Trans women at risk of female genital mutilation, claims College of Policing

[IwantToRetire]

New policing guidelines issued by the taxpayer-funded quango state that trans women could be forced to undergo female genital mutilation, despite them being biologically male.

The suggestion that they might be forced to suffer mutilation specifically intended for young girls has been branded as “insulting” to victims.

Female genital mutilation, which is illegal in the UK, includes the removal of the labia, clitoris and the almost total sealing of the vagina.

The College of Policing’s claims appear in guidance for officers investigating “honour-based abuse”, which sets out details of female genital mutilation protection orders, which are court orders officers can seek to protect potential victims.

The guidance introduced in August states that “as well as women and girls”, these orders protect “any other person who has female genitalia… and is at risk of harm from these practices and procedures”.

This includes “intersex, non-binary, trans men and women, with or without a gender recognition certificate”.

Full article at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/09/07/trans-women-at-risk-from-female-genital-mutilation/ and also at https://archive.is/jU0Xh

Imo the only trans identified people at risk of this are the trans identified teenage girls, any medical changes to their sexed bodies surely come under the heading of FGM

If there are people who know the difference between male and female, it's the horrendous individuals who carry out this heinous crime.

FFS… is there no groups suffering that they won’t try and appropriate?

Blimey. The College of Policing seem to be hell bent on distracting from any focus on the specific damage done to women and girls. Maybe they need to be cleaned up.

’Whatd’ya mean girls and women shouldn’t be mutilated’. ‘Who cares about them?’ ‘It is the lads who are important in female genital mutilation.’

They're half-wits, aren't they?

The guidance introduced in August states that “as well as women and girls”, these orders protect “any other person who has female genitalia… and is at risk of harm from these practices and procedures”.
This includes “intersex, non-binary, trans men and women, with or without a gender recognition certificate”.

This sounds like the classic confusion over what being trans is, and what a "man (or boy) with female genitalia" actually means. People know TW are men, basically, so they get confused and think a TW is a male person with female genitalia that they have somehow gained, or "grown" a la David Lammy. When the actual "man with a vagina" according to gender ideology is a female who is claiming to be a man - a TM.

I think someone (or possibly a whole committee of terrified stonewall-brainwashed pen-pushers) has then taken the decision to just shove everyone in there so they can't be accused of not being "inclusive". Because obviously always being inclusive, of everyone, in everything, is what matters. Not focusing on actual specific harms and what to do about them - and especially not sex-specific harms, which might mean having to admit being female is a thing.

Trans women don’t have female genitalia.

These people are trolling us. If I wasn’t convinced of that long ago, this would have done it.

Eye watering levels of stupidity.

Well good luck finding a TIM with a clitoris.

It's yet more evidence that there are some very dangerous people in the College of Policing. They're senior enough to produce / sign off on this rubbish and dangerous enough to repeatedly undermine safeguarding girls and women in plain sight and under the cover of "trans inclusion".

Frankly, now that both the Cass Report AND the Guyatt Review, along with others, found that there is no significant evidence that medical interventions for children experiencing gender dysphoria have any benefit, wouldn't a phalloplasty actually be considered honor-based abuse? If a parent and doctor move forward with this kind of practice - knowing the immensely high risk of serious complications, plus knowing now that it likely won't have the intended outcome - what else could compel them to move forward except their strong cultural and quasi-religious beliefs? I ask this in all seriousness.

I cannot fathom the stupidity that came up with this. I'm starting to believe it's just trolling. F*ing weirdos.

Duh... doesn't everyone know that a GRC changes your sex for all purposes? Including for the purposes of FGM?

An astronomical level of stupidity.

Brings back memories of the Greens and Challenor. The College of Policing is determined to make its ideological capture fully explicit, no matter what the cost to their own reputation nor public confidence in policing.

At the same Spring 18 conference Aimee #Challenor (with Molly Arthurs, NB, and Teresa Ravenshaw, trans) put forward motions to remove the word 'female' from Green Party constitution, turning mechanisms created to tackle sexism into trans promoting mechanisms

mobile.twitter.com/Justloo79304166/status/1036605561104728064

And at same Spring 18 conference the words 'women and girls' were removed from text about female genital mutilation and changed to 'a person maybe subject to FGM', to hide the fact that this is crime that happens to women and girls because of our SEX.
mobile.twitter.com/Justloo79304166/status/1036607053308067841

From: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3355084-Aimee-Challenor-Quits?reply=80741010&utm_campaign=reply&utm_medium=share

I'm sure there was a thread about an amazing woman who was working to help end FGM and help the victims. She was getting a lot of abuse from tras because she wasn't inclusive of tw. Why would she be, unlike the CoP she knows what a woman is.

My memory of the thread isn't very good I'm afraid.

I know Harry Miller, of Fair Cop, lays much of the fuckwittedness of the Police around gender at the door of the CoP. He might be onto something.

Part of me thinks no one can be that stupid

sad times

1. They are misusing our language again: “women” and “girls” refer only to sex so trans men and non-binary people (referring to “gender identity”) are already included if they are women or girls. Stop corrupting our language!!

2. Trans women are men who do not have female genitalia (even with surgery they are not the same thing) and they are not at risk of FGM. This is an insult and absurdity.

This sums up the entire thing.

They clearly have absoluetely no fucking idea what they are talking about.

Its insulting to absoluetely everyone. Its transphobic, sexist and racially / religiously insensitive.

They got their rainbow training but there's not a lot between the ears of the UK police force from what has been demostrated over the last week.

In what way are the police not incels?

Lets hope this group is standing firm against this nonsense:
https://fgmnetwork.org.uk/about-us/

If they have had "bottom" surgery then they have already had genital mutilation, which they consented to. I fervently hope that in all cases it was willing and fully informed consent and that any further surgeries to address complications are successful. I would think it very unlikely that any of them are at risk of fgm for the same reasons that women and girls are at risk. But I do support raising awareness of risks of surgery as long as it is not conflated with something completely different that deserves full attention.

No, I think it's far more sinister than that

Exactly. A trans woman who has had surgery is in possession of a surgically created opening, that has no function, not "female genitalia". Its insulting to compare the two.

FGM is most likely to occur between the age of 0-15 and within highly traditional African communities. Is the College so ignorant that it believes that those at risk will be affirmed in their trans identity at all, let alone to the extent that everyone would be confused as to whether or not to mitigate them? ? Do they think the parents might not be able to tell which sex their child is?

Their ignorance about the communities involved is staggering.