A UK man has been jailed after raping and impregnating a 14 year old girl.
Many of the reports detailing the case describe the rapist as a ‘trans woman’ despite him being convicted of having penetrative intercourse with the victim in the case.
This is top shelf 1984 reference fodder – according to trans ideology a ‘woman’ can rape a child with ‘her’ penis and anyone who states the biological fact that women cannot have penises is a bigot.
The perpetrator in this case, David Orton, according to reports identified as a ‘woman’ at the time of the crime was jailed for nine and a half years by Leicester Crown Court on charges of raping a child between the age of 13 -15.
During the trial Orton’s name was recorded as Danielle-Rose Gemini in accordance with his ‘female’ identity, although he was rightly tried as a male offender – because that’s what he is.
Orton, who was about 23 years old at the time of the rape, was allowed by the girl’s family, who he had befriended, to be alone with her because of his preferred ‘gender status’.
This writer has no idea why responsible parents would let a man ten years older than their daughter spend periods of time alone with her, perhaps they were fearful that too much caution on their part could have led to accusations of transphobia?
Indeed under Helen McEntee’s new hate speech law, Orton’s gender preference would render him a special category of victim – meaning anyone who refused to participate in his fantasy of being a woman could find themselves with a conviction.
Anyone with a teaspoon of sanity needs no explanation that women are not physically capable of impregnating another person.
I also question why many journalists feel the need to ‘respect’ the arbitrary identities of violent criminals or child rapists – people who have shown clear disregard for the wellbeing and dignity of others.
Journalists as a profession are after all duty bound to report facts, not fantasies.
It would seem as though many journalists these days are more concerned about ‘mis gendering’ people than they are of appearing nuts to the majority of people who do not agree that men can become women or vice versa.
This child predator used his appropriated ‘female’ status to allow him to harm a child: why would anyone – especially someone whose personal integrity is central to their career – affirm that, especially after conviction?
"Trans woman jailed for sex with 14 yr old girl".
This "trans woman" had "penetrative sex" with the girl and made her pregnant.
What did this "trans woman" use to penetrate the girl and how did this make her pregnant?
It's a total mystery, isn't it? 🤔 https://t.co/pGwDsYBlGz
— Julia Hartley-Brewer (@JuliaHB1) November 29, 2022
“Leicester Police said Orton had denied any wrongdoing but was found guilty of two counts of penetrative sexual activity with a child aged 13 to 15 after the trial”.
The judge in the case, Timothy Spencer KC, is reported to have told Orton that he was, “a self-pitying and self-obsessed individual who shows no detectable empathy” adding that he had shown “not a shred of remorse” for his actions.
I’ve recently heard critics of ‘gender identity’ asking whether the safety of women and girls is more important than men’s feelings.
This is a question that cries out for an answer. So far it seems like the feelings of men who enjoy masquerading as what they think women are are indeed held by some as being of superior import than the aforementioned safety of women and girls.