when gender blinds us to sex

Smileless2012 I'm not sure what the law would make of your artificially constructed penis, because it's not a real penis. Interesting point, but hardly likely to happen in any great numbers because we know the majority of transgender people do not have genital surgery at all.

Summerlove in England and Wales the law (I'm not sure about Scottish law, I'd assume it's the same) is rape is the penetration of a vagina, anus or mouth by a penis without the consent of the other party. That means in our courts rape can only be performed by a man. The link you gave is American, so not relevant to the UK, especially when it goes into prison abuses. UK prisons, while far from perfect, are not like some of the privately run institutions in the USA. I do not equate a man feeling forced into sex in a relationship with the forceable rape of a woman. There were no actual figures, just ambiguous percentages and words like 'most' I just cannot believe the statement they make For example, the CDC’s nationally representative data revealed that over one year, men and women were equally likely to experience nonconsensual sex, and most male victims reported female perpetrators. Really?

What about my post Mollygo? What about a woman who undergoes gender reassignment surgery and has a penile transplant, being able to maintain an erection and have penetrative sex so is therefore physically capable of committing rape?

As the law states that rape requires the use of a penis then it is possible for woman by birth, to commit rape is she's had gender reassignment surgery. I'm saying this based on the fact that regardless of what hormonal treatments and surgical procedures someone goes through, they are always the sex they were born with.

So sorry Summerlove, you had deviated from the point that in law, only men can rape, because rape is done with a penis. I’m used to reading posts where a deviation is used to minimise the importance of the original post and I thought your post was one of those.
If you want to make a point about the appalling sexual attacks being made by females, why not start a thread about that? It’s certainly important but has nothing to do with rapes by 436 TW when the culprits can use their claimed gender to endanger females further.

Excellent post Doodledog. The definition of terms and the acceptance of those terms is essential.

The definition of rape in law in this country is very explicit, it requires the use of a penis so generally speaking, a woman as the law stands cannot rape a man or another woman as she doesn't possess a penis.

A woman can sexually assault a man, woman and as awful as it is, a child but she cannot commit rape. A man who presents or identifies as a woman and who has also retained their male genitals can rape all of the aforementioned.

However, a woman who undergoes gender re assignment surgery can have a penile implant to enable 'him' to have and maintain an erection and have penetrative sex so, Summerlove's challenge to the idea that only men can rape is valid IMO.

Are statistically more likely

Still, it could be useful to know whether transpeople get statistically more likely to get long sentences than others. That way, if they are being discriminated against, measures can be taken to prevent it.

We will never know unless these figures are gathered in a meaningful way.

trisher if figures for trans prisoners exclude those on very short sentences doesn't it follow that figures for non trans prisoners also exclude those on very short sentences?
Because that is the MoJ's normal way of recording statistics.
So the stats are comparing like with like.

Rape is defined as being done with a penis.
Only men/males can do that.

Mollygo

So summerlove are you saying that because women can rape, it excuses those transwomen who carried out rape as men? Your link was interesting, but it’s a definite side track from the importance of those male rapists claiming to be females being registered as male in terms of crime statistics.

No I’m not. Nor did I.

All I did was challenge “only men can rape”.

Mollygo the OP says that "in law only men can commit rape".

Disagreeing with that doesn't detract from the issue or excuse criminals.

So summerlove are you saying that because women can rape, it excuses those transwomen who carried out rape as men? Your link was interesting, but it’s a definite side track from the importance of those male rapists claiming to be females being registered as male in terms of crime statistics.

Doodledog... common sense post, totally agree with you.

The statistics are based on transwomen serving longer sentences being compared to other males also serving longer sentences and to females likewise.
So I don't see any problem with those statistics.
Could you explain where this came from *FarNorth please. None of the statistics I have seen have used any lengths of sentencing. The usual rate of sex offenders isn't even released as sex or gender. The figure being a percentage of the prison population. So at present it is 18% assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/805271/offender-management-statistics-quarterly-q4-2018.pdf

Rosie51

Summerlove As you need a penis to rape, biological women can't rape. I'm assuming you mean biological women have used implements to sexually assault someone. Where are your links to evidence of this, and how many women are guilty of this crime? I would think the number would be vanishingly small.

That’s…not true. Please look into that more. I’ll leave this article with many links to studies for you to peruse.

www.scientificamerican.com/article/sexual-victimization-by-women-is-more-common-than-previously-known/

I do think if we are to approach this in any reasonable manner the first thing has to be accurate and unbiased recording and reporting.

How can recording be accurate and unbiased without a definition of what being a woman means? When collecting data for any sort of research all parties have to understand what is meant by all of the terms being used, and agree to use them in the same way.

We have seen what happens on here when people are working to entirely subjective definitions based on things like ‘presentation’ or shared values. Clearly neither of these things would stand up in court (fortunately), so fixed legal definitions need to be found, to cover what is meant by ‘male’, ‘female’, people of either sex who have transitioned to the other gender and people of either sex who identify as the other gender. That way, decisions about things like prison accommodation, access to safe spaces and so on could be made in ways that take account of the differences between those groups, and research into medical and social science disciplines would be far more accurate and unbiased than at present.

