To ask you to sign this petition about women's prisons

[kendoddsdadsdogsdead18]

You may remember recently the case of Karen White, who is physically a man but self id'ed as a women. White was sent to prison after carrying out a vicious attack and was subsequently housed in the female estate. Within days White raped 2 women and thank god, is now housed in the male estate.

However, there are simply no guarantees that this situation would not happen occur. If self id became the law over here, women in prison,l who are often vulnerable & as a group are statistically to be more likely to have experienced sexual assault will be most at risk. In Ireland where self id is already law transwomen are housed in the male estate. Over here, where self id isn't even law, we have gone one huge step further than Ireland by allowing fully in tact males into the female estate.

In prison showers and getting dressed is open and shared. Personally I could not imagine personally having to shower naked in front of a male bodied stranger. It's bad enough in front of women. I think it says a lot about a society that carefully considers the privacy, dignity and safety of it's most vulnerable members. As I understand it, there are currently male bodied prisoners in every female estate.

If you feel, as I do that prison rules should reviewed, please take a look at and sign this
petition.

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/228767

But it's not good enough to take a knee-jerk stand to this emotive and unacceptable outcome and place vulnerable trans women in harms way in some sort of "eye for an eye" act of retribution.

Good lord. You tell Sweary that she invalidates the abuse of women and derides people in the sex industry, and that she believes Hudson deserves everything they got.

That head-butting a barman and breaking all his teeth is the kind of thing the girls get up to on a night out.

And now claiming that maintaining sex segregation in prison is women giving an eye for an eye in an act of retribution.

Your desperate need to attack and criticise women for not centring men is getting out of hand.

In that case, as women are sex segregated from biological men to keep them from harm, there's no issue with biologically male Transwomen being housed in their own separate male prison wing? As the impostors would be reviewed out anyway, wouldn't they?

If anyone was calling for improving case board procedures as well as a third prison space (and a fourth for trans men...) I'd be a bit more sympathetic. I wouldn't agree, but I'd be more sympathetic.

I wouldn't agree because a case board assessing a legal woman as no threat to other women should place her with other women. Unless we now segregate arbitrarily on the basis of gender reassignment, where it is not a proportionate means to a legitimate aim, completely at odds with the Equality Act and the principle of non-discrimination.

Your desperate need to attack and criticise women for not centring men is getting out of hand.

What a strange thing to say to me, given that the first instance you site was me deriding someone for invalidating sex workers, who are predominantly female; the second is me pointing out that to see all women as delicate wallflowers is both factually incorrect and perpetuates damaging gender stereotypes; and that using "feminism" to justify the endangerment of another minority group undermines the very principles of human rights on which feminism is built.

How very strange of you indeed. I can't think why you would want to paint me as a misogynist for pointing out how your position harms the very pillars of feminism. Can't for a second think why at all.

What a strange thing to say to me, given that the first instance you site was me deriding someone for invalidating sex workers,

Which you made up. Tara Hudson's 7 inch surprise was their USP in their sex work job. You then projected onto that sentence a whole load of negativity that wasn't present in it.

You calling incarcerated women, most of whom would have already been victims of sexual violence, 'delicate wallflowers', to underpin your point that they should be incarcerated with men, is awful. And blatant misogyny.

In case anyone has lost track of the purpose of the thread

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/228767

3950 ... need more signatures!

Carry on bumping the thread with the discussion ...

Which you made up. Tara Hudson's 7 inch surprise was their USP in their sex work job. You then projected onto that sentence a whole load of negativity that wasn't present in it.

And yet she said she only wanted to say that Hudson had an intact penis... and yet she didn't just say that, did she. As a feminist, you know, the kind who doesn't just hate trans people, I'm extremely familiar with people bringing up a victim's sex work when not remotely necessary for them to make their point. And I have personal experience, as noted.

I'm surprised this isn't a key area of concern for you own feminism Datun; it really is quite widely recognised to be a problem that hugely hurts the prospects of female victims achieving convinctions against their attackers.

You calling incarcerated women, most of whom would have already been victims of sexual violence, 'delicate wallflowers', to underpin your point that they should be incarcerated with men, is awful. And blatant misogyny.

Oh stop it now, you're getting yourself all het-up trying to twist my points into a stick to beat me with. It's transparent. Look, if you can't play the ball, don't play the woman.

Signed.

Should never have happened, hoping this will stop anyone else suffering.

Rat The reason Hudson's job was brought up is because the only way anyone knows they were fully intact is because they advertised it, on their website as their 'seven inch surprise'!

For their job. It's the whole point.

This is bumping the thread, so hopefully more people will sign the petition.

