Transwoman accused of sexual assault after concealing male genitalia on date

[BunfightBetty]

Could be interesting. Consent is surely only consent if you know what you're consenting to...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15019143/Trans-woman-sexually-assaulted-man-concealing-male-genitalia.html

Consent is only valid if its informed consent, surely?

The moustache in that 1st picture is so obvious along with all the other male features.
I can't believe that they are referring to this predatory man as she/her what happened to referring to sex offenders by the correct sexed pronouns?
I hope the courts throw the book at this man and it acts as a warning to all trans people who stealth that not only do they risk serious assault from the men that they deceive but a hefty jail term and being registered as a sex offender for life

It's political squeamishness.

I never used to have time for the Mail, I was an avid Guardian reader. How times have changed.

Now I just ask the "ew, Daily Mail" posters to try to get their medium of political preference to cover these subjects with due respect for women's rights. And wish them good luck, because I believe they'll need it

It will be interesting to see if the trans side shout ‘sexual bigot’ at heterosexual men who don’t want to have sex with them in the way they do to lesbians. I can’t help think that there will be less because they know full well that straight men will be harder to coerce. Like the chap who was full on TWAW but admitted not for relationships with him because he liked very feminine women

Agreed, but why comment if you wont read the thing???

Not if he used a finger, tongue or object

I feel so sad for them both. They were obviously both very young and probably quite horny and it’s such a mess. The comment from the defendant at the end about not telling the victim ‘I was a boy’ and about revealing he had ‘a different gender’ suggests he is himself really confused about what he now is and how to talk about it. The ghastly ‘be kind’ proponents of gender ideology have done a real number on both these kids. Bloody tragic.

People lay out preferences when it comes to sexual contact, such as no touching below the waist when first seeing each other. Many trans women do not look like women at all but I can see why this person passed as a woman. I agree with @Sarah2891 that is a look that quite a few young women go for.

This is how I felt and also a bit angry that the grown men who have been shouting for years that men who are trans are in fact women have confused the heck out of young teenagers.

It is so wrong.

The ideology is just poisonous in so many ways. Teenagers/children have throughout history been the targets for poisonous ideologies. Their impulsivity and lack of prefrontal cortex development makes them so vulnerable to these bonkers ideas.

Someone facilitated that very young man to get lips, eyelashes etc. it’s not cheap. Someone was paying for it.

From the local press
https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/ciara-watkin-stockton-sex-assault-32307731?utm_source=linkCopy&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar

I think it still would be, just not rape.
There was a case of sex by deception a few years ago - very deliberate deception iirc - where the perpetrator was a woman pretending to be male (I can’t remember if she said she was trans or not) - used an object on her (female) victim.

But that’s a ridiculous way to live a life! I think Owen Jones is a deranged antisemite and an unpleasant little misogynist (for example) but I follow him on Twitter and read some of his articles because it’s important to know what people who disagree with you are thinking and to understand some of why they think it. And even OJ isn’t wrong about everything, all the time. I mean, sure, approach different media with caution, and I’d definitely include the DM in that because it’s obviously not an impartial or even entirely scrupulous reporter of the facts but it’s still a useful source of information! Do these delicate flowers think they’ll be tainted by contact or is it just virtue signalling and cancel culture?

Unfortunately the press routinely breaks the first IPSO guideline, which is not to be misleading, by using this phrase, along with feminine pronouns. They mean a trans identified male.

Guidance on this was recently changed, late 2024.

Guidance on this was recently changed, late 2024.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-6-consent

