Telegraph - Women prisoners who call transgender inmates ‘he’ or ‘him’ face extra jail time

[OvaHere]

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/10/08/women-prisoners-call-transgender-inmates-face-extra-jail-time/

This is an utterly disgraceful abomination of human rights. First they put male rapists and murderers in women's prisons then the women are punished if they won't go along with the despicable pretence.

Extract

Women prisoners who call transgender inmates by the wrong pronoun could face extra time in jail under equality rules, says a justice minister.

Female inmates who deliberately call a transgender woman “he” or “him” could be punished under rules barring “threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour”.

The penalties will be decided by an independent adjudicator, a visiting judge, who has the power to impose additional days if they feel the abuse merits such a punishment.

The disclosure comes amid a growing debate over the policy of holding male-to-female transgender prisoners in women’s jails.

This summer, the High Court rejected a legal challenge to prevent transgender inmates with convictions for sexual or violent offences against women being imprisoned alongside other women.

In 2019, there were 34 transgender women who were still legally male detained at the 12 women’s prisons in England and Wales.

We can't post archive links now but the full article is out there if anyone wants to look.

Calling a male 'he' isn't bullying. 'He' isn't a slur, it's nothing like using slurs against black people, gay people, disabled people.

This is gaslighting already vulnerable women. Gaslighting, coercion, control, compelled speech. These female prisoners are being abused.
This absolutely will be used against them, to control them.

How can we have faith that the women will be listened to, should they be accused of 'misgendering'? The people we're relying on to give them a fair hearing are the same people that think it's fine to cage these women up with males, even if those males are rapists, so their respect and consideration for women is non-existent.

They've already made it perfectly clear whose side they're on, who matters more, that males having their feelings hurt is way worse than putting women locked up in their care at risk of being raped

It could work but that would require a starting point of recognising that there is a conflict of rights and whether to take any action against the "offending" female prisoner would involve a balancing of those conflicting rights. Unfortunately I have little confidence that things would be done in this way.

Seeing as how vindictive these people can be, I’m sure all the women who won’t play along and pander will get extra jail
Time.

They aren’t even trying to hide their hatred and disdain for women anymore. This is really like a post dystopian novel. Wrong think and wrong speak will get you punished.

I posted this on the other thread, and I haven't changed my mind yet.

Let's talk about pronouns. When we speak to people in English, we have one pronoun and it is unisex: you.

So any 'misgendering' can only consist of one person overhearing a second person speaking about them, without using their preferred terms, to a third party. Was it back in June that Laurie Penny said that if a child saw a penis in a spa, she should just look away? If a child should do that for a penis, why should the same not apply to an adult transgender prisoner?

There was once a time, in this country, when you could be imprisoned for speaking about the aristocracy or the monarchy with insufficient respect. (Lèse-majesté legislation and treason legislation) In other countries, you still can face such penalties, and this is rightly viewed as a human rights issue. But these days, I think there is universal agreement in the UK that no-one should be imprisoned for not referring to the Queen asHer Majesty, yes?

So, when did we agree that if someone identifying as trans didn't like what they overheard, the person who'd offended them could lose their freedom for it? This isn't about respecting the human rights of anyone, this is the creation of a brand new form of aristocracy with a complex system of titles, and the power to punish the plebs if they don't follow the etiquette!

The Queen should not have that power. None of her family should. And certainly nobody else should, either!

Jesus wept. These women are already being used. Vulnerable women, most of whom have been subjected to domestic abuse at the hands of men and most of whom have a head injury as a result. They are already being utterly manipulated as a tool, as a service, merely to validate men. And now those same men get to decide that they can increase their usage of these women. And the law is backing them up by punishing the women if they don't comply??

Transgenderism is shored up by sexism. It can't exist without it. So at the very least, these men are sexist, and at the worst they are violent sex offenders.

And what about those who have AGP? Which according to all the information is the majority. Are prison service expecting these women to validate a sexual fetish?

