Ricky Gervais chimes in over Karen White

[Freespeecher]

Rickeyyy!!!

twitter.com/rickygervais/status/1050707771837026304?s=20

Brownpaperteddy: "That's interesting although nearly 40 years ago. I wonder what human rights laws would say now? Given that being trans gender is a protected characteristic what does that mean for prisons?"

It seems to bear out Tara Hudson's experience. A prison authority without a clue what to do; inmates who were interacting with Tara, flirting with Tara, but actually no violence towards Tara.

You see, I hear about all these men who are supposed to go mad and attack on sight of a transwoman.
There doesn't seem to be so much hard evidence of them.

I hear you Lang, but I don't think even high risk violent women prisoners deserve to be forced to share showers etc with that sex-by-deception-transman, or a high risk pump up penis transman (it would bother me, I don't want be forced to see an real erection or a fake one thanks) so I'd like them segregated for their sake not the transman's.

I'm not that bothered if it is in a trans wing or a segregated unit in the women's prison or separate timetables, or a secure psychiatric unit so long as they are getting some serious treatment for their abusive behaviour before they are reintegrated with women. And I don't much care if it makes them feel left out.

So much easier to deal with when female offending is at considerably lower levels than male offending.

Hopefully it is already well managed within the female estate.

Irrespective of what you believe or not about the general trans community, why are we not accepting that convicted violent or sex offenders are likely to be liars with an incentive to place themselves among vulnerable women?

Those sort of prisoners often lie about their mental health in order to get what they perceive to be special treatment. Why would they not lie about their gender too?

Two Peneth also on freedom of speach around the trans issue by the lovely Johnathan Pie. www.facebook.com/JonathanPieReporter/videos/250528485612785/

Well, quite!

Wouldn't it have been so easy?

"Well now, Ms White: are you a real transwoman or a just-pretend-to-get-his-hands-on-vulnerable-women one?"
"Honest, guv, I'm the real thing! Butter wouldn't melt!"

Recently there were cartoon penis stickers with "women don't have penises" written on put up in public places.

TRAs described these as being transphobic, a hate crime, something that trans women should not have to tolerate due to the emotional harm such things could cause.

And yet, women are transphobic if they find it emotionally harmful to share a space with an actual penis, attached to someone who says they're a woman. They just have to accept it and deal with it, and even expressing it is to be condemned and shut down.

That's not even considering the physical harm some trans women with a penis might cause women. Trans women's pattern, type, breakdown of crimes is more like men's than it is women's.

The risk of harm to women is too great to allow a dogmatic approach based on feelings rather than facts to influence policy and safeguarding.

That trans people also need protection is clearly true, but not at the expense of women.

Being trans gender is not a protected characteristic. Having a GRC means you’re protected. Doesn’t mean you’ve done jackshit to your male body and doesn’t mean you’re a woman.

Irrespective of what you believe or not about the general trans community, why are we not accepting that convicted violent or sex offenders are likely to be liars with an incentive to place themselves among vulnerable women?

There's that too. By definition convicted sex offenders are people who can't be trusted. Why would you ever even consider taking them at their word? They've already proven that their word means nothing (and most of them will have lied like rugs during the trial, if for some reason you need even more proof that they're not trustworthy).

May have been said before but could we eventually make segregated wings in women's prisons for transwomen instead of in men's prisons? Then they don't need to feel their identity is being violated but the women can still have their privacy, safety and lack of pregnancy risk.

Why? Stick ‘em in segregated wings of men’s prisons. Why should facilities for women make any provision for men?

Do you really think they wouldn't then lobby relentlessly to be moved into the main section?

At some point the answer has to be "no". Continued attempts at "compromise" just encourage them to keep pushing.

The women's prison estate is too small and too old to cope with that level of expansion. Relative to the men's estate it is small and already very limited with too many of the institutions too far away from inmates' friends and family to be able to keep up relationships against the day that they are released.

If self-ID is allowed, it will not take many prisoners to self-ID before they would require a disproportionate amount of the female estate and there just aren't the facilities.

I know I've written this up before with various links but AS is letting me down and I need to go to bed. (Many, many, train delays followed by tree on the line, a bus replacement service that didn't come, and now being dropped off with a long walk back...)

Transwomen need to be managed by people with experience and expertise in male offending and male MH disorders etc., that means it will need to be near/ part of the male estate. Otherwise resources are spread too thin or they will be unsuitbaly mananged by female prison staff.

