Sarah Phillimore explains why women don’t get the anxious tender obsequious concern and protection that is lavished on our trans siblings:

The police have long lived in the shadow of the murder of Stephen Lawrence and the righteous anger directed at their failure to act promptly or at all to find his killers. The Macpherson report of 1999 was clear that as the police were institutionally racist, they could not be trusted to make proper assessments of any report of racial hatred and must therefore simply accept all complaints and investigate them thoroughly.

The ‘investigate’ bit often got neglected and soon a two tier system gained root – criminal offences and the ‘non crime hate incidents’ where any complaint, no matter how ridiculous made by a member of a ‘monitored strand’ would be accepted at face value and recorded on a ‘crime report’, using the words ‘victim’ and ‘perpetrator’ There was no clarity about when or where that recorded information would be disclosed.

…

There are five monitored strands and they mirror some of the protected characteristics of the Equality Act – race, religion, disability and sexual orientation. ‘Transgender identity’ which is not in the Equality Act was added in 2012 – see discussions below.

Notice anything missing? Yes of course.

If you commit a crime against a ‘monitored strand’ resulting out of your hatred for them, you are looking at a higher sentence; these groups are deemed worthy of enhanced protection.

The interplay between protected characteristics and monitored strands has itself caused immense confusion with some believing that the police are following the Equality Act protected characteristics. They are not. A notable omission is ‘sex’. There are longstanding concerns that requiring police to record misogynistic hate crimes would overwhelm them.

Ohhhhhhhh I see – women are left out because there are too many crimes against us and thus it would be too much trouble to do anything about those crimes. Ok that’s fine then.

This explains in part why women’s complaints of violent threats from trans identifying men did not get the traction when it was vice versa. Women are not seen as a group requiring enhanced protection but the trans identifying man is.

Is that fucked up enough yet?