This is what happens when you completely ignore how statistically likely men are to be violent/sex offenders, and how statistically unlikely women are, and then mix them up because you yourself are a misogynist.

Forcing women, by dint of your power over them, to repeat gaslighting lies that they don't believe in, along with most people, is a disgusting and shameful reflection on our prison service.

It's more likely that person A will hear female prisoner B using the "wrong pronoun" to refer to trans person C, and either person A will make a complaint to the authorities or will report the "misgendering" to trans person C who will then complain.

Women to be punished for refusing to lie.

It gets harder when the person either has a condition (eg ASD) which makes them unable to give a different gender that they believe.... The writer said it could go either way in those cases, but would probably be allowed.

I have autism and it is distressing for me to be forced to lie when I know the truth. I have run afoul of MN's deletion rules because of this, which I find unfair. But there you go. Pandering to someone's invisible identity is more important than accommodating my disability, which has been formally assessed and documented.

@Datun

Jesus wept. These women are already being used. Vulnerable women, most of whom have been subjected to domestic abuse at the hands of men and most of whom have a head injury as a result. They are already being utterly manipulated as a tool, as a service, merely to validate men. And now those same men get to decide that they can increase their usage of these women. And the law is backing them up by punishing the women if they don't comply??

Transgenderism is shored up by sexism. It can't exist without it. So at the very least, these men are sexist, and at the worst they are violent sex offenders.

And what about those who have AGP? Which according to all the information is the majority. Are prison service expecting these women to validate a sexual fetish?

This is what happens when you completely ignore how statistically likely men are to be violent/sex offenders, and how statistically unlikely women are, and then mix them up because you yourself are a misogynist.

Forcing women, by dint of your power over them, to repeat gaslighting lies that they don't believe in, along with most people, is a disgusting and shameful reflection on our prison service.

Well said Datun.

Don't put males in women's prisons. Instant fix.

I feel a letter to my MP coming on.

It could work but that would require a starting point of recognising that there is a conflict of rights and whether to take any action against the "offending" female prisoner would involve a balancing of those conflicting rights.

I simply don't accept that referring to people as their sex is bullying in any way. It's an ideological view. I don't think people should have to lie. So no I don't accept that it could work or would ever be fair.

Don't put males in women's prisons. Instant fix.

When you accept the lie and you have to build a world around the lie then you have to punish people for not upholding the lie. The point at which the lie led to vulnerable women being housed with male offenders is the point we should have called time on this. We're on the third stage when most people aren't even aware we've accepted men are ACTUALLY women.

It all depends on how the referring to someone's sex occurs. As an aside in normal conversation, no, that's not bullying. As part of campaign of sustained harassment, well, that's a different thing.

I'm with the High Court in the Maya Forstater decision: the manifestation of the viewpoint is relevant.

@HeddaAga

Don't put males in women's prisons. Instant fix.

When you accept the lie and you have to build a world around the lie then you have to punish people for not upholding the lie. The point at which the lie led to vulnerable women being housed with male offenders is the point we should have called time on this. We're on the third stage when most people aren't even aware we've accepted men are ACTUALLY women.

Yes this. Lie upon lie told in service of the original lie. Atrocities committed based upon lies.

@nauticant

It all depends on how the referring to someone's sex occurs. As an aside in normal conversation, no, that's not bullying. As part of campaign of sustained harassment, well, that's a different thing.

I'm with the High Court in the Maya Forstater decision: the manifestation of the viewpoint is relevant.

This whole thing since the inception of the GRA in 2004 has been a campaign of sustained harassment against women.

Lie upon lie told in service of the original lie.

In a previous thread about men in women's prisons, I say "There was an old lady who swallowed a fly" brought up as the analogy.

An ever-increasingly ridiculous set of "solutions" adopted to deal with a very simple original error.

And Helen Joyce has referred to it as permitting "1 = 0" somewhere in a mathematical framework. Once that's permitted, everything else dissolves - nothing else can be true, or false.

@HeddaAga

Don't put males in women's prisons. Instant fix.

