DM article - interview with female attacked in prison.

[DevonTF]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9819631/I-sexually-assaulted-womens-prison-fellow-inmate-male-genitalia.html.

Article in the DM - interview with a female prisoner assaulted in prison by a female identifying male. Awful to read, but it is showing the reality of this.

@Tibtom

But the EA also requires organisations not to discriminate against women.

It does, but in this case it would mean a sort of positive discrimination - requiring organisations to treat women differently from men in certain circumstances, which I don't think the EA addresses.

It allows organisations and service providers to treat women differently from men if there is a justifiable reason for doing so, but I don't there is anything in the EA about requiring organisations to treat women differently from men in any circumstances.

I think this is why this judicial review (and Ann Sinnott's) failed. Service providers cannot be compelled to provide single sex facilities. And I think this is why the judge suggested suing the MoJ and Sodexo for failing to make women's prisons safe for women. They can't be compelled to provide single sex accommodation, but they can be compelled to make the prisons safe for women (which they could do by invoking the single sex exception and making prisons single sex).

@DevonTF

Cllr Emma Edwards - Green Councillor in Bristol has responded to the article on twitter. Ignores the reality in the article - and calls CG women out 'lying with dogs. How are these people blind to the reality of all of this ?

Attack the writer and ignore the contents of the article, well done Cllr Emma Edwards, slow hand clap for you but good to know that you believe female prisoners deserve to be raped and sexually assaulted as part of their sentence. How progressive, how kind.

@ArabellaScott

In the comments:

'This is absolute madness and WHERE ARE the voices of women's groups?!!'

I replied to this and comment denied. In fact none of my comments regarding females and girls safety got past the mods

requiring organisations to treat women differently from men in certain circumstances, which I don't think the EA addresses.

That can lead to indirect discrimination though. If mixed-sex spaces can be shown to harm women more than men (not hard), then you can have a case for indirect discrimination on the basis of sex.

Indirect discrimination is of course harder to prove than a direct contravention of a law.

I'm wondering - shouldn't there be legal precedent here? Possibly not, because women's spaces were settled societally and legally long before any modern equality legislation. Institutions failing to provide single-sex accommodation just wasn't a thing.

@DevonTF

Cllr Emma Edwards - Green Councillor in Bristol has responded to the article on twitter. Ignores the reality in the article - and calls CG women out 'lying with dogs. How are these people blind to the reality of all of this ?

Careful with this, that screenshot tweet is from March, it’s not a direct response to this particular article. It is a stupid criticism of Julie Bindel, however, who has done more for women this week than that Councillor has done in her entire life.

Just don’t get caught in inaccuracies.

I replied to this and comment denied. In fact none of my comments regarding females and girls safety got past the mods

And here is the paradox. You can't tell people what's going on, online anywhere where people can pre-moderate you or post-moderate you.

Yet - if you attempt to describe this to people IRL it is so outlandish and tinfoil that people find it easier to disbelieve that this can be happening in plain sight in a democracy.

OP article concludes,

"'J is a serious sex offender. This judge's decision is insulting to her victims, to all female prisoners and to women everywhere. At least this case will have alerted the authorities to how dangerous J is.'

Amy believes the outcome of the case is so iniquitous that she intends to continue to campaign.

'I want to train as a lawyer,' she tells me. 'I want to help women who have been unfortunate enough to end up in prison because of the abuse they suffered in childhood and beyond.

'I would never have imagined this; that sex offenders would be allowed to prey on the most vulnerable women in society.'

are insufficient for Amy. I hope she knows how many women will support whatever campaign or legal training she decides on.
We must do all we can to ensure that that the most vulnerable in society are protected from dangerous men.

STILLTish article, Spetember 2019:

'Ministry of Justice: Updated Policy on caring for Transgender Prisoners.'

