He grabbed her by the face
Female spaces need better protection after trans woman sex assault on girl, say campaigners
The subhead:
Campaigners have called for greater protection of female-only spaces after a trans woman sexually assaulted a 10-year-old girl in a supermarket toilet.
How do they know the perp is a trans woman? How do they know the perp is not just a man who claims to be a trans woman so that he can use the women’s toilets for the purpose of assaulting girls? How does anybody know that? How can can anybody ever know that? Given the adamant ideology that a trans woman is anyone who claims to be a trans woman (and that said trans woman is also a woman), how can anyone ever know that?
Why is the Scotsman (ironic name) being so polite to a guy who assaulted a child in a toilet? Why is it taking his self-identification so seriously? Why is it pretending he’s a woman who sexually assaulted a child as opposed to a man claiming to be a trans woman?
Katie Dolatowski, 18, admitted sexual assault after grabbing the girl by her face and forcing her into a cubicle in Morrisons in Kirkcaldy before ordering her to remove her trousers.
A very womany thing to do.
She also told the girl, who managed to escape after punching Dolatowski in the face, that there was a man outside who would kill her mother.
See…women kind of resent being told to accept this guy as a woman even though he grabs girls by the face and pushes them into toilet stalls and tells them their mother will be killed. We think it’s adding insult to injury.
Dolatowski also tried to film a 12-year-old in the toilet of Asda Halbeath, Dunfermline, last February.
But please, continue to call Dolatowski a “trans woman.” His feelings must be respected.
I think one benefit of calling him a transwoman is to allow people to see what this ideology can lead to. Other than that, yeah, I agree. This is no woman, it is a man. And a man that has been allowed access to spaces where 10-year-old girls go to pull down their pants so they can pee.
They didn’t use the word “allegedly” or any other sort of softening the blow in that respect… That’s certainly unusual.
Maybe because he admitted it? That probably changes the rules.
I’m told this never happens.
Consider an alternative, which is quickly becoming the norm: writing the news piece with complete acceptance that he is a woman. It could so easily have dropped the trans from trans woman; I’m relieved that the writer and editors found their spines to resist the dominant narrative even to that small degree.
What a brave little girl.
@ikn:
Yeah, I know what you mean but the paper could also have said something like “man who claimed to be trans” which would have the benefits of highlighting one of the problems of self-ID and of not affording any respect to this man or men like him.
Holms, that stood out to me as well. It’s pretty clear that sex crimes against children committed by women are rare, and even rarer when of this type. I think it’s important that crimes stats don’t get blurred by misclassification as such stats are used to set policy.
The issue with “Man who claimed to be trans” or somesuch is that it does play into the No True Scotsman fallacy–with many TRAs, the moment a trans-identifying individual is shown to be a danger, the declaration is made that they were never ‘really’ trans at all–and thus, that this is just an example of how ‘cis’ people appropriate trans identity to commit crimes.
The fact that the modern TRA position makes it impossible to tell who is ‘really’ trans in the first place (since any form of medical criteria is rejected outright) is simply ignored.
Freemage:
True, but it depends what battle you’re fighting. No article is going to convince the TAs and most of the people reading The Scotsman won’t be familiar with this issue. That approach might cause a few people to join the dots without the paper making a story about a serious assault on a girl into a political battle it probably has no intention of joining. They’d be subject to allegations that they equate trans women with dangerous paedophiles and the message could get lost entirely. Sometimes keeping the message simple is the best way even if it’s flawed because of it.
I just read yesterday (can go look it up, if anyone’s really interested) that the percentage of women committing crimes (particularly rape) is increasing in national crime statistics in the UK–pretty clear what these numbers are reflecting.
guest, I’m interested. I’ve been wondering if/when this would start showing up in statistics.
Went back to the post I read–no link included, but it had screenshots of FBI ‘Crime in the United States’ Table 42 from 2012 and 2018.
‘I previously posted an FBI crime stat for 2018, that said men perpetrate 96% of rapes. I remembered the stat being at 99%, so I dug through my bookmarks and found the original 99% stat that I had been referencing. That stat is from 2012. I can’t find it on the site, but the bookmark still works.
What do you think changed between 2012 and 2018? The crime rate did not go down- but more attacks have been attributed to women. I think we ALL know what that means. Male rapists who are identifying as women are skewing the crime stats, just as we thought would happen. In a footnote, they state that the Uniform Crime Reporting definitions have been revised, but they do not say how they were revised. The term “forcible rape” has been changed to “rape”. This could mean that statutory rape is now included in the stats, which might explain why more women are included in that number, but without clarification, there is no way to know this, and we also have no way of knowing whether or not statutory rape was included in the 2012 stat.’
Comments:
‘It is my understanding that as they traditionally do in abuse and murder cases they are now charging women who fail to stop the perp from committing the crime as equally guilty of the crime. In this state that usually means the abuser, rapist, murderer, does less time for the crime than the woman does for not stopping him.’
‘there were also changes to the definition of rape (rightfully), so, it’s not just a simple matter of comparing 2012 to 2018.’