Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Can MNHQ set up a new discussion category called Feminism: sex & gender discussion (inclusive, non-GC)

867 replies

PlanetLuna · 04/04/2023 14:59

MN, will you please create a talk group/category of Feminism: sex & gender discussion (inclusive, non-GC)?

MN appears to currently have only 2 feminism categories:
Feminism: chat
Feminism: sex & gender discussions

But the Feminism: sex & gender category on MN is predominantly GC, with its emphasis on trans exclusion ideology. Feminists who do not subscribe to those beliefs are often unwelcome and treated with derision and hostility in discussions. Certainly not always as some GC posters do enjoy open, intellectual discussions but often enough that engagement can be toxic & intimidating all around.

It is almost impossible for non-GC feminists to find inclusive/non-GC feminist discussions, and we have to wade through unpleasant (for us) GC threads while attempting to do so.

GC feminism dominates on UK parenting sites in particular. However, inclusive/non-GC feminism is extremely popular around the world (especially in places like the US, NZ, and AU) and in the UK among younger feminists and those who do not see trans rights as a threat to women & girls’ safety. Many UK feminists are non-GC but may feel silenced on MN.

The addition of another category will help open up and improve MN discussions while reducing the toxicity and hostility that many feminists on both sides experience in discussions.

So I propose the following feminism discussion categories:
Feminism: chat (general)
Feminism: sex & gender discussions (GC)
Feminism: sex & gender discussion (inclusive, non-GC)

@MNHQ

OP posts:
Thread gallery
27
ReadersD1gest · 06/04/2023 21:32

But we can all see the calibre and toxicity of the replies to me in just the first few minutes of my post being up. It’s a lot of negativity for a MN poster to be subjected to for a straightforward, respectful post
No, we can't. You haven't experienced any toxicity; people simply don't agree with you.

You might want to start getting used to this...

RealityFan · 06/04/2023 21:39

ReadersD1gest · 06/04/2023 21:32

But we can all see the calibre and toxicity of the replies to me in just the first few minutes of my post being up. It’s a lot of negativity for a MN poster to be subjected to for a straightforward, respectful post
No, we can't. You haven't experienced any toxicity; people simply don't agree with you.

You might want to start getting used to this...

I set up my first thread as a newbie to MN...the initial response was pretty bracing to say the least, and I felt a bit up against the wall.

But in reality it wasn't hostile, just frank.

Same here.

haXXor · 06/04/2023 21:45

BlackeyedSusan · 06/04/2023 21:29

It'll be that we don't want teens to mutilate themselves before their brains are fully matured. You know protecting children and young people from making decisions they are likely to regret later in life.

Why are so many girls and young women referred to GIDS? I'll bet there would be far fewer if women weren't treated like utter crap.

haXXor · 06/04/2023 21:58

BlackeyedSusan · 06/04/2023 21:29

It'll be that we don't want teens to mutilate themselves before their brains are fully matured. You know protecting children and young people from making decisions they are likely to regret later in life.

Sorry for the double reply.

The Scottish govt thinks that a 17 year old can't know right from wrong well enough to be jailed for raping a 13 year old. The same Scottish govt thinks that children aged 16 are mature enough to decide to legally change sex. So that 17 y o who isn't jailed for rape could have been legally-female for a whole year, using women's facilities. Do you think the women and girls in those facilities would be safe with him in them? Men and boys benefit from this Scottish double-think, not women and girls.

Helleofabore · 06/04/2023 22:00

There is a laziness to the continued framing of disagreement as ‘hostility’. On a thread today on AiBU women responding to a clearly misogynistic poster were referred to as being clever and sneery. And that we were ‘off putting’. It really was the same as we always see.

Women, you are too shrill / blunt / hysterical / clever / gentle / unreasonable / hostile / whatever so we are going to shame you and tell you so rather than engage with the intention of understanding what you are trying to say. You are obviously hateful anyway, you really are mean, that while I might agree with some points I don’t want to be seen as being in agreement with you at all so I will try to shame you to distance myself from you because your meanness is that you are pointing out flaws in people’s arguments. How rude and unreasonable you all are!

I mean, we can almost script it by now. First post from the poster on the thread (can be OP, might be just someone joining in) is agreeing with a poster shaming others about how terrible posters have reacted to that poster’s inflammatory words. Then it continues for x posts. The final post is telling women that their tone is ‘off putting’ or whatever and that no one will listen to you all, whereas that poster is positioning themselves as the reasonable poster with the answers, while actually contributing very little but tone policing throughout the thread. Today’s thread that I saw this play out really reminded me of this one.

haXXor · 06/04/2023 22:16

Helleofabore · 06/04/2023 22:00

There is a laziness to the continued framing of disagreement as ‘hostility’. On a thread today on AiBU women responding to a clearly misogynistic poster were referred to as being clever and sneery. And that we were ‘off putting’. It really was the same as we always see.

Women, you are too shrill / blunt / hysterical / clever / gentle / unreasonable / hostile / whatever so we are going to shame you and tell you so rather than engage with the intention of understanding what you are trying to say. You are obviously hateful anyway, you really are mean, that while I might agree with some points I don’t want to be seen as being in agreement with you at all so I will try to shame you to distance myself from you because your meanness is that you are pointing out flaws in people’s arguments. How rude and unreasonable you all are!

