Women and girls' sex-based rights

[StephanieSuperpowers]

Well, here we are...

To my fairly ignorant (on this) mind, there are two issues around prisons:

First, the number of men who, taking any sort of dispassionate view of it, look very likely to be using the tactic of identifying as a woman to gain access to the female estate. Many of whom are convicted of crimes against women. They are not trans women, but male sex offenders, who are benefiting from a lack of challenge.

And then 'genuine' (as opposed to well dodgy) trans women who are housed in the female estate, who may, due to their history of offending, still pose a risk to women, and whether effective risk assessment for that risk is happening.

These feel like two separate things, each with their own potential risks/controls/solutions.

I wouldn't want to see a trans women in the male estate, where they would be at real risk. And I don't think that trans woman = offender against women.

Good morning you bloody lovely people. I don't care where you've all come from - I'm just delighted to be luxuriating in a warm bath of sanity.....

Wonder if you're all aware of this rather interesting looking event coming up next Thursday evening. As someone who feels she has no one to vote for I think it's an important (if uncomfortable) debate: unherd.com/helen-joyce-julie-bindel-should-terfs-unite-with-the-right/

Apologies if someone's already posted - haven't had time to read through everything.

It is a vexed issue indeed. And there are separate and intersecting risks and vulnerabilities that need to be considered.

But opposon side shouting bigot or pervert at each other is not going to help.

Should terfs unite with the right?

My first feeling - before reading the article - is no. Partly because of their other policies, and partly because the most likely way to make progress on this (actually, probably on most issues) would be if we could get it seen as non-political/cross-party.

But I can see why the question needs to be considered.

And - it shouldn't need saying but - very definitely not the far right.

Which unfortunately in current UK politics doesn't leave much.

Yes Binturongs - that's my gut feeling too - but I think the debate is important. And perhaps the act of HAVING the debate will make it clear that it's a real risk for all non Tory parties that people might sit on their hands/spoil ballot papers in a GE rather than vote for a party that doesn't know what a woman is.

My sense is that this is still seen as very much a 'fringe issue' that won't move the needle when it comes to the ballot box. All I know is - women died for my right to vote but I simply cannot and will not bring myself to vote for any party that is pro self ID etc.

I think, apart from the issue of whether this rapist pervert ends up in a women's prison, we still have to consider the fact that we have to be able to describe these criminals as men - regardless of their feelings on the subject. Otherwise, it becomes far more complex for women and girls to describe events in ways that are true to use. And also factually true

We need to know why the police are colluding in the removal of that right from women and girls.

I wouldn't want to see a trans women in the male estate, where they would be at real risk. And I don't think that trans woman = offender against women.

I agree fully with third spaces for men who are in prison who aren't safe in the main men's spaces. No man belongs in the women's prison.

I don't know what everybody is talking about apart from the bit about the news report, which I'd seen on Twitter. To which I'd say there are two issues - the more important one being that the perpetrator should NOT be housed in the female estate; the second issue that this should be headlined as a MALE crime and therefore the word "woman" shouldn't have featured.

FWIW - in terms of safety - trans women are housed on the VP (vulnerable prisoner) units in the male estate. So they are with sex offenders, former police/prison officers etc.and 100% shielded from 'the mains'. I don't think they are in much physical danger - but I suppose they could argue it's bad for their mental health etc.

I think, apart from the issue of whether this rapist pervert ends up in a women's prison, we still have to consider the fact that we have to be able to describe these criminals as men

Well all rapists are men.

I am reminded of the group of 13 year old girls I spoke to in Manchester who told me that "if he says he's a woman then she can come in women's toilets (changing rooms etc)."

These girls are too young and naïve and trusting to realise what a dangerous policy that is.

Incidentally, a few people have had a response from the minister who cancelled the adult human female doc screening on Sunday. It was cancelled because they are inclusive.

Fucking hell.

This is one of those "language evolves..." monstrosities, isn't it?

Well, that was my bad on the lifeboat thread. I've spent the last few days watching people queuing up to say that they were unaware of the issues, unaware of the offending thread, etc., and when a friend sent me that link last night I unwisely decided to show it as an example of the problem, specifically the reporting of it being worded as "trans woman jailed for sex with 14 year old" when what actually happened was that a man raped a child. To me it was an example of the crazy gaslighting nonsense that goes on routinely around male crimes, distorts statistics, etc.

My post was reported and deleted within minutes and I've been banned from the thread. Fair enough. I have to say that I raised my eyebrows at the subsequent assertion that this reporting, rather than being an example of institutional capture at the BBC, was actually a deliberate attempt to tarnish transwomen. It really gave me pause for thought into the chasm between my view and those of people on the other side of this debate. If I could turn back the clock, maybe I wouldn't post it but I've been biting my tongue over there so there it is. I won't mention the subject over there again.

As an aside, over the years I've often seen people respond to a post saying "a poster has been banned from this thread" by posting to see whether it's them. I know that you don't need to do that. The posting box goes away and is replaced with a message letting you know you've been blocked.

All the posts saying some things should not be discussed are of course also giving their tuppence worth on where they come down on the issue, which is discussing it. What they really mean of course is that there are never to be viewpoints from a Gender Critical perspective.

A remarkably balanced post, from the hatted one (about Mumsnet):

I think they make a good basis for a future policy not least because they are from a women's focused organisation and address several key issues previously overlooked.

Also everyone who has left has implicitly endorsed these standards by relocating to the site which uses them, which both demonstrates their concerns are being listened too, and places the policy beyond contention.

Peacamer saying supportive and sensible stuff on that thread too, not for the first time.

All the posts saying some things should not be discussed are of course also giving their tuppence worth on where they come down on the issue, which is discussing it. What they really mean of course is that there are never to be viewpoints from a Gender Critical perspective.

This. In part I think it goes back to what I said earlier about a lot of people wanting to stay in denial, where it's easier and means there is no danger of hearing unpleasant realities and thinking about it too much, making you a Bad Person who will be a social pariah among all your right on friends.

ExiledElsie

I agree fully with third spaces for men who are in prison who aren't safe in the main men's spaces. No man belongs in the women's prison.

I posted about this in the old place; my brother in law is a maintenance operative in a sex offenders' prison. He felt much better working there than his previous one, because there was rarely any bother.

I'm quite sure that it's because the type of prisoners there don't attack men. Men claiming to be women could be housed safely in those types of prisons.

I think the vast majority just want to carry on posting on JTT and hope the meddlesome GC thread goes away purely for selfish reasons; the number of actively hostile posters is quite small, IMO

That's my point, and it's a general one I've observed in many people. A lot of people don't want to get involved and they resent getting drawn into it.

And when they have to think about it, they default to being men and think about what men want.

in France, trans prisoners are in a specific wing in one prison near Paris (or at least they were when I last looked a couple of years ago[. This does raise issues of its own, in that they are held further from their families than is standard, which can with some fairness described as discriminatory.

Both transmen and transwomen?

And when they have to think about it, they default to being men and think about what men want.

Yes.