Woman found guilty of raping two women. Remanded in custody for sentence end February

FannyCornforth

I hope that I don’t offend any of you; but I honestly don’t understand why you are debating this over and over, and repeating everything ad nauseam.
It’s not going to make any difference to anything

No, I agree, we get nowhere and it's incredibly sad

I hope that I don’t offend any of you; but I honestly don’t understand why you are debating this over and over, and repeating everything ad nauseam.
It’s not going to make any difference to anything

Mollygo

I don’t find anything to do with rapists funny,
but you go for it VS if you do.

Here it is Iam64

Mollygo also clearly said "image" and has said so several times in this thread.

Impact I agree with because yes, it may impact a trans woman who would never hurt another woman being allowed in a woman's prison and put her at huge risk in a male prison.

But image of all trans women?

Most of whom will never commit a crime?

What are your thoughts on that?

Do you believe I would laugh at the thread topic? And if not, do you agree that's a pretty vile thing to say to a fellow woman and survivor?

I’m sorry Violet, I don’t know what Mollygo said to offend you. I’ve looked back and see some discussion on whether the actions of misogynistic trans activists /rapists who later self id as female impact ALL trans women.

Iam64

Perhaps you could be principled enough to acknowledge Mollygo should not have said that to me.

Because I think it should be very apparent I would not and have not laughed at the topic itself.

If you can't differentiate even after forcing me to explain myself, I don't know what else I can say so I'm hoping I'm wrong

doodledog

There is a 4th thing I haven't said

You are in the lead so far with 2

If you don't want to do better of course you don't have to

But if you want to tell me what I think at least back it up with evidence I've actually said something.

Besides, I've explained to you before, if you listened:

1. I am not particularly interested in giving rights to those accused of rape

2. Rapists shouldn't be in woman's prisons, and possibly not mens either where they might also reoffend.

3. I do not think victims should be asked to use pronouns for their attackers I think we focus on theor trauma and mental health as a priority

4. None of that has anything to do with trans people in general

5. Mollygo seems to think that rapists who claim after the fact they are trans, damages the image of ALL trans people which is utter nonsense

If you want a discussion you need to actually read what others say

VioletSky

Iam64

VioletSky, Its clear it’s very important to you, that you oppose any comment you perceive to be anti trans people and the right to self id. That could enable good debate and discussion yet your contributions seem aimed at closing debate. Posting lol could be seen as patronising, rude and takes the debate no where.

Except

This is actually wrong though and not what I have been saying

I do not laugh at rapists or survivors. I am a survivor. I've also talked at great length about how important it is to me that victims of violent or sexual crime are not expected to worry about pronouns or anything like that of their attackers at any time. They have experienced trauma and I don't want to see any more reasons why women don't report attacks to authorities.

If the fact that sometimes I laugh instead of get upset or angry at others on threads offends you well, getting upset and angry just isn't me and I will stick up for myself but not letting negative emotions make me act like a crappy person.

So I'll stay as I am thank you and if you feel the need to call me out rather than the comments I responded too then I hope you have really thought that through

I don’t see my post as calling anyone out and I don’t understand what you hope I’ve thought through.
I agree with you in not wanting victims of sexual or violent crime to have to worry about pronouns. A rapist is male. No victim should have to refer to her/her penis etc.
It’s part of being human to get upset and angry, trying to pretend lol doesn’t alter the underlying emotion.

I acknowledge you are a survivor Violet. You aren’t the only survivor posting on these threads. We 70’s feminists discovered, when we asked the question, that almost every woman in the room had experienced abuse of different kinds, almost all the physical and sexual abuse perpetrated by men. Things haven’t changed

Aveline

It's patently obvious that cases of sex offenders identifying as female after being charged are exactly what is setting back the cause for all transgender people as are the aggressive transgender people causing so much trouble at pro women demonstrations. Just too much testosterone fuelling it.
It's a great pity for those who just quietly carry on with their new genders.

This.

We are not here to take orders from you, VS.

The thing is, what you seem to be saying is that you don't want people to have to worry about pronouns, but you don't want transpeople to be 'misgendered', that you understand people's concerns about sex offenders disguising as transpeople, yet you want transpeople to be able to access female spaces, that you agree that sex offenders' using self-id is wrong, yet anyone suggesting that this impacts on transpeople is somehow also wrong.

Then you complain that you are being misrepresented! It is getting increasingly difficult to follow your arguments, and before you claim that I am 'twisting your words', that is not the case. You don't appear to know what you think yourself, so how do you expect other people to know?

Oh no wait, 3 things, 4 people

Do better.

Smileless2012

I asked you who the 'them' are you referred too and whose being mean to them VS but you've yet to answer.

To have a good debate it's not enough to simply say comments are anti trans and anti the right to self id without something to backup that point of view. Neither do vague suggestions that other posters are being mean to unspecified others.

Except I haven't said that...

So that makes 3 things I haven't actually said on this thread or anywhere at all ever and hvlave been very clear about.

3 things by 3 people in a matter of days.

If you cannot get straight what I actually do say and think, how are you qualified to tell me I have or haven't answered something?