The issue of men in female prisons has never been complicated to me.

I don't think it's complicated to most people, so you defending it always comes as a surprise to me.

I also think the idea of a fully transitioned trans woman of 30 years being placed in a men's prison for failing to pay her TV licence is a no-brainer to most people too Datun.

That's why we need a review board.

And an end to forcing people to polarise on an issue so that so obviously requires human judgement to make decisions to uphold the right to safety, dignity and privacy for all people.

What about the disabled man who is arrested for 'non-TV licence' paying? The gay man, the 90-year-old man, the man with learning difficulties?

Women's prisons are not some dumping ground for vulnerable men.

Women's prisons are not some dumping ground for vulnerable men.

No Datun, it isn't. It is the place where women are housed. Women in the eyes of the law, be that through birth, through having acquired a GRC, or through undertaking meaningful steps to life their lives as the women they believe themselves to be.

The men's prison is not a dumping ground for women you would rather weren't recognised as women on account of their anatomy at birth.

What this really comes down to is your determination that no trans person should ever be recognised by any authority as the gender with which they identify. Regardless of what steps they may have taken, and regardless of their rights to live their lives as they see fit - where there is no increased risk to those around them. And that, to me, is fundamentally against the values of a fair an equal society.

What this really comes down to is your determination that no trans person should ever be recognised by any authority as the gender with which they identify.

Gender, yes. Sex, no.

Apart from socially.

Gender, yes. Sex, no.

Well I'm sorry Datun, but both the law in terms of GRCs and common sense in terms of surgical and hormonal changes to ones anatomy and secondary sexual characteristics disagrees with you.

If someone has a GRC they may be legally female.

If someone has no penis, breasts and a neovagina the sex of their structure of their body is female.

If someone is taking female hormones, grows no facial hair, has reduced muscle mass and is making an effort to appear as a female would be expected to appear in today's society, their presentation is female.

If someone knows within themselves that the body they inhabit was supposed to be both anatomically, and in all appearances, female, their identity is female.

Their genetic sex is immutable. Every other aspect of their sex and the way in which that interacts with the rest of society is changeable. And it is common sense to almost everyone in the world that somewhere along that spectrum of change there is a point where the material masculinity of someones genes is NOT more important than their femaleness in all these other respects.

Where I think that change matters may not be at the same point as where the next woman thinks it matter, but very few people's first thought when considering this would say all that matters when segregating people by sex is their genes.

I haven't read the posts in between & looks like the discussion has moved on but I just want to re-cap...Rat thinks yes a woman should shower with a male in prison.

It was hidden in a load of waffle, knowing full well it wouldn't be a popular opinion but the upshot is, yes - a woman should have to shower with a male penis.

If you, like sane, rational, respectful people that care about the needs and boundaries of women in prison think women should not have to shower or share intimate spaces with penis havers, please sign this petition.

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/228767

Their presentation is feminine not female

Nope. A man who makes lots of changes to himself isn't a woman.

Women are people. They are. In their own right. There are not amended men.

Their presentation is feminine not female

No, their presentation is that of a female.

Women are people. They are. In their own right. There are not amended men.

A very emotive spin to put on things. Women are people in their own right. As are trans women. And trans men.

All deserve basic human rights, including the right to be safe, and the right to privacy, dignity, and to a private life insofar as it does not disproportionately affect anybody else.

You have some fabulous soundbites Datun that appear at first glance to stand up for the human rights of a persecuted group, except they belie a complete disregard for the principles of human rights in general.

You have some fabulous soundbites Datun

Thanks.

Men do not have the human right to redefine the word woman.

How do you present as female please?

Men do not have the human right to redefine the word woman.

Another one! Nice work.

You know "the men" aren't trying to redefine the word "woman", right? You know words just mutate, don't you? They don't belong to anyone; they're the property of a society, and we all get to shape them.

I know you'd love to reshape this as a battle of men vs. women.... It isn't. It's a battle of tolerance vs tribalism. That's the only reason I couldn't stand idly by.

How do you present as female please?

You know how when you look at a group of people you can somehow establish roughly who the men and the women are? I mean not every time, but broadly speaking. It's almost like there's something they're doing that makes that possible... or something about their physiques... I just don't know, but it would seem some people are able to show on the outside what they are on the inside.... Like, how??

I have no idea how they're doing it.

They?

Congratulations Rat! You've just explained how most women know that transwomen are men, rather than women.

Ooh hadn't seen this before! Thanks, will also direct to the people I know who submitted the FPFW response to the GRA consultation. There's quite a few of them who are now engaged on this issue and they may want to sign this.