AIBU to think a male paedophile rapist should definitely go to a male prison?

[HermioneWeasley]

And it shouldn't just be "likely"?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-35726292

FFS.

Thats exactly my problem with it violet. Regardless of how you view tg-ism, the sex of an individual is established long before they have anything resembling a brain. So if anything is wrong, its the brain.

Just for the record, I don't think and would never think that trans women are 'beneath' me. That's a horrible suggestion. I do believe they are biologically different to me. That is not the same and you know it.

'Women's rights are important - but no more so than anyone else's'.

This seems like a reasonable statement on the face of it until you start to examine the huge inequity in gendered violence globally. That's the reason that sex segregated spaces exist - to keep women safe. If male violence ceased to be a problem, so would this.

As I stated earlier, I am 100% for trans rights and protections but why does this have to be given to them by removing protection from women and girls?. Including, I might add, trans women and girls.

Again, as I quite clearly stated up thread, the proposed law of self definition will allow predatory men to say they are trans women and enter women-only spaces with the full protection of the law. I think this will put women and trans women in danger.

Can you explain how this is transphobic?

herm

it seems to be an issue if a person is born with the 'wrong' genatalia and want to fix it - that's not ok apparently

Whether it is OK or not is beside the point. It is simply not possible. With a very few exceptions, we are XX or XY and nothing can change that.

In most cases, whether we are XX or XY should not affect what we can do. But there are some exceptions due to biological differences that put XXs at a physical disadvantage compared to XYs. XYs are usually stronger than XXs and so there are some situations in which XXs need to be protected from XYs, whatever gender the XYs identify with.

Sleepy - how should some people have had a penis but don't end up with one? How do you think that happens?
If a person is female, then their female body is not wrong. They may feel it's wrong, but it objectively correct for their chromosomal sex. So how could they have been meant to have had a penis?

Thanks beyond

People who should have a penis (aka males) have this determined long before birth, long before conception, during spermogenesis. Mitosis splits the proto-sperm-cell so some sperms have an x and some a y. This alone determines sex, and therefore whether a penis should grow. Yes, sometimes it goes wrong (rarely), but that intersex not tg-ism.

An embryo starts to have something resembling a brain at about five weeks gestation iirc. Even if it goes wrong at this earliest possible point, it is much later than when sex is established and thus the brain is wrong.

Am I looking down on black people if I say they're more likely to experience sickle cell anaemia? Being racist if I say that white people with red hair need to use factor 50 SPF?

That's not the same thing at all. Looking down at people is sneeringly saying 'well if they can be a woman, I can be a dog/turnip/interst stupid thing here'. I'm not a troll, maybe I have gone over-the-top in trying to make my point though. I was merely trying to show the hypocrisy in posters on here. However I should have known better than engage in a trans thread again, as they are all exactly the same. Every single last one of them. It's just another bit of society that will take years to change and become acceptable.

SleepyBoBo, you're the only one saying that being a transwoman is not-quite-as-good-as being a biological woman. None of the gender critical posters have said or implied that. Women being different to trans women = / = better than. I acknowledge that an orange is biologically different to a banana, but that doesn't make me an elitist anti-banana bigot

This basic biology (x and y done at gcse, no?) is being mis-represented by people with an agenda, drilling the "born in the wrong body" mantra into naive but well-meaning peoples heads.

"Born in the wrong body" also potentially suggests the assumption of a (female eg) soul that was floating around and accidentally landed in the wrong (male eg) body. Its just bloody nonsense!

BeyondTellsEveryoneRealFacts Exactly.
The body only does what the brain tells it do, on an autonomous level.
So really, it shouldn't be a case of your body deceiving you, since it has developed exactly as your brain sent signals for it to do in the first place.

Very obviously intact penises shouldn't be in female prisons on prisoners.

Any other stance is just anti women.

There's a debate to be had about those who've had their penises and testicles removed too - possibly an interesting one.

Yes, build some trans wings.

Are big nosed people 'born with the wrong nose'? Should they have nose surgery on the nhs to give them the nose they should have had?

If someone is deaf, they can have operations to try and fix it, if someone is bron with an extra set of fingers, they can have them removed.

Yet it is not possible to change sex to the extent that you wouldn't always have to be treated medically as somebody who was born one sex and then took hormones and/or had surgery to resemble the other.

medicine cannot make a trans woman a woman or a trans man a man. I imagine that is why many trans people don't have surgery.

However, the fact remains that when women have separate spaces and provisions it is because they are physically different and sharing those spaces and provisions with somebody who has a male body makes them pointless.

You can't avoid this issue by not discussing it.

Do you recognise gender and sex based violence and oppression?

If you do, why would you want to see a law passed that would remove protection from that from women?

It's just another bit of society that will take years to change and become acceptable

Nope I already accept and want change for trans. I will help in anyway I can to get them rights of their own

What I don't want, is to give random men the ability to say on any given day "today I am a woman" and everybody has to bow down to their new rights as women. It gives genuine trans more hurdles and problems to overcome.

The trans activists seem to be shooting themselves in the foot, with constantly back cases like the one this thread is about.

Also I see a lot of "well I can see I'm not going to change anybody's mind and you are not changing mind"

You know what many people do in a debate. Is yes argue their point, but later reflect on their opponent point of view and facts and information given.
It's not like a light bulb. occasionally it can be

I read a lot of threads about contentious issues, but rarely post. I take on board both sides, then come to my own opinion on it. After looking at the argument from all angles first, and that's not to say I then close myself of from any new opinions. I'll take them on board too, then maybe adjust mine accordingly.

It's something that I rarely see any activists(in whatever subject) been capable of doing.

What about Rachel dolezal? If she had her skin permanently darkened, her hair permed (actually I think she did?) and her nose flattened, her lips plumped etc until she was a permanently altered simulation of a mixed race woman - would that make her a black person? If not, why not?

Race isnt even a binary, so it should be easier to "change" race than sex

Basically, no matter how supportive you are of trans folk there will always be occasions where a choice has to be made between prioritising the needs of a trans woman, or a bio woman.
Which will you choose?
If you choose the woman you might upset the trans woman and be accused of being transphobic.
If you choose the trans woman you might put the woman in danger and be accused of being a misogynist.
The easy option is the second one because women are the second class citizens in this world so much easier to put them second.
The hard option is to prioritise the woman, that's always where the battle is. To put women first in this world is to be up against huge criticism, but it is the ethically correct choice.

Fab post, worms

Thank you, I'm not great at getting my point across in written form so normally lurk. But this topic has really got to me.

And races are essentially identical. You can't profile someone's DNA and say what colour they are (though you can make guesses based on characteristics from different geographical areas). Yet most people would not say that you can become black by living as a black person.

I have no idea how to live as a white or black woman or man. I think I can do a vague approximation of living as a person.

Oh are we talking abut race again now?

I thought that was frowned on/offensive/irrelevant.