Transphobic US senator was sex trafficker.

[DonnaBe]

He got 15 years. Is it enough?

deadstate.org/ex-gop-senator-who-voted-for-anti-trans-bathroom-bill-gets-15-years-for-child-sex-trafficking/

Abusive man is abusive.

And? Is this news?

Pombear

Donna - what is it that you're seeking?

Not seeking any of your suggestions! And thanks for taking time for such a long reply.

Re trans prisoners: in general, I think trans women who offend should be housed in women’s prisons. But if the offender has a history of violence, especially if it’s violence against women, they should obviously not be housed where they can harm women.

This is not just a trans versus non trans issue. I think there were 345 assaults on women prisoners in 2016, I can’t believe they were all done by the handful of trans prisoners so some of those assaults must have been carried out by non trans women and prison officers. Why focus on trans prisoners? If you’re concerned fir the safety of women, you need to look at the whole system.

I don’t know what accommodation is available for offenders. I would hope that the prison service would take account of someone being trans when deciding where to put them. But other aspects of the offender’s history need taking into account also.

Why did I post this on here? Because I have a lovely supportive environment on twitter, but I’d like to engage with people who, on the surface, disagree strongly with me. I’d like to see if there’s some common ground and a way to understand each other’s point of view.

I’ve read some good and thoughtful posts on this thread, so I’m glad I raised the issue. I hope people reading my posts will see this is not simply a war between 2 sides with nothing in common and that there are areas where people on both sides can agree.

Thanks for posting OP. Aren’t men awful? This is why women need their own spaces, isn’t it?

disingenuousity

Thanks for more evidence that women need their own spaces away from men.

Why focus on trans prisoners?

I don't think it's healthy to stop talking about male violence. Not talking about doesn't make it go away, it just stops women being able to discuss their feelings and experiences.

Telling women to stop focusing on male violence is not a feminist position.

Any ideas how we could reform the check system to protect children?

I’m glad you asked! What will help is ensuring that safeguarding procedures are followed - so single sex provision of some spaces and services is VERY important as I’m sure you know if you’re aware of the recommendations of aid agencies and the WHO. I’m sure you recognise that they have significant expertise and all such agencies recognise the need for single sex toilets.

What won’t help is reducing safeguarding- and allowing men into such spaces/services. As that would be the effect of self ID it follows that it’s a bad idea.

The DBS system has grown and changed in response to a number of real life, very awful cases in the uk. When a loophole has been found because predominantly male predators always exploit loopholes the safeguarding framework is reviewed and updated if needed.

What we take away fro the us case is:

Predators exploit loopholes
The vast majority are men
Safeguarding and single sex spaces are a vital part of the safeguarding framework
Safeguarding provides a risk reduction framework. In and of itself it cannot prevent every crime but it provides the framework to reduce the chances of crime. Thus...
dismantling that framework or weakening it will directly harm children by removing that layer of protection.

Nice to see you are so keen on safeguarding of kids - I agree it’s vital. I am a little confused as to how you think TRA demands are acceptable though, as they will effectively remove most of the safeguarding framework.

In response to the argument Not All Men / Not All Trans:

Nice to see you are so keen on safeguarding of kids - I agree it’s vital. I am a little confused as to how you think TRA demands are acceptable though, as they will effectively remove most of the safeguarding framework.

Yes, I'd like an answer to this.

So far this week we have seen Tara Hudson claim they should be given access on the basis of longevity, but not those Johnny come lately transwomen.

We have seen Debbie Hayton claim they should be given access on the basis of surgery, and disagreeing with self ID access, despite self ID-ing themself.

We see Michelle Lewin, a paedophile given access to women and children on the basis of a piece of paper.

And Karen White, rapist and a paedophile being given access to women and children on the basis of absolutely nothing.

We see homosexual transsexuals like India Willoughby claim they should have access because they are not, apparently, autogynephiles - who should absolutely be kept out.

And any number of autogynephiles claim they should have access on the basis that fetishising women makes them women and you're transphobic if you disagree.

And now the OP claiming transwomen should have access on the basis of their crime.

It's astonishing just how many men are deciding amongst themselves which women's boundaries should be dispensed with. Fighting over it, in fact.

How about no.

Just no.

The absolute disregard for any boundaries for females is how we know they are men. If these men had any respect for females at all they would never violate our boundaries.

Why focus on trans prisoners?

Because if there were 345 assaults on prisoners and even one of them was carried out by a transwoman who should actually have been in a men's prison then there would only have been 344 assaults, and less assaults is a Good Thing.

I like this:

Donna re the senator

"He’s not trans"

How do you know? Are you a personal friend? Do you have an insight into his mind?

If he says tomorrow he's a woman then he is literally a woman with a woman's body and a "woman's brain" and needs to go to women's prison quicksmart.

As it seems he prefers boys, this might not be such a disaster as with some other female women with female bodies that have used their female pensies to commit sex offences.

