The "mysterious" spike in female paedophiles glinner is chatting shit about is actually the result of policy starting in 2015 taking women sex offences more seriously. This was notified at the time by the ministry of Justice. There was no contemporaneous rise in female rape.

The Sun (who I won't link) reported on a rash of new cases of cis women in teaching or care roles being prosecuted for abuse. Just looking for the figures I've got on it. Some sex offence classes go from nothing per year to ~200 within a few years.

The offending rate is still *much much* less than cis men, this shouldn't be used as a distraction from the extremely gendered nature of most sexual violence. It's just there's some stuff the CPS hadn't taken seriously at all before and now they do.

As an example of one such area which went from absolutely no cases ever being processed and only a very few getting cautions this is the cjs pivot table filtered to incidents where a female was accused of sexual activity with someone under 16 or under 13.

TERFs and gender critical aligned people have repeatedly argued that this "spike" in female offences was the result of trans people rather than changes in CPS policy finally taking adult women fucking children as a genuine problem.

Feel free to look at the pivot table yourself.

Note that trans women have been able to self identify for crime as female since 2010/2011 when the equality act came into effect. There is no sudden jump in female prosecutions around that time.
http://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524326/cjs-outcomes-by-offence.xlsx

The reality is that trans people probably do not form a large enough population to make a serious dent in sex offences even if TERF theories about trans women exhibiting "male criminal patterns" were right.

Because of the specific disparity of rape (200:1, maybe 400:1) I've been working on testing the hypothesis against the available data - if trans women were 1% of women this theory would be blown out of the water immediately.

But out trans women are more like 0.2% which becomes murkier for confidence values. Given the disparities we should be able to test the hypothesis if and only if the projected rate of offenses even for that small trans minority would significantly dent the whole population stats.

That said, the outcome then is that there just aren't enough trans women around to be worth being afraid of anyway. So, either way.

Twitter won't let me search my back tweets right now for whatever reason so I'm struggling to find the relevant links to the pronouncement they were taking child sex offences by adult women more seriously.

The TImes in 2018 fail to cover policy change
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/more-women-convicted-of-sex-offences-bfdvv2w37

Archive link just in case http://archive.is/Z6FQU 

Incidentally this was where my hypothesis came from around disproving male pattern trans crime hypothesis (since I can't search my old posts).

(Left, rape prosecutions for males, right rape prosecutions for females)

It's hard for women to be prosecuted for rape at all in the UK because it's defined by anatomy. In case of MPTC hypothesis, given 100,000 trans women in the uk, proceeded cases would lead to an expectation value of 10 new female rape cases annually after self id, gt doubling it.

There's a slow increase in prosecutions over time for both men and women as a result of policy changes taking stuff more seriously but nothing on the scale of the expected shift.

The only sharply increasing female sex offences category is stuff involving minors (where policy changes are documented and the news coverage suggests it's mainly cis women in the stats)

(apologies for Americans reading this thread this is criminal prosecutions in England and Wales)