(extract)
"The policy exposes how far the, legally protected, characteristic of sex has been eroded, by allowing anyone, regardless of biology, to declare they are a woman. The prison system is illustrative of just how far Gender Identity ideology is embedded within our legislature and enshrined in public policy.

Below is a quote 👇 from James Morton, of the Scottish Trans Alliance, which shows that Female prisoners are the subjects of a dangerous laboratory experiment. James is listed as an author of the Scottish Prisons Policy which deals with Transgender Prisoners. As James is a lobbyist for Trans Rights there is only one group at the forefront of the policy. Spoiler. Its not Women.

‘We strategized – we strategized – that by working intensively with the Scottish Prison Service to support them to include trans women as women on a self-declaration basis within very challenging circumstances, we would be able to ensure that all other public services should be able to do likewise’.

The above quote is illustrative of a complete disregard for the female prison population; one of the most vulnerable groups in our society. Domestic violence refuges, rape crisis centres and female prisons do seem to figure prominently in the targeted locations. Captive females are being targeted for this new branch of Men’s rights activism." (continues)
gendercriticalwoman.wordpress.com/2019/09/19/ministry-of-justice-new-policy-on-caring-for-transgender-prisoners/

@EdgeOfACoin

I look forward to the 'we just want to pee' brigade and the 'my best friend is a lovely transwoman and you're all just hateful bigots for suggesting there might ever be a conflict of rights' club coming along to defend this policy.

Waits patiently.

Oh, there was one that was happy to defend it on the original thread.

Said the decision to house male sex offenders in women's prison (because the case was about excluding just sex offenders) was a ''good decision'', and now the case is 'over' we should all forget about rapists being handed victims on a plate in prisons and move on to more important feminist issues

But yes, apart from that one charmer, where are all the others that love telling us we're fearmongers, that its only happened ''once'' (Karen White) and that was a mistake that will never happen again?

‘We strategized – we strategized – that by working intensively with the Scottish Prison Service to support them to include trans women as women on a self-declaration basis within very challenging circumstances, we would be able to ensure that all other public services should be able to do likewise’.

Men, including paedophiles, rapists and sex offenders having access to vulnerable and incarcerated women, was always the goal.

One that required relentless 'strategy', to implement.

And yes, as previous people have said, its state sanctioned rape and assault of some of the most vulnerable women in our country.

It's difficult to get your head around quite how woman hating it all is.

NotBadConsidering - Yep - you are correct. Apologies. It has obviously become prominent - the attack on a journalist willing to stand up when she writes another piece.

Emma Edwards has has doubled-down, and posted her enlightened, inclusive speech. I have read it. Well written and articulate, completely ignores some of the key concerns and issues.

Sunday Times

February 23 2020,
'Critics of trans plan take heart from London news
As Conservatives drop gender recognition act, some believe the issue could damage the SNP'
(extract)
"James Morton, manager of the Scottish Trans Alliance, said it was “disingenuous” for the church to say that reform was being rushed. He said: “There has been ongoing robust public debate about this reform since 2017. Over 15,500 people took part in the first Scottish government consultation in 2018, and the bill is now going through a second additional consultation period above and beyond what most legislation is subject to.” (continues)

“The SPS does careful risk assessments and refuses to allow trans prisoners to move to the female estate if they pose a risk of predatory behaviour,” said Morton.

“Even when a trans woman is assessed as safe to be in the female estate, women prisoners do not share actual cells or shower with trans women. They only interact with any trans women in the closely supervised recreation and work areas where there are also male prison officers, visitors and tradesmen present.” (continues)

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/e91df7e8-55b8-11ea-9f52-925d1cf654c9?

relevant threads:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3829786-James-Morton-scottish-trans-alliance-quote

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3398737-We-re-Still-Here-Conference-8th-September-A-report-from-the-inside

The comments under that DM article are so ignorant and ill-informed though. I find that very depressing.
Women have been shouting into the void about this for years.
The Labour party, the Greens, the Lib Dems are all even worse than the current bunch on this issue.
Even on MN women are censored and silenced.
It is all a bit uphill to be fair.

women's spaces were settled societally and legally long before any modern equality legislation. Institutions failing to provide single-sex accommodation just wasn't a thing.