However, the presence of a little dicky in a cunts only space is significant even if there are no attacks committed:

• Risk pf pregnancy through consensual sex. Women in prison getting pregnant is not something anyone wants
• Showers sharing cells etc this should be cunts only space
• The WHOLE PRISON should be cunts only space as the female prison population is VASTLY different to the male population (in UK at least) and starting to put penis-people in there will fundamentally change the nature of it and oh GUESS WHAT vulnerable women will be put at a massive disadvantage

This is all obvious though isn't it.

The idea that women "do it too" (yeah we dont' really very much though do we) and so it's fine to put MALE RAPISTS in women's prison is so bizarrely preposterous I don't even know what to do with it.

Be aware that the general population will look at this and say NO this is UTTERLY FUCKING RIDICULOUS.

I'm off to fill in my response to the consultation now :)

Some facts & figures about "women do it too":

OP we seem to have found some common ground here, so let’s explore it.
You’re unhappy with DBS checks because they only flag up retrospective offending, so you‘d like suggestions for a more watertight system.
You believe that violent and sexual offenders should be kept out of the female estate.
You evidently believe that not all people who claim to be trans are in fact trans, therefor by extension, if you continue that logic, that some people may seek to abuse a system of self ID for nefarious purposes.
So what are your suggestions? Nobody can identify an abuser before they’ve been caught, so how do we identify abusive men who wish to self ID as a woman for the purposes of predating on women and children?
How can we ensure that any male bodied individual who gains access to female single sex spaces will not commit any offences?
How can we correctly identify people who are genuinely trans, as opposed to people like Karen White, who’s trans identity you question?
You clearly believe that a system of safeguarding should be implemented to prevent abusive predatory men gaining access to women and children, so how do you think that should work?

There are already several threads about safeguarding, start with those.

This thread is a collation of many examples of the failings/ potential failures of Child Protection and Safeguarding frameworks:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a3301266-Safeguarding-girls-and-protecting-women-post-Jimmy-Saville-metoo

‘He’s not trans’

Okidoki. And how do we tell? Us ladies who are told by stonewall that their magic umbrella covers all? What magic filter is there on the loo door? Some sort of Herbert-esque prudence barrier field?

Or, and here’s a radical idea, and kinda crazy, but bear with me because it’s worked for decades... we just don’t let men in the women’s bogs. at all. Any of them. At any point, ever.

I know. Radical eh?

Not even the Australian plumbers.

Jacky

I know. Most men who know they are men and claim no fellow-feeling with womanhood, nevertheless don't whinge about not being allowed into women's spaces, or about being assumed to be attackers. And the ones who don't, well they're the ones we don't want near us. But it's so very hard to tell the difference. And they all have a penis. Hence... nobody with a penis in sex segregated facilities. Now that is simple

HotRocker lots of interesting questions there. As you say, starting from apparent common ground with the OP.

As the OP has indicated their keen to discuss with others, I'll be interested in the response you get.

*they're ffs. Or 'their keenness'!

Most men who know they are men and claim no fellow-feeling with womanhood, nevertheless don't whinge about not being allowed into women's spaces, or about being assumed to be attackers.

Quite. Except for the extreme fringes of the MRA movement no man would ever demand access to a woman's refuge on the basis they thought being barred was the same as being called a rapist.

Except for the extreme fringes of the MRA movement no man would ever demand access to a woman's refuge on the basis they thought being barred was the same as being called a rapist.

Yes.

Hotrocker

OP we seem to have found some common ground here, so let’s explore it.

I’d love to discuss. I don’t entirely agree with how you’ve characterised my views though.
I haven’t time tonight.... I have to do some work when I get home, take the cat to the vets and spend some time with my family.

Yes, DBS checks are retrospective. I can’t think of a way we can screen people who work with children and vulnerable adults without being intrusive to the vast majority of good people. And I think attempting to screen people would probably make it very difficult to run services, and the people who are a threat would know exactly how to answer the questions to get through.

So I don’t see proactive checking as possible unless you refuse to allow anyone to work with kids because you might be day employ a child abuser. Then you don’t have services for children.

Do you see where this is going? A lot of people want to refuse trans women access to various “spaces”. One of the reasons is that someone might pretend to be trans to gain access. This is the “ don’t allow anyone in case” solution. You’re shutting out the vast majority of law abiding trans people because someone who’s not trans might do something bad.

As far as “Male bodied persons in female spaces” goes, I have 2 comments.
I was in the Ladies on Tuesday. There was a male plumber working in there, singing away to himself. He made me uncomfortable, but I didn’t feel threatened. Men in women’s spaces happens all the time, and it isn’t always threatening.
I don’t like the term “male bodied person” used by in the context of trans women. It’s too loaded.

Anyway....v happy to discuss all at length, but I’m busy tonight. :-)

There was a male plumber working in there, singing away to himself.

Perhaps not to just himself but to make clear his presence?

Some men do this deliberately so as let women know they are in a space which is expected to be single sex.

Just as in service stations, a sign is displayed clearly that a male is cleaning the women's toilets.