Ricky Gervais chimes in over Karen White

So a "provisional" GRC if you like, that only affords you partial acceptance as your "preferred" gender, and a full GRC when whatever authorities have been satisfied it's suitable both for you and your community.

Who gets to decide that a male transperson will never sexually assault a women or girl. Who gets to decide that a girl will never feel uncomfortable undressing alongside a male transperson.

What criteria or checks are they going to use?

This I don't think is right. This debate polarises people just like all big debates do (Brexit, anyone?) But the answer isn't at the extremes is it. The answer is never going to be at the extremes. It isn't "tough cookies, you think trans women are women so that means you think Karen White should be in a women's prison come hell or high water", just like it isn't, "tough cookies, you think trans women are men so that means you have to send 70 year old Isla who transitioned 45 years ago (including full surgical reassignment) to a men's prison for losing control of her car and hitting a pedestrian".*

Calligula I think we all started wanting compromise. The problem is that the compromise is only coming from one side. First they wanted to use transwoman, no more. Than they wanted woman, they'd leave female alone. Now they want female. Some are even saying they should be called cis!

It used to be that we had an unofficial agreement of pretence. Now police are called for misgendering. Any compromise we give is jumped upon and the next thing demanded. Because of all the demands, and that nothing is ever enough, we are being forced to take a hard line. We can no longer do a case by case basis because of the way it is exploited.

We have been nice for too long and this is our reward.

But the answer isn't at the extremes, is it
But we have to take extremes into account, because women and children suffer if we don't. This case is just another example.
This policy is unfit for purpose, there are already too many examples of it going wrong. It isn't a case of Karen White being risk assessed wrongly, it's a case of the policy being wrong in the first place. Not only is it wrong, they knew it was open to abuse before it was even brought in, it's on record.

that is not what you’ve been saying all along

I think it is Karen White doesn't have a GRC and so the prison service are sooooo responsible for their decision to put him in the women's prison. Self-ID would be fine if those checks were reliable, even for people who DID have a GRC, but they're not. So I think there needs to be some sort of review process to get a full GRC.

CaligulaBlushed that is not what you’ve been saying all along. It’s not even close.

Checks are exactly what is needed! AND a 3rd space.

We have unpicked it. Time and time again. Most people get it, just that some insist on tangling themselves into knots again with words and muddled thinking.

I'm not pro-self-ID without some burden of proof BTW. There's a trans woman I know, elderly now and transitioned years ago, who I was talking to about this and she said she favours a two tier system for GRCs. So a "provisional" GRC if you like, that only affords you partial acceptance as your "preferred" gender, and a full GRC when whatever authorities have been satisfied it's suitable both for you and your community.

What wrong with that? Trans women are women to me. I know that some trans women are women to some GC feminists. The law should reflect the best we can do to all live comfortably with each other. I know from speaking to my trans woman friend that neither side would be happy with this outcome, but neither side would lose big either. If we could have self-ID with the checks and balances where needed (like in the prison service) then I think that could work, but those checks aren't there right now. So they have to happen when you apply for your GRC.

Datum, Isla is a woman. It is so obviously not right to put her in the men's prison AT ALL that it barely even needs justifying.

caligula But for the purposes of the law, there has to be some hard and fast rules don't there?

In both your Karen and Isla situations, one solution that would preserve the dignity, privacy and safety of everyone involved would be to have third spaces. I can't think of any other way to achieve this. And I appreciate there being concerns about 70 year old Isla being incarcerated with White but then couldn't whatever provisions people think could go in place to protect women from Karen White in prison be applied to Isla in the third space? And if that's not OK for Isla because it's not safe etc, then how could it be safe for women? And if it's not OK for Isla on any other basis, I'd be interested to hear what they'd be because I'm sure I've missed out reasons for why it may or may not work!

Sorry, I'm really aware I'm rambling but I'm trying to unpick it all.

You don't sacrifice ALL vulnerable women because some men are vulnerable.

Women's prison isn't the vulnerable men's wing of a male prison.

YES. This, with bells on.

yes, I don't understand why cal wants to plunge us into a world of 'are you trans enough to go to ladies prison?'

it's just so pointless

there's a really easy way to decide who goes to the men's estate and who goes to the womens

and yes, of course vulnerable prisoners should be protected. but not by infringing on the human rights of other prisoners.

If the XX chromosome is present, it's female
If it's XY, it's male.

No amount of surgery or dressing-up is going to change that.

The creature calling itself Karen White is a MAN. A MAN who raped.

Caligula - Coming at it from that point of view, maybe a good compromise might be to allow a very few men to legally transition, subject to medical diagnosis of dysphoria with a system of checks and balances? So the law as it currently stands? Surely the hypothetical Isla would have been able to obtain a GRC under current legislation?

Now I personally do not agree that there should be any exceptions to sex segregation when it comes to prisons, but you must admit that the existence of GRCs at all is already a HUGE compromise on this issue. The trouble is the boundaries of what constitutes extremism or compromise are pushed back and back until apparently Self-ID isn't recognised as extremism anymore.

Caligula

I don't understand why you think it's so awful for a 70-year-old transwoman to go to a male prison? There is a vulnerable prisoner unit. Many men are vulnerable in prison. Gay men, disabled men, older men, men with learning difficulties.

