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.

MN rules for this work fine. I will gladly use a person's name. I will gladly avoid using the sex based pronoun the person has specifically stated they do not want used, where possible and where that person is within a socially reciprocating situation. Basically if they are polite to me I'm happy to be polite in return.

What I won't do is lie and use a pronoun I don't believe in, or avoid being clear about sex based reality if it is necessary for me to do so to protect my boundaries, or those of other women. If those boundaries aren't being trampled it won't be necessary for me to do so.

As mentioned in I think Maya's court case: there are rules and boundaries to manage actual bullying as opposed to other situations, and the danger is the two being merged. A woman following a TW around shouting sex based pronouns to harass and cause distress is bullying and should be stopped. Although I want to know for what other bullying actions are sentences increased; what is this on a par with and are pronouns seen as significantly worse than other forms of bullying. People are sadly going to sometimes be unpleasant.

A woman who fails to always be able to jump her language through someone else's hoops correctly, has autism or other needs, is not bullying. A woman in prison who is being treated in an unpleasant and harassing way by a male person who has a hell of a lot of power over her in this situation may use the only remaining power she has left to name the reality of the situation. That is not bullying.

It's where 'misgendering' is invested with special powers that it goes wrong.

A woman following a TW around shouting sex based pronouns to harass and cause distress is bullying and should be stopped.

I will add to that, that in the light of the evidence coming from prison guards, women prisoners and collated by the Keep Prisons Single Sex campaign, I don't have much remaining belief in the idea of a vulnerable TW being subordinated to more powerful women; particularly TW with a history of serious sex offending against women. The power seems very much established on the other side.

There also has to be the issue of yet more power being handed to the male person to control and subordinate female people already harassed and subordinated by their presence. In this situation it is possible to envisage why some women will be angry enough to retaliate.

A woman following a TW around shouting sex based pronouns to harass and cause distress is bullying and should be stopped

And conversely a TW following a woman around demanding "am I a woman" to harass and cause distress is bullying and should be stopped.

You do see this sort of attempt to cause confrontation occurring from TW quite often - at least more often than the converse. Unsurprising if they now feel they can get someone in trouble for saying the wrong thing. Male aggression has a new outlet.

Examples that spring to mind are that report of Mridha Wadwha from a partygoer, and a recent Tiktok video of someone having a rant at a drive-through.

And conversely a TW following a woman around demanding "am I a woman" to harass and cause distress is bullying and should be stopped.

You do see this sort of attempt to cause confrontation occurring from TW quite often - at least more often than the converse. Unsurprising if they now feel they can get someone in trouble for saying the wrong thing. Male aggression has a new outlet.

Yes, exactly this.

I think this is where it becomes confusing with transgender surely either we accept that they are male or female depending on circumstances. We can’t keep swapping depending on circumstances.

This. Either they are "women" who must be afforded female pronouns or they aren't.

This sounded a lot like that storyline to me.

Yes, it did, didn't it?

I’m confused. I thought feminists long supported the concept of crimes being punished harder because of discrimination/hate/or ill will as an aggravating factor? I also thought feminists supported the idea that people shouldn’t be allowed to say certain offensive things to others?

This is simply the things feminists have long advocated for put into practice. Bullying based on protected characteristics not being tolerated with the test of whether bullying has occurred or not largely being based on the victim’s perception? Surely they didn’t just want their own immutable characteristics protected in law and not everyone else’s? Because equality isn’t equality if doesn’t apply to everyone. Feminists should be pleased about finally getting the policies that they wanted.

Our characteristics aren't protected in law. It's not a hate crime to use misogynistic words, in the same way it is to use "transphobic" ones. So feminists haven't "won". Hope that helps.

I’m confused. I thought feminists long supported the concept of crimes being punished harder because of discrimination/hate/or ill will as an aggravating factor?

Did they? I imagine some people calling themselves feminists may have done so, but I don't see how it necessarily arises from feminist principles. (Not really a feminist expert...)

On the whole the push from this sort of thing was initially directed towards race and homophobia, afaik.

"Feminists" aren't speaking with one voice here. Those around here are far more inclined towards classical liberal principles and universal rights, rather than the "identity politics" type. We're generally supportive of "Fair Cop" who are fighting against excessive use of "hate" stuff by police, distorting the legal process. We just want women to be treated fairly as people.

