151 male people with transgender identities who are sex offenders (as per the Parliament notes) who don't get put into female prisons in the UK under the guidance from February 2023 are faking it for some reason. Either way, that number as per the FOI information declared in parliament earlier this year, is significantly different from the statistics for female people with sex offences. In 2019, this was only 3.3% of the female prison population. I doubt that % has increased much.

There is no logic to the claim that the sex offence statistics for male people with transgender identities in the UK is so flawed that there is no evidence that this group of male people cannot be considered as high a risk as the general male population in the UK.

There seems to be a disconnect here.

I cannot work out the logic this person was using though.

It doesn't make sense since the guidance that came out in Feb 2023. And the number of male sex offenders with transgender identities has increased hugely since that guidance came out.

So, why are these sex offenders supposedly declaring they are female if they know that they are not going to be put into the female prison estate? What is their motivation? What is the benefit?

And indeed, there is no way to arbitrate who is really transgender and who is not.

It seems that the poster read about some anecdotes that I don't doubt was true prior the new guidance. And there is no confirmation from the poster at all that these were sex offenders doing this or how many male prisoners in general were doing this. Either way, there seems to be little reward for sex offenders in doing so with the current batch of stats to March 2024.

Plus the presence of a few doesn't mean the majority are 'fake' and the numbers are so high anyway that it would take a huge chunk of these male prisoners to have been 'fake' just to return them to the male general rate of committing sex crimes.

It is why many of us on the board make it clear that this group commit sex offenses at least at the same rate as the general male UK population.

And it would require most of those prisoners to be 'fake' to get anywhere near the female rate of offending which is the point. We know from watching the news reports that many of these recent offenders are not 'fake' in that they committed the crimes as male people with transgender identities. ie. they already had a history as male people with a transgender identity.

It simply seems like an misinformed attempt to discredit the prison statistics. You have to ask why?

Nobody on this board is arguing that any of the ideology makes sense.

If you are concerned about self ID, you really need to take this up with organisations like Stonewall who deliberately campaigned to expand the trans umbrella to include obvious chancers.

Putting both together that means using UK prison stats for criminality of transgender overestimates them.

No.

This thread is about a German where German male people apparently will be put into the female prison as soon as they say they are a woman. This doesn't happen any more in the UK since February 2023. So it is not logical to make the assumptions you have based on this German example.

Secondly, that in the past some male people declared they were female to get into the female prison estate (pre February 2023) doesn't indicate the magnitude of the issue that would be needed to have the effect of reducing the sex crime rate of male people with transgender identities to the same level of female people or lower. For that to happen, the magnitude of 'fake' trans declarations would be very large.

There is no indication that these current statistics have this anomaly that would be needed to meet your claim.

The large increase in sex offenders in the UK prisons who are male with transgender identities in the year since the guidance was released (meaning those will not be placed in the female estate), seems to negate that 'fake' claim.

I think you took what the writer said and you applied it to all or most male people with transgender identities for your own political agenda, or you misunderstood the magnitude needed to be fake to support your position of:

' I see statistics about transwomen in prisons quoted as evidence that they are more dangerous than cis women.'

and

'Using these stats to argue that transwoman are more dangerous than cis women and so shouldn't be allowed in women's spaces.'

(or were these statements by way of you playing 'devil's advocate' and you don't believe that male people with transgender identities are as dangerous or less dangerous than female people in general in the UK? )

So, no. I don't agree at all that you can argue that male people with transgender identities have the same risk of committing sex crime as female people in the UK, making them the same risk profile or lower than the general female UK population.

I think you took some anecdotes from a expert and completely over reached in your argument.

But of course TW are more dangerous than women….and of course they shouldn’t be in cis women’s spaces… Because they’re men.

Men are statistically more dangerous than women. By some margin. Please do think about that. If you’re trying to argue otherwise, then you need to explain what you mean.

To paraphrase, You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means

I pondered this last night. It really did come across like StilltheUnknownWorrier actually thinks that some magic happens if a man has been saying that they are a woman for years. That they magically become a woman and don’t retain the male pattern of crime.

They smashed together two ideas and thought ‘yeah, that is what is happening, I knew those statistics were dodgy!’ But really they just were trying to frame the stats to suit their own political agenda.

Here are some numbers I smashed together in response:

Considering the sex crime numbers for that prison population jumped from 88 to 151 male prisoners with a sex offence that declared they were women in a year (31 March 2024 to 31 March 2024) AFTER the publishing of the guidance in early February 2023, I seriously doubt these new prisoners are making declarations for the benefit of getting into the female prison.

The stats are interesting actually.

The increase of the overall number of male prisoners with transgender identities in the UK prisons between 2023 and 2024 was only 42 yet the increase in the sex offenders was 63.

To me this indicates several dynamics that I expect to be happening. Firstly that leniency is being shown for less serious crimes committed by this group (and maybe all convictions due to space in the prisons) and those convictions of lesser seriousness are not getting custodial sentences.

Then, some of the those with less serious convictions were released, because they served their sentence or whatever reason. However, the new prisoner trend was to have larger % of sex offenders.

Either more male people with transgender identities are being convicted for sex offences or the judges are more lenient with other crimes, or there was a back log and the case rate was abnormally high for that period. Or existing prisoners committed sex offences while in prison or had addition offences from prior imprisonment processed into convictions. or something.

There are numerous reasons this inconsistency happened. I don’t know whether we ever explored why on threads yet. (And this is not the thread to do this).

Either way the ratio also changed from 43.3% (88/203) having a sex offence to their name at 31 March 2023 to 151/243 to 62.1% as at 31 March 2024.

Yet we have someone on this thread last night trying to tell us that obviously a huge majority of these 151 male prisoners are faking it like this neo nazi.

In 2019. there were 3.3% of female people in UK prisons were sex offenders. I haven’t looked up the stats since. But I wouldn’t expect this will be different. Last time I looked at the raw stats for female sex offences, they had remained stable numbers for a decade or more despite population growth.

For what this poster tried to suggest last night to be true, there would be 8 (3.3% of 243) prisoners with trans identities in the UK prison population with sex offences.

8!

Not 151. According to this poster 143 of those prisoners must be fakes if we simply used blunt logic, and isolated it just to sex offenders ‘faking’ it. Of course, if one group of male prisoners with transgender identities were faking it, logic would apply to the other group and this would decrease too meaning even greater numbers of the sex offenders would also have to ‘faking’ it.

And I can probably think of 8 male prisoners in UK prisons right now who had transgender identities long before they were convicted.

Talk about having an ideological belief about how transitioning magically removes male patterns of behaviour.

So when someone tells me to ‘please do think about it’, well… fuck! Yes. I have! But it is clear that someone else hasn’t.

It seems what one poster believes is logic is really just their ideological belief clouding any logic at all but condescendingly telling those who have thought about how wrong they are.

We’ve been “thinking about it” for ages here on FWR and there are lots more threads you can read going back about a decade, thanks. Maybe inform yourself better if you want anyone to take your posts seriously here?