'Deception as to sex

All cases involving deception as to sex must be referred to the CCP for prior approval of a decision to charge or NFA and consultation on subsequent decisions which terminate proceedings or substantially alter the charge.
As with all cases, prosecutors must approach cases involving an alleged deception as to sex on the basis of the specific evidence and circumstances revealed by the police investigation.
However, the following information may assist by way of background for prosecutors to understand the context of such a case.
Although the words “sex” and “gender” may be used interchangeably, to refer to the state of being male or female, sex tends to refer to birth sex (sometimes referred to as “sex assigned at birth”) or legal recognition, while gender is commonly used to refer to social or cultural differences or the way in which someone is perceived or experiences themselves (commonly known as “gender identity”). This guidance uses the term “sex” to refer to birth sex and “gender” to refer to gender identity.
A person’s gender identity might be the same as their birth sex (sometimes referred to as “cisgender” but for clarity referred to in this guidance as “non-trans”) or different to their birth sex (transgender / trans or non-binary).
Deception as to birth sex may be relevant to the issue of whether consent to sexual activity was vitiated (negated). Cases in which deception as to birth sex is a live issue may involve either a suspect who is non-trans or a suspect who is trans or non-binary.
Although much of this guidance contains information on trans and non-binary suspects, this is because questions of deception and consent may involve more complex issues where the suspect is trans or non-binary. However, the guidance does not intend to suggest that most such offences are committed by trans or non-binary persons nor that trans and non-binary people are pre-dispositioned to be deceptive. In many cases, the suspect will be non-trans i.e. a woman purporting to be a man or vice versa.'

Has the wording been changed from 'sex by deception' to 'deception as to sex'?!

I didn’t know that - how was it changed, please?
…sorry, didn’t see your post above, will read that!

I read that page fairly closely a while back, it seems to have expanded into almost infinite gibberish as the CPS attempts not to do a transphobia but acknowledge that a person can't consent to sex if they don't know the sex of their partner:

'...even though the suspect fails to disclose their sex and / or gender identity they may reasonably believe the complainant consented due to: the degree to which the sex, trans or non-binary identity of the suspect is apparent; the opinion of the complainant towards lesbian / gay / trans people etc (depending on which is relevant to the case) and the suspect’s knowledge of their opinion; the length and nature of the relationship or their communications; the nature of and the circumstances in which the sexual act took place; evidence that the complainant expressed doubts, asked questions, or made assertions relating to the suspect’s sex and / or gender identity; evidence that the complainant was exploring their own sexuality.'

I'm not keen on the victim blaming in this thread . Also not keen on the rapist being referred to as she in the report .

Slight derail but is this the only issue where deception can lead to a criminal charge. If the issue is informed consent, surely that is a factor in a lot of situations. I’m thinking for example of a woman who has unprotected sex with her husband because she believes he isn’t sleeping with anyone else, but actually it turns out he’s had multiple one night stands or something - she wouldn’t have consented (to any sex but particularly to unprotected sex) if she had been fully informed. Not just because of the emotional side, but also the physical health risks.

In UK law rape is only with a penis - in this case something else was used (finger, tongue or sex toy). So sexual assault by penetration not rape. Carry the same sentence and are both considered serious but words matter.

Well from the newspaper report, the defendant knew he ‘was a boy’ so the stuff in those guidelines (tbh I skimmed before losing the will to live) about some trans people really thinking they’re women doesn’t seem applicable, and he ‘pretended to be on a period’ to avoid below the waist touching which seems pretty clear deception. It seems quite possibly he was naive/ignorant about consent and didn’t realise he was committing a serious crime, as he doesn’t seem to have tried to pretend he didn’t do it.

The male victim was penetrated, so presumably the accused man must have penetrated his anus but not necessarily with his penis. Could have been a finger, sex toy, etc.

Technically, if the wife has clearly conveyed that her consent is conditional on fidelity, it is rape. This may be hard to pull off in practice, and I think defence would have a field day with it.

Wives could rightly assert that the marriage itself makes sex conditional on fidelity, but in reality there are enough 'open' or 'poly' marriages to negate that as an appeal to common practice.

If she had ever known (or even reasonably, and correctly, suspected) he had cheated but still had sex with him, that could indicate she didn't take this part of the marriage vow so seriously.

If she said "I'll only consent to sex if you never do it again with anyone but me", that should suffice but defence would probably say she needed to clarify this every time, at the time.

I think somebody has tried this, but don't know if she got anywhere.

Lying about your sex isn't the only way to commit sex by deception, though. There've been several cases of 'stealthing' a condom. Telling a woman you were infertile to gain her consent would also do it, and so would explicitly stating you had no STIs. I believe women have succeeded against men who pretended they were single.

I don’t think it is but being a cheat doesn’t count. If you know you have HIV but have unprotected sex without disclosing.