is there a thread for FWS / Prisons?

In the closing few minutes, the respondent's barrister was talking about Scotland having to follow European law. The quote was something like

'because of the unique position of the Scottish ministers, they do not have the easy get out of following laws set in Westmister but also have to refer to European law'

Does anyone have a better memory of what was said?

The judge is a woman.

Was it just me or did the judge seem more amenable with his questions towards the Scotgov legal team?

He's stalling because he knows he's speaking nonsense.

It's because of his accent.

It occurs to me that FWS are pounding the facts; SM are pounding the law.

What did Marion just say? "yet"?

The public listening to this do not look at all impressed.

You have to love someone (the judge) who refers to fora and not forums.

SM are arguing that prisons are a function and not a public service. Why then is it called the Scottish Prison Service?

The bloke I referred to upthread, I did a thread about the precious lamb if anyone wants to learn more

Poor misgendered murderer | Mumsnet https://share.google/ieopHP4RpWpb7gox1

Paris Green requested surgery - what that entails we haven't been told. However, the doctor concerned has now refused to to do the surgery since he doesn't want a murderer on the same ward as his other patients.

ETA There have been no reports (that I'm aware of) of any other men in the women's estate requesting surgery. They'd just really like to stay locked up with the women.

represent! Not reprint 🙄

Did this advocate reprint the SM in FWS? I recognise her voice. I find her style of presentation a tad irritating but that could well be influenced by the utter guff of her arguments

What you call "a protected custody wing", actually called a Vulnerable Prisoner Unit, isn't just for paedophiles, it's for any prisoner who may be vulnerable.

That includes informants, ex-police officers, those who are in debt to other prisoners, those who have fallen foul of gangs, etc.

In a men's prison, any trans identified male prisoner can be housed in such a unit if vulnerable.

It's not possible to treat post-op transsexuals (in legal terms men without penises) differently to other men. It would be a human rights issue to say to people you can go in the facility you want but only if you lop your bits off first.

So whatever solution is for post op transwomen has to work for pre op transwomen too (edit: and of course non op transwomen, which appears to be the majority). A small transwomen only wing could be a suitable solution. Or putting them with vulnerable men who aren't a risk to them.

None of which is exactly what this case is about, this is about the legality of putting any man in women-only facilities which are discrimination permitted because of the Equality Act sex based exceptions and therefore can only be based on sex as defined in the EqA as clarified by the SC judgement in FWS's previous case.

There's one, I forget his name but he's in a relationship with a child torturer/killer Nomi something, who was offered all the gender affirming care he wanted. Facilitated by the SPS, paid for with taxes. He got his Adam's apple shaved.

Have Paris Green and co. even had surgery? Not that it's relevant to whether they should be in a women's prison or not because they are still men.

The presence of men, also renders single sex spaces for women as mixed spaces, which undermines the reason why such spaces exist in the first instance. I'm watching the proceedings right now and the lady who just finished speaking (I didn't catch her name because I've only just re-logged on) highlighted this very point.

No we don't, because they're women.

Wasn't their a court case that established that making castration a condition for getting a GRC was unlawful? I suspect making castration a condition for permitting a man to be jailed with women would go the same way. We'd wind back here.

Lonely tw aren't women’s problem in prisons, Guides, hospitals, the WI or anywhere else.

Take it up with the SPS.

Eta offering them 'gender affirming care' while behind bars should stop for starters.

If the claim they are trans then they are trans. That is how it works.

They aren’t children so will be fine in the protected wing with paedophiles.

Given how few genuine transsexuals there are in prison

Another reason for a bright-line rule being legal is that it avoids the challenges of having to decide what, if anything, a "genunine" transsexual is, who might be one, and who is a fraudulent transsexual.

I note that you're conflating being a "true" transsexual with not being a danger to women. I suspect that you may feel that a "false" transsexual can be exactly defined as "one who is a danger to women". Which is the "no true scotsman" argument re-packaged. It doesn't work.

A female who takes testosterone and had her breasts removed is a higher risk due to the impact of testosterone.

A man who identifies as trans is over 250 times more likely to commit sex offences than women, and castrated sex offenders have been shown to commit sex offences with more violence.