MOJ Prison Policy JR TODAY

[ChazsBrilliantAttitude]

Just seen on Twitter.

Will post links

Thank you Tibtom

Thanks @Tibtom

Bingo. The single-sex exemptions aren't about GRCs. They're the things that let you have any male-only or female-only services.

Exactly, so many people fail to grasp this.

Office of the High Commissioner of the Unied Nations for Human Rights

Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners

www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/treatmentofprisoners.aspx

*United

The women's estate isn't as overcrowded as men's.
Could the reason be that callous? Just thinking how women's refuges are being wound down to save money. The more males that want to identify out of overcrowded men's prisons, the better?

Does anyone get sick of the endless definition dodging when it comes to ‘gender’? It seems their position is to make ‘gender’ as incomprehensible as possible, as if it was defined it would be so easily smashed to smithereens.

I just want one person heading up these reviews to say, ‘until gender is defined we cannot apply it in any way’.

This is nothing short of state sanctioned rape and sexual assault of the most vulnerable in society who have NO means of escape.

Quite.

Yet again, falling only on females.

Females being raped, assaulted, harassed, frightened, intimidated, losing their privacy and dignity is considered a worthwhile price of meeting TW need for affirmation of gender identity.

However TM need for affirmation is not possible, because the TM would be the one who would suffer as opposed to other people absorbing the necessary price.

It's wholly sex based thinking, a clear acknowledgement that sex plays an insuperable part in this and forms insuperable barriers of need and treatment, and as always female people lose in this practice - whether they identify as female or not - while there is no impact upon any male people at all in either estate. None. The burden falls entirely in a sex class based way and only to one side.

We used to think this was wrong. We used to have words for this. There was a time when decent politicians would have been utterly horrified and raising Caine about this.

I was brought to this board and this battle by ocado (still annoyed ) but my attention was held by this issue. Dystopian is right.
I am so fortunate to have been born into a loving, supportive family and have had considerable luck in other ways through my life (and a pathological fear of being told off ) which means I will probably never go to prison.
Those women that aren't so lucky and have found themselves serving time would think they've been ignored, irrelevant collateral. It's shitty and it isn't acceptable and I'm really really fucking angry about it.

Does anyone get sick of the endless definition dodging when it comes to ‘gender’? It seems their position is to make ‘gender’ as incomprehensible as possible, as if it was defined it would be so easily smashed to smithereens.

So true.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Does anyone get sick of the endless definition dodging when it comes to ‘gender’? It seems their position is to make ‘gender’ as incomprehensible as possible, as if it was defined it would be so easily smashed to smithereens.

So true.

Yes quite.

The word salad is quite deliberate, on the one hand. But also a direct result of the incoherent nonsense that makes up the gender ideology house of cards.

Luckily there is an immutable standard which can be applied in every case - that of biological fact. A human female will always be a human female, and a human male will always be a human male. That fact should always stand in law and legislation.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Does anyone get sick of the endless definition dodging when it comes to ‘gender’? It seems their position is to make ‘gender’ as incomprehensible as possible, as if it was defined it would be so easily smashed to smithereens.

So true.

I feed the pigeons, I sometimes feed the sparrows too It gives me a sense of enormous well-being

Hi everyone,

Thanks for all your support and interest for this very important case.
Live tweeted from court today and will attend remotely and live tweet again tomorrow.

The points that I took away from today's proceedings are as follows:

1. The 'old' policy on allocation of transgender prisoners (pre Karen White) allowed a degree of discretion re allocation of trans prisoners, including those with a GRC. The new & current one (at least in respect of TW with GRC) does not. (My take is that this now puts women at increased risk, whereas the revised policy should have protected women.)

1. Secretary of State for Justice when formulating the new policy post-Karen White stated that the single-sex exceptions in the Equality Act do not apply to prisons. (My take is that if women's prisons are not a definitive example of a single-sex space, then what is?)

1. Before the new policy rolled out there was a 'consultation' with stakeholders including Fair Play and the Centre for Crime and Justice Studied. But evidence presented in court shows Minister had already agreed the new policy predicated on the opinion that single-sex exceptions do not apply to prisons. Therefore this was not in fact a consultation, and none took place. The interests of women in prison were not represented. The evidence presented at that time by FPFW & CCJS was not considered: the decision had been made.

1. I am concerned that in November 2020, Lucy Frazer (Minister for Prisons) re-affirmed the correctness of the policy on allocation of transgender prisoners. This supports the previous Ministerial view that EA single-sex exceptions do not apply to prisons. Yet in September 2020 Liz Truss gave clear statement affirming government commitment to single-sex spaces. Does this commitment extend to prisons or not? This is an important question that government needs to answer.

Thank you for what you are doing. Here's a gin

Luckily there is an immutable standard which can be applied in every case - that of biological fact. A human female will always be a human female, and a human male will always be a human male. That fact should always stand in law and legislation.

And, I hasten to add, in government policy.

Thank you KPSS

Yes, and and

Those women that aren't so lucky and have found themselves serving time would think they've been ignored, irrelevant collateral. It's shitty and it isn't acceptable and I'm really really fucking angry about it.

Same here. The decisions made by those with responsibility for these women's safety and security seem unconscionable.

KPSS - I think it's less interest than absolute raging disbelief.

Thank you With you all the way, so grateful you are fighting so hard to stand up for the right of vulnerable, imprisoned women to even be given the most basic consideration.

KeepPrisonsSingleSex thanks for live tweeting today.

KeepPrisonsSingleSex if SSJ thinks singke sex exemption does not apply then why aren't prisons mixed sex? And why do only transgender males get to move to those which accidentally(?) have somehow ended up nearly all female?

@NecessaryScene1

If the MOJ thkught single sex exemptions did not apply to prisons then why on earth are there male prisons and female prisons? Why are they not mixed?

Bingo. The single-sex exemptions aren't about GRCs. They're the things that let you have any male-only or female-only services.

If the single-sex exemptions didn't apply to prisons, then wouldn't single sex prisons be illegal? Single-sex exemptions are there to allow for separate services for the sexes because to have them mixed sex would be unacceptable. In any situation where mixed sex is acceptable and the single-sex exemptions don't apply, to refuse the use of that facility to anyone on the grounds of sex is discriminatory.

KPSS
Thank you so much for today and all your hard work.

I was thinking of a prisons’ version of the Staniland question

“If John Warboys obtained a GRC should they be moved to a woman’s prison?”

I feed the pigeons, I sometimes feed the sparrows too
It gives me a sense of enormous well-being

Indeed. And it's not about you joggers who go round and round and round