Usually the truth is, I did answer but people ignored it because they didn't like it.

Iam64

VioletSky, Its clear it’s very important to you, that you oppose any comment you perceive to be anti trans people and the right to self id. That could enable good debate and discussion yet your contributions seem aimed at closing debate. Posting lol could be seen as patronising, rude and takes the debate no where.

Except

This is actually wrong though and not what I have been saying

I do not laugh at rapists or survivors. I am a survivor. I've also talked at great length about how important it is to me that victims of violent or sexual crime are not expected to worry about pronouns or anything like that of their attackers at any time. They have experienced trauma and I don't want to see any more reasons why women don't report attacks to authorities.

If the fact that sometimes I laugh instead of get upset or angry at others on threads offends you well, getting upset and angry just isn't me and I will stick up for myself but not letting negative emotions make me act like a crappy person.

So I'll stay as I am thank you and if you feel the need to call me out rather than the comments I responded too then I hope you have really thought that through

Good point, Molly.

My English teacher had a thing about qualifying absolutes, and was always pointing out that something can't be 'very unique' or 'slightly unnecessary'. This is the same, isn't it? A 'natal woman', or an 'intersectional feminist' are both qualifying absolutes.

Smileless2012

and yet for some intersectional feminists it appears to be OK to foreground trans men and trans women.

That’s why there has to be a prefix to the word feminism, so it can be made to mean whatever you want it to mean. A bit like ‘woman’

and yet for some intersectional feminists it appears to be OK to foreground trans men and trans women.

Doodledog

I don't know, Smileless. The third way is what I (and others) have been advocating all along, but apparently it is 'transphobic' and out of date thinking that is stuck in the 70s, and I need to embrace intersectional feminism that doesn't foreground women.

It makes sense to me though.

It’s offensive to dismiss women in this way. It’s part if our lived experience to have misogynistic men with no respect, who think rape threats are funny. It’s a recent development to have men in frocks making rape threats

I don't know, Smileless. The third way is what I (and others) have been advocating all along, but apparently it is 'transphobic' and out of date thinking that is stuck in the 70s, and I need to embrace intersectional feminism that doesn't foreground women.

It makes sense to me though.

The third way does sound reasonable, because it is. The problems arise when some don't have the decency and humility to respect the wishes of the women they want to accept them into our number.

For me, that is the most confusing aspect of this issue. Why on earth would anyone wish to to be a member of a 'group' whose natal members they have no respect or care for?

Doodledog
There is a third way, which is to ask transpeople to recognise that this is what they are, and accept that in order to live as transpeople they need to recognise the fact that male-bodied people in women's spaces do pose a risk, and have the decency and humility to respect the wishes of the women they want to accept them into our number. It's not going to have a massive impact, surely? Places where women are unclothed or less able to escape, and situations where strength gives male bodies an advantage aren't so commonplace as to make a huge difference if men are asked to stay away. If this is in return for acceptance as transpeople in all other aspects, surely it's a good tradeoff, even apart from the expectation that people who believe that they are women would understand.

It sounds reasonable.
And since it’s only a few who cause the problems, most TIM would probably accept it and be happy to go back to living unobtrusively as they did before. But it isn’t most TIM who would have to be persuaded. How would the interpretation of transpeople in all other aspects work out?

It is utterly exhausting repeating what seems to me very simple. It is undeniable that sex offenders are muddying the waters for transpeople, but equally that this is not the fault of transpeople.

The question is, who should sort it out? Should women stop moaning and risk having sex offenders in the spaces where they are vulnerable, or should men (or call them 'male-bodied people' if you prefer) find a way of accommodating the wishes of those of their number who are innocent in all this, whilst protecting women from the guilty?

There is a third way, which is to ask transpeople to recognise that this is what they are, and accept that in order to live as transpeople they need to recognise the fact that male-bodied people in women's spaces do pose a risk, and have the decency and humility to respect the wishes of the women they want to accept them into our number. It's not going to have a massive impact, surely? Places where women are unclothed or less able to escape, and situations where strength gives male bodies an advantage aren't so commonplace as to make a huge difference if men are asked to stay away. If this is in return for acceptance as transpeople in all other aspects, surely it's a good tradeoff, even apart from the expectation that people who believe that they are women would understand.

I asked you who the 'them' are you referred too and whose being mean to them VS but you've yet to answer.

To have a good debate it's not enough to simply say comments are anti trans and anti the right to self id without something to backup that point of view. Neither do vague suggestions that other posters are being mean to unspecified others.

Thanks Aveline,

VioletSky, Its clear it’s very important to you, that you oppose any comment you perceive to be anti trans people and the right to self id. That could enable good debate and discussion yet your contributions seem aimed at closing debate. Posting lol could be seen as patronising, rude and takes the debate no where.

It's patently obvious that cases of sex offenders identifying as female after being charged are exactly what is setting back the cause for all transgender people as are the aggressive transgender people causing so much trouble at pro women demonstrations. Just too much testosterone fuelling it.
It's a great pity for those who just quietly carry on with their new genders.

VS
Are you proud of yourself for this?