It was dismissed because it was youth crime from one city. The national statistics with a much bigger volume of data, from the whole country and all ages, showed that violent crime is overwhelmingly the preserve of males.
What data tells us is that young people are more likely to be implicated in violence against the person.
The Met data was more instructive than the Home Office data, because it provides a breakdown of that crime, and as
@mudsticks has pointed out, it puts numbers against the crime in terms of severity.
The Met police area is sprawling, it doesn't just cover areas of highest crime rate, but a spread.
Although it's less than perfect, it is the best data that I've seen.
So of the cohort that are responsible for the largest proportion of data, about one third is female violence.
And while you can pretend that you haven't seen it, or argue against it, or pretend that the figure of 53 000 arrests of women for violence against the person is insignificant, you can't produce any meaningful data whatsoever that trans women with a GRC or women with a dsd are the cause of any level of harm to women in women's toilets.
I'm sure you have a bookmark that leads to something vaguely like one case at some point in time, but as others say, one case since 2004 in a population of about 66/67M people is not evidence that trans women are assaulting women in women's toilets.
It just isn't happening, but you won't reconsider. Produce a well-reasoned argument and I'll read it, but so far you haven't met the bar of reasonableness. Instead you have easily passed the bar for unreasonableness.
I know, how arrogant, patronising, superior, smug of me to notice.
