Sometimes I am ashamed

I dont know if it's an axe to grind so to speak, she is making claims of controlling behaviour, violence and attempted rape, the police were involved in one of the incidents, that's easily verified one way or the other.
I thought statistics were now recorded by sex but am doubting myself now.

Common sense in Scotland is being replaced by common purpose. The politicians have an agenda and are forcing the hand of the electorate. Who will say nay? Thankfully Joanna Cherry for one. I like her, she’s full of common sense. And Jackie Baillie (Labour). Someone needs to hold Sturgeon’s feet - and those of the Greens - to the fire. They are taking the Scottish electorate for fools.

Joanna Cherry, one of Ms Sturgeon’s MPs, said she was “very concerned about the safety of the women prisoners with whom a convicted rapist has been placed”.

Ms Cherry added: “Under Scots law, the crime of rape can only be committed by somebody with a penis, and that’s a man. I think we should call out what’s happened here.”

Hear, hear.

Galaxy

I dont know if it's an axe to grind so to speak, she is making claims of controlling behaviour, violence and attempted rape, the police were involved in one of the incidents, that's easily verified one way or the other.
I thought statistics were now recorded by sex but am doubting myself now.

I admit I only scanned the news briefly on what the ex wife had to say - but yes, if the Law was involved in any of the incidents, then it's easily verifiable.

I'm just attempting to be rational about the whole affair, but the Defence's portrayal of Bryson and the ex-wife's picture are quite contradictory.

... and I'm not sure about the recording of the statistics either.

I would assume that a crime committed by a man regardless of the time that elapses between the event and the conviction is recorded by sex - but maybe the statistics are recorded per conviction? I'm confused.

They were recorded by gender identity at one stage but I thought the Tories announced that it would revert back to sex. I have no idea if that happened, the government say a lot of things, doesnt mean it actually happens.

Galaxy

They were recorded by gender identity at one stage but I thought the Tories announced that it would revert back to sex. I have no idea if that happened, the government say a lot of things, doesnt mean it actually happens.

Earlier this year, Professor Alice Sullivan of University College London submitted a petition to the Scottish government demanding police more accurately record the sex of rapists. According to her petition, "Rape is classified as a male crime in UK law, and females can only be charged with rape as an accomplice," yet her data shows that between 2012 and 2018, a total of 436 males prosecuted for rape were recorded as women.

... from "4W" - and I've no idea who "4W" are... 'for women'?

436 males prosecuted for rape recorded as women does skew the statistics though. 436 women did not commit rape.

It will be Fair play for Women, they have done a lot of work on this issue.

Dickens

I admit I'm not up to speed on transgender issues, but I have been pondering on and off during the evening...

If a man who has raped a woman (or more than one in this case) later identifies as a woman - what is he actually identifying with? What does he associate with ^womanhood that makes him want to identify with it?

This is not a facetious question - I genuinely don't understand. Because it doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I understand individuals, men and women, not wanting to conform to stereotypes of either sex (I never have wanted to be a stereotypical woman either).

He's guilty of rape of women - and now wants to identify as one?

Because he now wants to portray himself as a victim.

Is he convinced, delusional or manipulative?

A defence barrister will try everything within legal boundaries to try to get their accused client found innocent, to the extent of causing untold distress to the real victims in the case, whatever the barrister may privately feel.

Smileless2012

It's wrong in any circumstances for a male accused of rape to be referred to as she and/or to insist that they're addressed by their first name if it's a name only associated with women.

The offences were committed when Bryson was a man... but is now convicted - as a woman?

That is simply wrong. I don't mean it's not happened but the whole concept of it is wrong.

Rape by penetration with a penis cannot be carried out by a woman.
Should this case be recorded as Adam Graham aka Isla Bryson or Isla Bryson formerly known as Adam Graham?

4W is not Fair Play for Women.
4w.pub/about/
It was started by a writer called M K Fain.
marykatefain.com/

From February 2022 :
Scotland's police will review a policy which means male rapists are officially recorded as being women if they "identify as female", after an outcry by women's organisations.

www.lbc.co.uk/news/police-scotland-launch-review-of-policy-which-lets-male-rapists-identify-as-wome/

I wonder what progress has been made with that review.
I'm not optimistic about it.

Oh sorry farnorth, is Alice Sullivan from Womans place? I am sure I know her from one of those organisations.

Callistemon21

A defence barrister will try everything within legal boundaries to try to get their accused client found innocent, to the extent of causing untold distress to the real victims in the case, whatever the barrister may privately feel.

Yes, I understand that. Who'd want to be a barrister!

Unfortunately, his words will register with the anti TG community and TBH not everyone understands that a defence barrister is not necessarily recording his own private feelings about his client. I do think he's over-egged it a bit though.

None of this is going to help transgender women, as a whole. There's plenty of discrimination against them - this just adds fuel to the fire.

Of course, TG activists would tell us that even discussing it is transphobic. If a man identifies as a woman, he's a woman as far as he / she is concerned - no discussion.

Womanhood is being defined for women - by men. Some activists are so far down the rabbit hole that they can declare they are "more of a woman" - than a natal woman. India Willoughby on JKR.

I'm not a nostalgic and don't hanker for times past at all - but I do now wish we could go back a bit and do a re-set. If people are now afraid to discuss the issues involved in what is a serious, and for some, life-changing, matter... then we are rather doomed.

Yes, I understand that. Who'd want to be a barrister!

I've sometimes wondered how, in all conscience, can you defend that person?
How do you sleep at night?

If people are now afraid to discuss the issues involved in what is a serious, and for some, life-changing, matter... then we are rather doomed

Very true.
I think we are reaching that point.

I think it's the other way round, thanks to a lot of work by some brave women, I think the days of no debate are long gone, we are now having MPs from the labour party speaking out, with very few exceptions that wasnt the case even a few months ago.

Let's hope so!

Being pedantic here, but we don't have barristers in Scotland, we have advocates.

Blondiescot

Being pedantic here, but we don't have barristers in Scotland, we have advocates.

And do these advocates advocate males being placed in female prisons?
I don’t mind a bit of pedantry so long as it doesn’t support misogyny. Who

Mollygo why do you keep calling volver "VD"?

Mollygo

Blondiescot

Being pedantic here, but we don't have barristers in Scotland, we have advocates.

And do these advocates advocate males being placed in female prisons?
I don’t mind a bit of pedantry so long as it doesn’t support misogyny. Who

It matters not what their job title is.
They presumably do the same job.

VioletSky

Mollygo why do you keep calling volver "VD"?

Ask VD. She knows.

Mollygo

VioletSky

Mollygo why do you keep calling volver "VD"?

Ask VD. She knows.

By any chance, does this refer to a previous username name? If so that is unfair.
There are those of us, who know posters by their previous user name, however we choose not to out them.

Callistemon21

^Yes, I understand that. Who'd want to be a barrister!^

I've sometimes wondered how, in all conscience, can you defend that person?
How do you sleep at night?

The ‘cab rank principle’ obliges a barrister to take a case on if they are available and it’s within the area of law they specialise in. If the client says they are not guilty the barrister is duty bound to do their best to defend the client, and to put forward such mitigating factors as they can but they must not mislead the court by, if you like, ‘making stuff up’. I’m glad I decided not to be a barrister. I would find it very difficult if I was obliged to defend someone accused of, for instance, cruelty to animals. Solicitors are free to take a case on or decline it unless they are on the police station duty solicitor rota. I have never involved myself in criminal law for good reason.

I asked you Mollygo, you are the one using an abbreviation that has possibly insulting interpretations