I think everyone here is bothered by the asymmetry where the police care about "transphobia" but not "misogyny", but I think the majority would rather rectify that by cutting back on application of "hate" than giving "misogyny" the same privileges.

(And personally, I think "misogyny" as an analogue to "transphobia" or "homophobia" is a bad fit for women's problems anyway. Women suffer oppression, not just discrimination. Women actually are a resource for men - sex providers and child bearers - not just an "other", and as such suffer systematic oppression in a way other groups like trans/gay do not. Acts against them do not so much arise from "hate" as their biological position w.r.t. males. Attempts to unpick "misogyny" from that and treat it worse than other male-vs-female crime would not really help.)

I think everyone here is bothered by the asymmetry where the police care about "transphobia" but not "misogyny", but I think the majority would rather rectify that by cutting back on application of "hate" than giving "misogyny" the same privileges.

Yes I agree. I don't believe "hate" should solely be based on the perception of the complainant. There should be an objective test.

And yes, excellent point about structural oppression.

And conversely a TW following a woman around demanding "am I a woman" to harass and cause distress is bullying and should be stopped.

Definitely this ^^

The common factor is the intent to harass and cause distress.

Which is bullying.

Which policies and practice already exist to manage perfectly well.

Pronouns should not be anything special or different in their own right.

(Does the TW get their sentence added to for bullying? Is the equality there? What about sentences extended for sexual assault of women?)

And yes, excellent point about structural oppression.

Thanks! I stole it from Jane Clare Jones - this is one of her bugbears...

She hates bad analogies, and thinking of women as "just" being like any other discriminated-against minority is one of them.

I simply feel that bullying focuses on a noticed thing that really hits home with the target.

It does. And the trans lobby have managed to convince the world that correctly identifying the sex of a male is bullying. It isn't.

(See Helen Joyce's book, Trans and the narcissistic rage of autogynephiles).

No one should be bullied in prison.

Forcing women to adhere to an ideology that requires compelled speech and repeated lies under threat of punishment is bullying.

I don't see why bullying (persistent targeting using whatever upsets or scares the target loads) should have ONE exception written IN.

It already does. The sex of a male in a female prison is relevant 24/7. It's the most relevant thing about them. These women must be forced to pretend they agree with the ideology that makes them subordinate.

Its like they thought of the most likely people dynamic to encourage bullying (incarcerating men with women), added the best case scenario, (make women obey the men or else), wound it up as tight as possible and set it off.

And the real kicker is that if the women don't comply it is because they are the ones with the power!

It's a massive con.

And conversely a TW following a woman around demanding "am I a woman" to harass and cause distress is bullying and should be stopped.

Not a prison situation, but this immediately brought to my mind the image of I Willoughby in CBB, bellowing in full narc rage mode at the cowed women contestants, “I AM A WOMAN! LET THAT PENETRATE!”.

Bullying - facilitated by big dollops of male entitlement and the fact of living in a society that fundamentally privileges males over females.

This notion that it is the women who are liable to bully by using correct sex pronouns is ridiculous and “problematic”. The women in this scenario are being bullied by the male people. Over and over and over again. Fundamentally.

I will add to that, that in the light of the evidence coming from prison guards, women prisoners and collated by the Keep Prisons Single Sex campaign, I don't have much remaining belief in the idea of a vulnerable TW being subordinated to more powerful women; particularly TW with a history of serious sex offending against women. The power seems very much established on the other side.

There also has to be the issue of yet more power being handed to the male person to control and subordinate female people already harassed and subordinated by their presence. In this situation it is possible to envisage why some women will be angry enough to retaliate.

Agreed, ArtichokeLeaves.

It's a massive con.

Indeed it is, Datun.

@ConfusedInNY

I’m confused. I thought feminists long supported the concept of crimes being punished harder because of discrimination/hate/or ill will as an aggravating factor? I also thought feminists supported the idea that people shouldn’t be allowed to say certain offensive things to others?

This is simply the things feminists have long advocated for put into practice. Bullying based on protected characteristics not being tolerated with the test of whether bullying has occurred or not largely being based on the victim’s perception? Surely they didn’t just want their own immutable characteristics protected in law and not everyone else’s? Because equality isn’t equality if doesn’t apply to everyone. Feminists should be pleased about finally getting the policies that they wanted.