You don't sacrifice ALL vulnerable women because some men are vulnerable.

And it's not necessary.

Women's prison isn't the vulnerable men's wing of a male prison.

Women are human beings in their own rights, you know. Female anatomy, gynaecological issues, menstruation, pregnancy, past sexist and sexual abuse and assault. This is what characterises female prisoners.

This is what characterises female people.

They are a unique category, in their own damn right. Stop trying to dilute that.

Really interesting website about detention of prisoners.

www.apt.ch/detention-focus/

As a matter of principle, women should be separated from men, minors from adults, and untried detainees from convicted detainees.

We fail on the convicted and unconvicted but pretty clear about sexes not being mixed.

It later says:

Other separation criteria can be justified to protect detainees in situations of particular vulnerability due to their age, health condition, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or gender identity.

To me that reads as though female's should be separate from men but those groups may then be sub divided if necessary. It does NOT say people should be out in the gender they identify.

Sorry I haven't stuck around to flesh out what I'm saying but it's hard when you're the only one on a thread. But Langcleg,

So tough cookies, my friend. You reap what you sow. And you sowed Karen White. Embrace her or admit you were wrong and become a right wing fundamentalist Christian feminist like the rest of FWR.

This I don't think is right. This debate polarises people just like all big debates do (Brexit, anyone?) But the answer isn't at the extremes is it. The answer is never going to be at the extremes. It isn't "tough cookies, you think trans women are women so that means you think Karen White should be in a women's prison come hell or high water", just like it isn't, "tough cookies, you think trans women are men so that means you have to send 70 year old Isla who transitioned 45 years ago (including full surgical reassignment) to a men's prison for losing control of her car and hitting a pedestrian".

Why would you want to push people to one extreme or the other? You're not the only ones doing it, the TRAs on Twitter do it too, and neither side is right. It can't be either or, it simply can't be, because if it is someone will always lose. And they will lose BIG. The answer HAS to be some degree of subjectivity, surely? Forcing people to polarise just means asking people to pick who they would prefer to throw under a bus doesn't it?

Most people don't want to throw anybody under a bus. It's playing their emotions and their allegiances to tell them that they have to choose.

Multiple organisations and institutions - the Guides, YHA, etc etc - say that Karen White is a woman because Karen White says so.

GG would go further and say that parents would have no right to know about birth sex (for want of a better expression sorry my brain is fried today).

So for anyone still in doubt, THIS is why I object to self ID. Because people with agendas like Karen White, David Challenor, the other rapist from Wakefield prison can access women and girls in our most private spaces without a single damn obstacle in their way. It has been shown that it can and will and indeed has been abused already.

So, bring up a third space? I’m right behind you.

Tighten up the legislation to stop misogynistic men abusing it to get to victims? I’ll listen.

Until then, fuck right off.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-leeds-45825838

This states they are transitioning. The DM article about the sentencing described them presenting as a woman (clothes etc) at sentencing.

Can anyone find a link about White continuing to transition/claim to be a transwoman (because they're one and the same thing)? I can see reporting about how the judge said White was pretending to be a transwoman to be even more predatory but I can't see anything anywhere about White continuing to transition/still claim to be trans.

If White isn't still claiming to be trans then fair enough, but if they are still claiming to be, then that instantly makes them so, doesn't it?

TinyRick

Indeed yes. They were also banging on about bitcoin formerly.

Stonewall says Karen White is a woman because Karen White says so. Proposed legislation will say that Karen White is a woman because Karen White says so. Multiple organisations and institutions - the Guides, YHA, etc etc - say that Karen White is a woman because Karen White says so.

You can't pick and choose, Caligula. Karen White is self-ID and therefore Karen White is a woman.

That's the ideology. That's the legislative proposal. That's the current overwhelming institutional response. Karen White is a woman.

So tough cookies, my friend. You reap what you sow. And you sowed Karen White. Embrace her or admit you were wrong and become a right wing fundamentalist Christian feminist like the rest of FWR.

Datun - Oh I know. Have you seen any of their dancing you tube vids?

Katie Charm makes a point of getting kicked out of as many restrooms as possible. Always videoed crying afterwards.

*they're

I'm guessing that Cal thinks that transwomen are smol and delicate flowers that look like Blaire White.

When in the actual real world you now have males barely on HT, if at all, thinking their entitled to female spaces because they reckon they are cute and totally 'pass' (internet strangers lied told them so)

E.g - www.google.com.au/amp/s/hornet.com/stories/trans-woman-las-vegas/amp/

SRS means fuck all now when you have self diagnosed transwomen rushing to get it done as soon as they can. Timelines of transitioning are getting shorter and shorter. If they have the money, the surgeons will take it.

Bonions

It's vital to have one's own argument open to scrutiny.

And this particular issue polarises opinion. Although less now than it used to. (Because people are seeing how loopholes are being exploited.)

There is still divided opinion as to whether or not you can categorise transwomen in terms of authenticity as women.

(Or just in terms of access, whilst acknowledging that they are still biologically male).

I, personally, think it's very useful to drill down into why some people believe certain criteria makes a difference.