Shortcut
Police have wrongly labelled hundreds of suspected rapists as women, The Telegraph can reveal – despite the Home Secretary saying they should not do so. Over the past four years, police forces have referred 260 “females” to the … (CPS) … to consider a charge of rape. A further 209 suspects have been recorded with an “unknown” sex, which is understood to include those who identify as non-binary. By law, rape can only be committed by a biological male.
So the police have ruled more than 400 men not guilty of rape, by the police’s own fiat. The police have ruled that more than 400 men are not men, which renders them not capable of and therefore not guilty of rape. Sorry wims; sucks to be you.
Dr Kate Coleman, director of KPSS, said that “the data is rendered useless”, which makes it impossible to “formulate a proper response at any level of criminal justice”.
Sorry wims. Maybe you should identify as men?
@Ophelia:
I agree with you that the police should record crime suspects according to their biological sex, however, since accuracy does matter:
It’s not true that the police classifying them as “women” would negate a rape charge. UK law does not say that only “men” can commit rape, it says that rape is unwanted penetration with a penis (penetration with anything else being “sexual assault”).
The Telegraph’s sentence: “By law, rape can only be committed by a biological male” (emphasis added) is accurate (since you have to be biologically male to have a penis), but the police re-classifying suspects with penises as “women” would not have a bearing on whether they can be convicted of rape.
[I’m open to correction here, since I don’t claim to be an expert on UK law.]
I think that the one thing that this news does illustrate is the lie about who are the “most vulnerable” when rapists like “Karen White” are easily tracked to their deadnames and exposed as the violent rapists that they are. We have numbers now on just how prevalent rape by fake women there are. I am quite sure that trans allies will attempt the “nae a true Scot” fallacy, which will expose the major problem with Gender Self-ID.
Coel, all true, but I didn’t take it as her saying they were literally incapable of being charged with rape so much as making a point that if they were indeed women, they could not be rapists under UK law (I think US law is different in that regard).
I could be wrong; our illustrious host could be meaning it literally. I could be reading it through my own filter (I do that sometimes…actually, most the time, like everyone else).
All theories in what’s sometimes called the Identity Synthesis (i e “woke”) are connected. Just as the rapes and other atrocities committed by Hamas on Oct 7th are explained as the understandable reaction to Israel’s acts of white colonialist oppression, any rapes and other atrocities committed by TW can be chalked up to an understandable reaction to TERFs refusing to admit they’re real women who belong anywhere women belong.
The Oppressed can only take so much before they break under the psychological strain; the Oppressors have brought it on themselves. “Women rapists” is what breaking the binary looks like.
@iknklast:
Apologies if I was over-literal. I do tend to err on the side of being over-literal.
Echoing Sastra’s comment:
In the outcome of the Hamburg trial of a mass rape of an intoxicated 15-yr-old (German) girl by young men on a migrant background, and the fact that 8 out of 9 of the assailants (“between 17 and 23 years old at the time of the attack”) were not jailed after being found guilty, the defence argued in mitigation that the rape was a “means of releasing frustration and anger” stemming from their “migration experiences and socio-cultural homelessness”.
There are suggestion on Twitter that the “woke” must regard the “white” girl as somehow deserving of this, as a result of her “oppressor” identity, and that the actions of the youths “of colour” were just an understandable response to their “oppression”.
So it was just an act of “reparations” as it were, an understandable settling of scores.
No need to apologize, Coel. I tend to be over literal a lot myself, leading to some misunderstandings between my husband and me. And you might be right about how she meant it; I’m not a very good mind reader, and my crystal ball is broken.