Citations please...

@Datun

I simply feel that bullying focuses on a noticed thing that really hits home with the target.

It does. And the trans lobby have managed to convince the world that correctly identifying the sex of a male is bullying. It isn't.

(See Helen Joyce's book, Trans and the narcissistic rage of autogynephiles).

No one should be bullied in prison.

Forcing women to adhere to an ideology that requires compelled speech and repeated lies under threat of punishment is bullying.

I don't see why bullying (persistent targeting using whatever upsets or scares the target loads) should have ONE exception written IN.

It already does. The sex of a male in a female prison is relevant 24/7. It's the most relevant thing about them. These women must be forced to pretend they agree with the ideology that makes them subordinate.

Its like they thought of the most likely people dynamic to encourage bullying (incarcerating men with women), added the best case scenario, (make women obey the men or else), wound it up as tight as possible and set it off.

And the real kicker is that if the women don't comply it is because they are the ones with the power!

It's a massive con.

Great post altogether. Bears repeating.

@Deliriumoftheendless

I think the Mean Girls- the Prison Years was Hollyoaks.

Thanks, you’re right. Having googled, Sally St Claire was the character.

Honestly. Its machiavellian.

Force women into a situation where if they acknowledge both reality and the danger and coercion you've put them in, it constitutes the power they have over you AND you can punish them for it.

Ffs.

It's a pattern of behaviour. It's basically STFU.

@NiceGerbil

And I've never been told to feck off either! It's not a term I've heard IRL. Surely it is for fuck? And round here fuck off is heard very often so I mean it's no big deal either way!

Feck is Irish and is completely different in tone to “fuck”. It’s much milder. Father Ted helped popularise it over here.

www.thejournal.ie/readme/feck-meaning-origin-stan-carey-622374-Oct2012/

Bullying - facilitated by big dollops of male entitlement and the fact of living in a society that fundamentally privileges males over females.

Entitled male (offender) says "I'm a woman I want to be imprisoned with women" - system facilitates. Entitled male offender says "the women must also say I'm a woman" - system facilitates. Same old shit, different dress.

@Datun

Honestly. Its machiavellian.

Force women into a situation where if they acknowledge both reality and the danger and coercion you've put them in, it constitutes the power they have over you AND you can punish them for it.

Ffs.

It's a pattern of behaviour. It's basically STFU.

That. Absolutely that.

@Datun

Honestly. Its machiavellian.

Force women into a situation where if they acknowledge both reality and the danger and coercion you've put them in, it constitutes the power they have over you AND you can punish them for it.

Ffs.

It's a pattern of behaviour. It's basically STFU.

It’s like the logical endpoint of the whole situation, isn’t it.

It’s all Machiavellian, all based on a reversal/denial of reality and the actual power dynamics at play.

Women in prison are at the extreme end of what is happening to the rest of us. They have literally no escape. They are completely powerless. They can easily be condemned to spend more time in prison as a punishment for breaking the rules without having to go to an actual trial: they’re there already.

But it’s the same thing that’s happening to women outside prison too.
Women facing disciplinaries or losing their jobs.
Women being harassed and abused so much they don’t dare participate fully in civic life.
Women victims of male violence being penalised in court for not referring to their attackers as “she”.
Women being investigated and prosecuted for “hate crime” for expressing their political opinions.

It’s a human rights abuse when it happens in Saudi Arabia. But it’s progress when it happens in Scotland?

We use the same words over and over again but it’s because they’re the only words that fit: dystopian, authoritarian, misogynistic. This is a profoundly woman-hating and woman-blaming culture we live in. Women in prison are being treated with contempt, with prejudice, with a denial of their human rights. All in order to prioritise a group of biologically male offenders.

And women in prison and out of it are told we’re the bad guys.

This is a profoundly woman-hating and woman-blaming culture we live in. Women in prison are being treated with contempt, with prejudice, with a denial of their human rights....And women are told we’re the bad guys.

You may want to check out another thread where women are being told that until they give in, nothing will get better. And that will be their fault.

And they're only not co operating because they 'don't like trans people'. Not because they have needs or real issues or anything, or any real reasons, because obviously women's lives don't ever revolve around anything other than male people.

Words fail. I struggle daily to get my head around this absolute farce.