To think a rapist shouldn't be in a women's prision to start with?

[MipMipMip]

A rapist has now admitted to assaulting female prisoners while in a women's prision. (This individual is in prision for rape but the assaults on prisoners do not appear to have been rape. Assuming all have come forward. )

But there is a large part of me that think this is down almost entirely to the people who put him there. Don't get me wrong - I blame the rapist. But it is clear that they are opportunistic. So while you wouldn't be surprised if someone went in a tigers cage and got eaten, you shouldn't be surprised that a rapist going into a women's prision assaults women.

These assaults were wholly avoidable. AIBU to think the people who enabled the rapist should be held partially responsible?

*for clarity: as MNHQ do not allow a person to be misgendered and this individual identifies as trans I have not used male pronouns. I hope that this does not prevent clear discussion.

Thank you both, I'm pretty upset to have been accused of 'taking the piss' on this issue.

I don't even recognise the abbreviations anymore. It makes me really sad that so many people are this transphobic and irrational

Oh for heaven's sake. How many times I heard this argument. I don't understand what you're talking about, but I disagree anyway.

Next you'll be saying you feel sorry for people, they're sad and should get out more

So going back to your stats, littlekitty.

It's important when you're collecting stats to collect the same information on the same population over time, isn't it? Then you can see trends, anomalies, what effect policy changes might have etc.

What do you think will happen to the validity of those stats if we don't distinguish between trans women and women? Because I will bet that HMP New Halls stats have already been affected by Karen White's actions.

We're not comparing like with like. Do you think that is a good outcome? One that delivers meaningful data?

TwistedStitch

It's a fast moving thread and sometimes when something is copied and pasted, it's taken out of context.

I don't think it's personal, at all!

Thank you for not trying to educate us with irrelevant and misleading information, LittleKitty. I’m glad you’ve recognised that you don’t understand the issues and that you can’t hold your own in this discussion because you are ill-informed and incapable of forming a coherent argument because your position is based on shifting sands and a total lack of logic or critical thinking.

Don’t let the door hit you on your way out!

It's a balance of rights, but as someone on the radio observed this morning, the rights of one person to be safe from male violence, were deemed more important than the rights of several hundred women to be safe from a violent person with a male body!

I won't try to educate you anymore

I know this is the go to phrase of youngsters online everywhere. But when did it become something that people didn't burst out laughing at?

When did random strangers offering to educate you because something that didn't immediately make them look like idiots?

*become

And we got the "you're all bigots" and the flounce in one post!

Do I get a prize given that my prediction was so timely and accurate?

twisted

No love i read your post and understood it perfectly

I meant to say that people who say or imply thats what posters on here think is taking the piss

Honest apologies you were very clear and I understood your post perfectly

It’s really laughable that the ‘education’ consisted of unverified data relating to prison statistics in another country. That is the kind of ‘education’ I’d say we can do without.

"It's a balance of rights, but as someone on the radio observed this morning, the rights of one person to be safe from male violence, were deemed more important than the rights of several hundred women to be safe from a violent person with a male body!"

I havent' seen anything to say they were put there for their own safety.
I thought they were put there as they "identified as a woman" and presumably said that they wanted to be in prison with women.

In which case it goes:

""It's a balance of rights,..., the rights of one man to have whatever he wants up to and including being imprisoned in a womne's prison when he is a rapist, were deemed more important than the rights of several hundred women to be safe from a violent rapist with a male body!"

Thank you Rufus

You have to be a pretty hardcore rape apologise [or potentially a fan of rape?] to be championing locking a known paedophile and rapist up with women who literally cannot escape.

I mean that is pretty fucked up no matter what your angle on trans issues is.

I just wish someone would actually use a coherent argument.

So something like, here are some statistics.

So another person says well they're not the right stats, because they apply to a different country.

So the person either says oh, my mistake i've been misinformed. Or, oops, here are some different statistics.

It never happens.

Should have said 'they'

Oh no wait im forgiven

Ill stop castigating myself

And i missed the bigotty flounce so ill have to read back

And instead of finding relevant evidence or arguments which support their case, they resort to accusations of hatefulness and ‘irrationality’. Because dismissing women’s concerns as ‘irrational’ isn’t a tool of the patriarchy or anything, right? And gosh, how emotional and unreasonable of us to object to locking women in with rapists!

Spot on Shrodinger, sums it up perfectly for me.

They are not really trans advoctes they are MRAs.

Statements like the ones on this thread who said it was right he was there and wrong he was removed, push more and more people into getting cold feet about teh trans movement generally.

It's an extreme position that hardly anyone in the public woudl agree with.

Notable is that one man's rights are important but the rights of hundreds of women are not + "women do it too" >>

They are men's rights activists who are using the trans thing to further their cause and "stick one" to women (literally in the case of women in prison).

However, the trans advocates are not calling them on this (bar some old school transsexuals who have the most - apart from women - to lose) and so they are complicit in this shit.

Trans rights are the reason this violent rapist was locked in with the women in the first place. The fact that MRAs are loving it and not a small number of them wanking gleefully over the idea is a side story.

I think Kitty's generous offer to "educate" us is actually more along the lines of "re-education" and all the connotations/historical context that phrase brings with it.

And now we've gone and spoiled his day by not rolling over for the mighty male perspective. We're just womaning wrong, dontcha know.

And gosh, how emotional and unreasonable of us to object to locking women in with rapists!

Exactly. Objecting to incarcerated women being raped is irrational, emotional, uneducated, bigoted, transphobic, and illogical.

The counter argument being you're all mean to rapists.

Do you think kitty was a bloke for sure?

The one who expressed fear of being raped in teh showers in prison was definitely one.

The idea of a male sexual predator being locked in with women who can't get away will be top wank fodder for plenty of chaps. Need to remember that too. A lot of men get off on the idea of women being "put in their place", raped etc.

Thing is, this was real life.

But when our only offer of education comes from a twerp who can’t tell the difference between the UK and the US, what hope do we have of learning??