How does this even work legally?
A woman can't be charged with
grape, instead the crime is classed as sexual assault by penetration. So although objectively a man
grape a woman, the law then sees this as a woman being charged with assault by penetration and inflates the number of females being sex offenders? Or are the rapists still charged with
grape, but simply referred to as women and oddly marked down as women, even though women can't be rapists? Confused
The victim is then gaslit and retraumatised into being told that the what happened to her isn't real, she wasn't
grape, her abuser wasn't a man.
Sexual crimes are rarely reported and convicted as is, what purpose does basing charges on gender expression and identity rather than the fact a man used his male body to commit crime against a woman serve?