Yes. There was no reason to legislate for the provision of single sex services, because that was what was in place already, and there was an assumption that it would remain. All they needed to do was legislate to make sure that such single sex services were still legal after the EA2010 came into force. They didn't think to make them obligatory in cases such as prisons, because nobody imagined that anyone would be trying to dismantle single sex provision.

Fox in the hen house springs to mind. Horrifying

2015 Dr. James Barrett, President of the British Association of Gender Identity Specialists evidence to Maria Miller MP & the Women & Equalities Transgender Equality Inquiry:

"...the ever-increasing tide of referrals of patients in prison serving long or indeterminate sentences for serious sexual offences. These vastly outnumber the number of prisoners incarcerated for more ordinary, non-sexual, offences. It has been rather naïvely suggested that nobody would seek to pretend transsexual status in prison if this were not actually the case. There are, to those of us who actually interview the prisoners, in fact very many reasons why people might pretend this. These vary from the opportunity to have trips out of prison through to a desire for a transfer to the female estate (to the same prison as a co-defendant) through to the idea that a parole board will perceive somebody who is female as being less dangerous through to a [false] belief that hormone treatment will actually render one less dangerous through to wanting a special or protected status within the prison system"

data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/women-and-equalities-committee/transgender-equality/written/19532.pdf

Successful appeal of pre-operative transgender male prisoner transfer to Women's Estate, this overturned the Home Office's previous refusal. (2009)

There is no apparent dicussion or assessment of impact on female prisoners during the hearing except the following supportive evidence from the same Dr James Barrett of the Gender Identity Clinic, Charing Cross Hospital, who had also known the claimant for many years:

"it will become clear that she is so widely accepted as female in that unit that location in the main prison will follow. I think that such acceptance will pretty generally apply in the main prison, also, although there will probably always be a small number of prisoners who will choose to make an issue of the matter because they are the sort of women who enjoy conflict. If this patient is able to cope with protracted close proximity women of that sort I would judge her able to cope with the less prolonged, more avoidable, travails of the civilian world."

www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2009/2220.html

the sort of women who enjoy conflict.

Ffs how low can they go with their utter dismissal and disdain for women.

Really?! Even in the paper where they've published this article? FFS.

• replying to drinkingwine

are insufficient for Amy. I hope she knows how many women will support whatever campaign or legal training she decides on.
We must do all we can to ensure that that the most vulnerable in society are protected from dangerous men.

Yes, this must change.

I replied to this and comment denied. In fact none of my comments regarding females and girls safety got past the mods

I've literally never had a comment published on this bastion of free speech.

I think as with the Times, the comment moderation leaves a lot to be desired, but I'm grateful to both for publishing some brilliant articles.

[quote R0wantrees]Successful appeal of pre-operative transgender male prisoner transfer to Women's Estate, this overturned the Home Office's previous refusal. (2009)

There is no apparent dicussion or assessment of impact on female prisoners during the hearing except the following supportive evidence from the same Dr James Barrett of the Gender Identity Clinic, Charing Cross Hospital, who had also known the claimant for many years:

"it will become clear that she is so widely accepted as female in that unit that location in the main prison will follow. I think that such acceptance will pretty generally apply in the main prison, also, although there will probably always be a small number of prisoners who will choose to make an issue of the matter because they are the sort of women who enjoy conflict. If this patient is able to cope with protracted close proximity women of that sort I would judge her able to cope with the less prolonged, more avoidable, travails of the civilian world."

www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2009/2220.html[/quote]
I really wish I hadn't read that attached document and lived in blissful ignorance, I am so fucking fuming after reading that.

This James Barrett?

https://www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/hf73zo/drjamessbarrettcharinggcrossweirdd_experiences/