If it had been a woman, don’t you think he would have been charged with rape?
You missed the point I was making: he should have been charged with attempted rape, regardless of the gender of his victim.
The court said he couldn’t complete the act of rape because he attacked a transgender....so, what if he had attacked a woman but raped her anally? By the courts logic, that wouldn’t have been a rape.
Furthermore, he may very well have known he was going after a trans and would have raped “her” anally had a 3rd party not stopped the rape. And now, so he could get a lesser charge, he’s lied and said he thought he was attacking a woman.
And still, by the courts logic, had they not been interrupted and he was able to sodomize “her” against her will - that still would not have been rape.
My point is that I don’t believe there’s a distinction to be made: any involuntary penetration against any person of any gender, is rape. Period.