Amnesty International are peddling distortions about trans homicides to push a trans activist agenda regarding the Gender Recognition Act consultation. They said:
“Trans women are suffering violence and abuse because they are trans. Over a quarter of trans people experience domestic violence and two women a week are killed by a partner in England and Wales.
So let’s look at homicide and sex differences, and homicide and trans people:
In the year ending March 2017 there were 613 recorded homicide victims and 617 recorded homicide suspects. The numbers aren’t exactly the same because sometimes there is more than one suspect and sometimes there are none.
- There were 433 male homicide victims and and 469 male suspects. That means
- 71% of victims were male
- 76 % of perpetrators were male
- There were 8% more male perpetrators than victims
- There were 180 female victims and 148 female perpetrators
- 29% of victims were female
- 24% of perpetrators were female
- There were 18% fewer female perpetrators than victims
- 50% of female victims aged 16+ were killed by a current or former partner (sex of perpetrator not specified)
- 3 % of male victims aged 16+ were killed by a current or former partner (sex of perpetrator not specified)
Trans people:
- Over the last decade there have been 7 homicides of trans people, all biologically male; there have been 12 homicides perpetrated trans people, all biologically male.
- There were 71% more homicides perpetrated by trans people, all biologically male, than against trans people (all biologically male).
Women are perpetrators of homicide at 18% lower rates than we are victims. Males are perpetrators of homicide at 8% greater rates than they are victims. Trans people are perpetrators of homicide at 71% greater rates than they are victims.
One woman has been killed at the hands of a man every 2.6 days in the UK since 2012. Why isn’t Amnesty International pushing the concerns of female victims of homicide in relation to proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act? Facts matter. Social policy should be based on factual information not twisted and distorted disinformation.
Why is Amnesty International appropriating commonly used (but not particularly accurate) data about female victims of intimate partner homicide to pursue a trans activist agenda?
*Usual disclaimer: Every victim of homicide is a victim. I do not celebrate a single homicide. My sympathies to the loved ones of every victim. I support universal human rights. I am a feminist with a particular interest in the wellbeing of female victims of men’s violence.
Karen Ingala Smith 
Common male obfuscation of the real facts – ‘“Trans women are suffering violence and abuse because they are trans. Over a quarter of trans people experience domestic violence and two women a week are killed by a partner in England and Wales.’ So this means the non-specialist female/male reader will interpret this as men who claim to be women are suffering violence at the same rate as natal women are subjected to male violence!
However, in reality these are the real facts: ‘One woman has been killed at the hands of a man every 2.6 days in the UK since 2012.’ But the women-hating male supremacist Amnesty International are only interested in furthering mens’ pseudo sex right to maintain male dominance/male oppression over all natal females.
Also these are the real facts concerning males who enact the ‘female impersonator’ –
‘Over the last decade there have been 7 homicides of trans people, all biologically male; there have been 12 homicides perpetrated trans people, all biologically male.
There were 71% more homicides perpetrated by trans people, all biologically male, than against trans people (all biologically male).’
But facts are irrelevant when the issue concerns men maintaining their male sex right to erase us natal females.
Pingback: How many fingers am I holding up? – An occasional blog
Excellent post. I’ve reblogged it, if that’s ok. Thank you – and for all the work you do.
Thanks Kevin
Reblogged this on Kevin Ovenden's Blog and commented:
The kind of evidence upon which rational discussion and policymaking should be taking place
Another brave post. I so admire your courage. Your attention to facts is exemplary. Thank you
Thank you