"Transgender woman jailed for deception sex assault"

[LooseCanyon]

Sad times

Thornaby transgender woman jailed for deception sex assault - BBC News

Whether he did it knowingly is irrelevant. The complainant was sexually attracted to someone he now claims was a man. So for him to claim he is not sexually attracted to men is, in at least that case, obvious nonsense. As for the law, it wouldn't be the first time the law has covered itself in idiocy.

It's not illegal to procure sex by lying about your name, socioeconomic status, race, marital status, or sexual orientation. I see no credible reason why lying about biology should be treated any differently.

What an ugly bloke

And, in the event that you persuaded someone to engage in a sex act with you when they thought that you were not the sex that you you actually are, do you really believe that any of this would be a good defence in law?

That would depend on the judge, the quality of the defendant's legal representation, and the political context. Which is precisely the point. This is all about political ideology, not about fact.

This is the law as it stands. You can’t pretend you’re the opposite sex to trick someone into sex as this young man did. Whether you think the law is wrong, it’s still the law. Sex by deception. And yes it does apply to some other forms of deception as well.

This is not the first case of this nature, but I think it may be the first man as opposed to a woman pretending she was male.

Actually, it depend on the facts of the case. The whataboutery that you flung around earlier would prove a pretty poor defence.

One case here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-66730689

"Mr Rogers was convicted of assault by penetration, two offences of sexual assault and two offences of causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent."

The "sexual activity without consent" is, I think, what took place before the deception became apparent.

Ah, thank you, wasn’t aware of that one.

This is all about political ideology, not about fact

The facts are that a man lied to another man about his sex to obtain consent for sexual activity. He lied because he knew the victim wouldn't consent if he knew the truth. That is sexual assault.

You could have shittiest legal team, or the very best in the world defending you, but sexual assault is still unlawful.

He also claimed that it was very obvious that he was a biological male, and that there could be no doubt when a victim gave 'consent'.

Both of these claims obviously cannot be true.

The state of these comments. Even the sensible ones are downvoted by the dozens.

https://www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/1o5ikgp/ciara_watkin_has_been_convicted_and_imprisoned/

The thing that really caught my attention about this story is this:

The court heard Watkin, of Walton Street, Stockton, has been diagnosed with gender dysphoria and is attracted to heterosexual men.

Think about that sexual orientation for a moment and the entitlement inherent in it.

He prefers to have sex with men who would not consent to have sex with him.

Before transwomen existed that was a thing for some gay men, and it was very dangerous (not just for them) because the straight men who had been tricked into sex often reacted with violence, and sometimes carried that violent mindset with them in their interaction with other gay men who would not themselves deceive a potential partner.

It's one of the drivers of violent homophobia.

And transwomen are men, the same is true for them as for any other man.

Education around informed consent has gone to hell.

Someone's taking a leaf out of Butters' book.

This is also a group of people who have been systematically messaged about them being more important than others and that there is a caste system that places them at a status above the servant class of other humans; that anyone saying no to them or not enabling them is an enemy (including their parents); that anyone else's boundaries or consent is them being stupid and evil while their own is vitally important and should be accorded special and highly sensitive importance and consideration; that them feeling rejected or annoyed is 'violence' towards them and they entitled to respond as such; and that they are owed service, enablement and that this includes access to and the use of other people's bodies.

Whether to pee next to them, watch them undress, or to have sex with them.

We've seen the messaging to lesbians that they should 'learn to cope' with straight sex as if they are unpaid sex workers, who have no right to expect anything such as enjoyment or mutuality from a sexual encounter with a man who identifies as a woman; they are merely required to not say no or resist. And there is crossover into the incel beliefs of a right to sex. A right to use others' bodies to meet needs with the other person's consent and even their legal rights being appalling violations of that right.

It's going to be about undoing these completely unrealistic and warped expectations and exemption from the social contract, the entitlement, and the complete belief in a right to escape from any responsibility for choices and behaviours that bind everyone else.

I think it’s also problematic that people don’t look like their photos anymore as they are so altered. So he didn’t look like his image, I’m sure that’s normal for a lot of people now. I see so many images of teenagers who have gone missing temporarily locally and they are so filtered there is no way for people to recognise them.

I've seen this before as justification. If a man is attracted to another man in the mistaken belief that he's a woman, the attraction still stands.

It's very creepy and completely disregards consent.

I can see why he (the TIM) may have assumed the other guy knew he was trans. It's extremely obvious.

Anyway the court had all the evidence and he's guilty so that's that for this case.

@Kuretake It’s obvious from that photo but his defence was to say he was obviously a man so he likely let his stubble come out, didn’t use make up and like others said a few years can make a difference in males looking more masculine. The judge also addressed this issue saying that the worse photos had been chosen and the he could have been perceived as a woman.

You don’t think there’s a difference in finding out you slept with a bank clerk vs a rich banker and a male vs female? The sex of the person matters when it comes to a person’s sexuality surely? The man deliberately fooled him. It doesn’t say anything about the victim’s sexuality.