If trans women a wing groups together they can hardly complain that they are not being housed with other women can they.

typo sorry, *if transwomen are in groups together they can hardly complain that they are not being housed with other women can they.

Why? Because I think it would be more comfortable for the "Isla" posited a few pages up, would reduce the strength of the argument of the Karen Whites to be moved to female provision (they're already in female provision), and would achieve that without vulnerable women being forced to share a cell with a penis or anyone being forced to try to draw a line down the middle to say which transwomen are "genuine" and "nonviolent" and which are a risk. Just a thought, maybe it doesn't work.

That's another issue, why should female prison staff who applied to work at a women's prison be expected to manage male sex offenders?

catkind their identity is not being violated; they are transwomen who by definition have 'transitioned' and are born male.

They might be being confronted with a reality/ truth they don't like, but a lot of people in prison will be feeling that same way when they wake up and realise where they are.

I hear you Lang, but I don't think even high risk violent women prisoners deserve to be forced to share showers etc with that sex-by-deception-transman, or a high risk pump up penis transman

Why?

This is such a huge change in the fabric of our society. I don't pretend to have a handle on it at all but I do realise that one rule won't cover everything.

Where were you when Chris Grayling took books away from prisoners? Have you campaigned about prison conditions? Indefinite sentences? JENGbA? Have you volunteered as a prison visitor or letter writer? Have you volunteered or raised money for charities helping women leaving prison? Or charities trying to help care leavers on a bad path stay out of prison? Or similar for women involved in drugs or prostitution?

(Me? About half those things.)

It's clear you have no understanding of the prison system or of those incarcerated within it. You even admit it yourself. Yet here you are, tying up women's time with arrant nonsense as you desperately flail around trying to find increasingly desperate ways to circumvent common sense and evidence.

This is typical of transactivism: trying to bend reality to fit an ideology in complete ignorance of systems. It would be pitiful really, were it not for the fact that it has its useless tentacles everywhere and is going to cause crisis upon crisis upon crisis because ideology does not change reality. At some point, society is going to have to clear up a tsunami of damage. And I, for one, will not forgive those who helped cause it.

At some point, society is going to have to clear up a tsunami of damage. And I, for one, will not forgive those who helped cause it.

Guess who'll be there to help clean up the damage (women, as usual, with radfems vastly overrepresented in those who care enough to help, especially given that many of the institutions that will need repaired like refuges were created by us in the first place) and who won't be.

If you want to be nice and feel kind and helpful go rescue a kitten rather than offering up women's spaces to anyone who demands access to them. Those spaces are not yours alone and are not yours to give away.

Yes good point, female prison staff also have the right not to be confronted with male anatomy unless they have agreed to deal with that. There have also been cases of that in the news haven't there? Where a prisoner pretended to be trans as a way of abusing female officers by trying to compel them to search him?

seafret, I'm seeing gender identity as a belief system I guess. Trying to find a way society could deal with gender believers in prison in a way that allows them to practice their religion without imposing it on others. For someone who genuinely believes they are a woman, being labelled male must be difficult.

Being labelled trans should not be though. Women clearly can't be forced to work in a trans wing, but can we impose male officers when that's against the inmates' religion? Or do we now need to recruit trans prison officers for everyone's comfort? (Flippantly, just send in male officers with wigs, not like they're going to discuss their private lives so the prisoners could know if they were trans or not. I know I know...)

Apologies if I'm being stupidly behind the arguments, I joined in late. I'm not a believer.

I have been discussing the whole trans issue with my "woke" 19 year old dd. I tried to liken the issue in chocolate bar terms (chocolate always gets her attention) So if a Snickers said it was a Mars and it was to be treated as a Mars bar would people with life threatening allergies be forced to buy them, given that only a small but significant population have such allergies? Her answer was don't be ridiculous of course Snickers have nuts and are dangerous to allergy sufferers. My answer was so do a huge percentage of transwomen and they are capable of being a danger if not physically then mentally to women prisoners, she has gone up to bed with no response.

LangCleg

"I hear you Lang, but I don't think even high risk violent women prisoners deserve to be forced to share showers etc with that sex-by-deception-transman, or a high risk pump up penis transman"

Why?

You're asking why female prisoners shouldn't have to share showers with a trans man convicted of sexually assaulting women???

If a trans women needs to go to a women's prison then can't the rule be she must have had the full bottom surgery. So there is no risks to the others serving time does anyone think that?