On a day to day basis doing so should make little or no difference to the lives of transpeople - I’m not suggesting that there should be any need to declare anything, and the right to privacy should be protected. But on forms, in court (when relevant), or for other official purposes, would it not make sense to make the distinctions clear?

I do think if we are to approach this in any reasonable manner the first thing has to be accurate and unbiased recording and reporting
That is what we need trisher.

the complete number of transpeople serving prison sentences isn't known, because the numbers serving shorter sentences isn't recorded.
The statistics are based on transwomen serving longer sentences being compared to other males also serving longer sentences and to females likewise.
So I don't see any problem with those statistics.

Yes Beverley I realised after I had written it that this ruling would have no impact on the treatment of female witnesses on this issue. But then again perhaps it's an indication of the system moving in the right direction.

That's because there's little point having a case conference if the inmate won't be in prison long enough to benefit from it. but, presumably, long enough to share a cell with another vulnerable inmate? So again, we're back to the needs/benefit of the trans person rather than who they're sharing space with.

many years ago. I think in the 1970s there was a case where a woman kidnapped and raped a man.

An assault like that, and similarly horrific crimes, should be classed at the same level as rape but they are not rape.

A GRC is an acceptable form of proof of sex

It really isn't.
It's a proof that the person is claiming to be the sex which they are not.

If a cheek swab is all that is needed, to establish a person's sex, that should definitely be done.
It's no more invasive than other checks the police do.

Chewbacca

This is for March - May 2018 trisher, I'll have a dig about to see if I can find more up to date stats....

According to the data collection exercise conducted in March - May 2018:
• 44 of the 124 public and private prisons (35%) in England and Wales said that they had 1 or more transgender prisoners.
• There were 139 prisoners currently living in, or presenting in, a gender different to their sex assigned at birth and who had sat a Local Transgender Case Board.
• Of these, 111 reported their legal gender5 as male, 23 reported their legal gender as female and 5 did not state their gender. When asked about the gender the prisoner identified as, 114 identified as female, 19 as male and 6 did not provide a response

The problem is that the figures are only collected after there has been a case conference and short term prisoners don't have case conferences.
From the article I linked to
It says the figures "are not yet a reliable reflection of the numbers and location of trans prisoners in the prison estate".
The MoJ can't count inmates who have not told prison staff they are transgender.^
Nor does it count prisoners who have already been given a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC).
About 250-350 GRCs are issued each year across the UK - 4,910 since 2005.
The survey only counts prisoners who have already had a case conference - a meeting of senior managers and other officials - to decide how to manage the trans person within the prison estate.
These are likely to be prisoners serving longer sentences.
The Ministry of Justice told us "prisoners on longer sentences are more likely to be managed as a transgender prisoner than those on shorter sentences".
That's because there's little point having a case conference if the inmate won't be in prison long enough to benefit from it.

BeverleyJB

Galaxy

Thank God forcing women who have been raped or assaulted to use she in court about their attacker is further abuse of that woman.

Unfortunately Galaxy the requirement for a natal female victim of rape by a natal male to address that individual in court by his chosen pronouns is enshrined in the Equal Treatment Bench Book which is highly unlikely to be affected by Priti Patel's instructions.
It won't stop men choosing to self-ID (sometimes at the pont of arrest) as women but it will stop their crimes being recorded as committed by females and, I sincerely hope, stop them being housed in women's prisons.

Women prisoners are also being forced to address the adult males housed with them using their “chosen” pronouns or face punishment for not doing so.
insidetime.org/women-face-punishment-for-using-wrong-pronouns/

That's disgusting and once again making women bottom of the heap when it comes to rights. If it were me I think I'd be tempted to ask the judge if having taken the oath was I now supposed to, in my opinion, lie? What a vile thing to do to any rape victim.

As regards extra sentencing of prisoners for misgendering,
I'd hope the judiciary are as conversant with neurodiverse individuals as they are with transgender individuals. Neurodiversity can mean an individual could misgender because of what their eyes tell them and not in an intentional insult.

Gender identity is not sex.
Biological sex cannot be changed.
Police and prisons should be recording biological sex.
If there is doubt, biological sex can be determined by a medical examination.
If a person has reasonable concerns about their safety, as gay men may do for example, that should be taken into account but is not a reason for male prisoners to be housed with female prisoners.

Galaxy

Thank God forcing women who have been raped or assaulted to use she in court about their attacker is further abuse of that woman.

Unfortunately Galaxy the requirement for a natal female victim of rape by a natal male to address that individual in court by his chosen pronouns is enshrined in the Equal Treatment Bench Book which is highly unlikely to be affected by Priti Patel's instructions.
It won't stop men choosing to self-ID (sometimes at the pont of arrest) as women but it will stop their crimes being recorded as committed by females and, I sincerely hope, stop them being housed in women's prisons.

Women prisoners are also being forced to address the adult males housed with them using their “chosen” pronouns or face punishment for not doing so.
insidetime.org/women-face-punishment-for-using-wrong-pronouns/