When you accept the lie and you have to build a world around the lie then you have to punish people for not upholding the lie. The point at which the lie led to vulnerable women being housed with male offenders is the point we should have called time on this. We're on the third stage when most people aren't even aware we've accepted men are ACTUALLY women.

YY.

But what we have is re-writing of rules and regulations, organising committees, having meetings, getting advice and mangling laws, to try and make the lie work as the truth.

Handwringing, over and over about what to do with transwomen, how to designate them, what panel they need to go in front of, what qualifications they need, what credibility their history can and can't provide.

And it sometimes still feels like the original smack to the solar plexus, when we realise we're still doing this because everyone has to pretend it's not a whopping lie.

But what we have is re-writing of rules and regulations, organising committees, having meetings, getting advice and mangling laws, to try and make the lie work as the truth.

Handwringing, over and over about what to do with transwomen, how to designate them, what panel they need to go in front of, what qualifications they need, what credibility their history can and can't provide.

And it sometimes still feels like the original smack to the solar plexus, when we realise we're still doing this because everyone has to pretend it's not a whopping lie.

This. I don't believe it is a human right to be referred to by the pronoun of your choice, so I don't perceive any correct use of pronouns as "harassment" or "bullying". I recognise the law does and I think the law is misguided.

I don't believe it is a human right to be referred to by the pronoun of your choice, so I don't perceive any correct use of pronouns as "harassment" or "bullying". I recognise the law does and I think the law is misguided.

And you see this slipping into any reference to someone as being male as being "misgendering". Any leeway on pronouns is extended to all indicators of male/female because they are understood to be denoting sex, and hence if you force the lie on pronouns, you can force the lie globally.

Like when the Connecticut athlete Chelsea Mitchell wrote an op-ed for USA Today, which they edited after publication to replace all references to "male" with "transgender" so they had her complaining about having to compete with "transgender athletes" rather than "male athletes". And they apologised for the "hurtful language".

Chelsea Mitchell wrote an op-ed for USA Today, which they edited after publication to replace all references to "male" with "transgender" so they had her complaining about having to compete with "transgender athletes" rather than "male athletes".

This societal-level enforced immersive fiction is making communication implausibly difficult.

@nauticant

It's more likely that person A will hear female prisoner B using the "wrong pronoun" to refer to trans person C, and either person A will make a complaint to the authorities or will report the "misgendering" to trans person C who will then complain.

The parallels to Lèse Majesté legislation in Thailand become ever clearer.

Thailand's lese-majeste law, which forbids the insult of the monarchy, is among the strictest in the world.

It has been increasingly enforced ever since the Thai military took power in 2014 in a coup, and many people have been punished with harsh jail sentences.

(continues)

Anyone can file a lèse-majesté complaint, and the police formally investigate all of them.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-29628191

I don't think the King of Thailand has ever personally overheard any of the comments. Much like blasphemy laws, in which it's never God H**self who brings the charge, it always seems to be someone else who made the objection. Almost like people will use rules to control others, given the opportunity.

You're not allowed to discriminate against someone on the basis of their religious views.

But no one thinks that that means you can't say Jesus wept, or oh my God in front of a Christian. They don't use those terms because to them it's blasphemous. But no one is telling female prisoners that if they say Jesus F Christ in front of a Christian, they could get more days added to their sentence.

And you see this slipping into any reference to someone as being male as being "misgendering".

Exactly. As it was always going to. Some people really need to do a course on coercive control.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

And you see this slipping into any reference to someone as being male as being "misgendering".

Exactly. As it was always going to. Some people really need to do a course on coercive control.

Why the general public isn't more shocked by the fact we're have a framework of authoritarianism put in place and the scale is not creeping it's being constructed rapidly and with gross restrictions.

Interesting point that a witness in court has to swear to tell the truth. Not sure if a Bible is used any more but it used to be. If, for example, a Christian has sworn on the Bible to tell the truth then can they then be forced to lie by calling a man a woman? Surely that would be religious discrimination?