Sussex Police are really knocking themselves out today.
Of course the “hateful” comments were not about the gender identity of Sussex Police – but leaving that clumsy mistake aside, the important thing to note is that the sex of a sexual criminal is of course highly relevant, and it’s just utterly stupid as well as evil for Sussex Police to claim it isn’t. Just imagine the scenario: man rapes a woman while she struggles and yells, he tells her he’s not a man, she says oh well that’s fine then, carry on.
Comments
8 responses to “Irrelevant to the crime”
How about, in your scenario, the women that is being raped cries out that, actually, he is a man. Would the rapist jump up, horrified, and declare that he is not gay and will withdraw immediately?
Of course not.
I should also add that the rapist in question lives just a couple of minutes drive from my house. I imagine that he will be relocated far away after his release because people around here are not traditionally very tolerant of paedophiles, whether they have transitioned or not.
How about a rule that men who commit sex crimes are not allowed to change names and/or genders? If an ordinary person files a petition for legal name change, it is proper for the court to deny the petition if the change is sought to obscure the person’s criminal history.
In the meantime I guess the TRAs will be no true trans-personing.
I mean, they’re not wrong: the perp’s gender identity is irrelevant to the crime.
Is it? Is it known for a fact that there is no relationship between gender identity claims and sex crimes? Undoubtedly a very complex issue, with some (probably even most) trans people unlikely to hurt a fly, but then others who are demonstrated sex offenders. There’s obviously some wheat/chaff separation to be done. Those who are sex offenders who opportunistically claim to be women to get easier jail time (women’s prison), access to vulnerable women (women’s prison), and obscure their name. Then there are those who genuinely believe (maybe/probably) themselves to be trans, but have a bunch of pyscho/social problems that manifest as sex abuse. Both groups can be filtered out of being a problem in women’s prison with a policy change. The latter group should be of interest to both the medical and criminology professions to figure out what drives the relationship, chicken or egg, and what might be done about it to prevent crime, or at least tidy up better afterwards. I think we all agree on the point that you can’t study what you (1) are not allowed to even hint at, and (2) can’t collect quality raw data on.
Ah, here’s my pedantic distinction: gender identity per se is irrelevant, but claims regarding it and actions based on it are another matter.
In my fields of expertise I can pedant with the best of them. We all know that strictly correct is the best kind of correct! Pedantry at its best keeps a conversation focussed and on track with crystal clear understanding. At its worst it creates confusion by giving the appearance of divisions that are functionally meaningless in context.