I mean, we can almost script it by now. First post from the poster on the thread (can be OP, might be just someone joining in) is agreeing with a poster shaming others about how terrible posters have reacted to that poster’s inflammatory words. Then it continues for x posts. The final post is telling women that their tone is ‘off putting’ or whatever and that no one will listen to you all, whereas that poster is positioning themselves as the reasonable poster with the answers, while actually contributing very little but tone policing throughout the thread. Today’s thread that I saw this play out really reminded me of this one.

Male entitlement to women across every aspect of life became normalised and accepted because of men's desire to be sure that he has heirs and puts resources into raising his own child, not someone else's. Plus, it's hard to control a woman's uterus if you don't control her entire life...

Tone policing is a means of controlling what women say and is part of how men try to have total control over women. If we talk to each other, we might organise to weaken men's control over us. We might share tips on birth control and abortion, we might advise women of their legal rights when ending a marriage, and we might even try to campaign politically for more freedom. So we must be silenced. If men said outright "shut up women", we'd ignore them because such a demand is obvious enough to be immediately recognised as controlling behaviour. So they try to disguise their silencing as them being reasonable, through tone policing and whataboutery and NAMALT and framing us as unreasonable. It's another thing that comes from controlling our uteruses.

haXXor · 06/04/2023 22:26

Taking away female-only space is another way of asserting control over us:

  1. We have nowhere to go to talk to other women, be with other women, etc. Even loos are valuable for this. Rape Crisis stickers are put on the walls of the women's loos for a reason.
  1. We cannot go outside the home alone for long if loos are no longer single-sex, because we must go home to pee. Would you be able to spend the day viewing flats to move out from an abuser's house if you couldn't pee all day?

Corollary to 2. You cannot have a job if you cannot pee safely at work. The laws protecting single-sex workplace loos are important.

howdoesatoastermaketoast · 06/04/2023 23:02

@haXXor for sure - conversation with dd basically I straight up agree that unisex internet 'nickname' and avatar was a sensible form of protective camouflage that made perfect sense to me, also irl that her clothes were for making her as comfortable and confident as possible with no pressure to be decorative or attractive to men.

BlackeyedSusan · 06/04/2023 23:52

haXXor · 06/04/2023 21:58

Sorry for the double reply.

The Scottish govt thinks that a 17 year old can't know right from wrong well enough to be jailed for raping a 13 year old. The same Scottish govt thinks that children aged 16 are mature enough to decide to legally change sex. So that 17 y o who isn't jailed for rape could have been legally-female for a whole year, using women's facilities. Do you think the women and girls in those facilities would be safe with him in them? Men and boys benefit from this Scottish double-think, not women and girls.

Offs. You're right it's ridiculous. And deeply unpleasant. We'll bend the rules this way and that and manipulate the truth....

NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision · 07/04/2023 00:08

Good evening. I've been catching up on this thread. I appreciate the following post is going to hark back to posts maybe a dozen pages back, but that's life.

There has been some lofty, idealistic phrasing about dealing with crime committed by males who don't identify as trans first.

So what does that look like, in terms of policy? By how much must male violence against women and girls be reduced before violence by trans-identifying offenders in historically single-sex spaces becomes worthy of preventing? Whatever your figure, what is the gameplan for eliminating that percentage of violence against women and girls?

What is the timescale for this?

Currently, women are being abused by male offenders in prison. How long do they have to wait before they are worth the effort of protecting? When you do your mental arithmetic, take into account that these rapes and sexual assaults are some of the simplest to prevent. All you have to do is separate prisons by sex again!

It can be done with the stroke of a pen.

Would you be willing to listen to the testimony of a woman currently locked in a building with a convicted rapist, and tell her that you don't think her physical and psychological welfare is worth the effort of moving those males into the male estate?

Incidentally, have you ever in your life said that bullying in school shouldn't be addressed until we've eliminated malaria, or anything like that?

At this point in a thread, some person self-identifying as a cleverclogs usually makes a fool of themselves by asking whether I ever cared about prison welfare before this issue came to the fore. Often in a highly patronising tone, with the clear expectation that they're going to trigger some kind of Damascene moment for me in which I'll realise that female prisoners don't matter.

Tonight, for the sake of my own bloody blood pressure, I'm going to pre-empt that. The answer is yes. In fact, I have cared about prison welfare since I was seven years old. Why seven? Because that was the first time my mother ever told me in any detail what her time in prison had been like. In the following years, I discovered that other adults I valued deeply, both female and male, had also served prison sentences. I do hope that's good enough for you.

I don't particularly need flower emojis, but donations to Keep Prisons Single Sex are always nice. Wink

For those who have the emotional perspicacity of a dead sheep, this longheld knowledge means that I have always been aware than incarcerated and formerly incarcerated people are... people! (Although my mother didn't believe that this applied to sex offenders and she brought me up to have no sympathy whatsoever. Grin)

Every single person in there is someone's daughter or son. The adults in my life wanted better for me than the lives they'd had, and they seem to have succeeded (unless I get arrested and imprisoned for calling men, men, at any rate!) but none of us know what the future holds for our own daughters and granddaughters.

Are you happy to turn a blind eye to your granddaughter being sexually assaulted in prison? Mine? The daughter of your sister's best friend?

What lies at the root of this lack of empathy for women? Is it people feeling guilty at saying no to particular subset of male prisoners. Why? The general public doesn't normally have any problem saying no to male prisoners asking for better food, more investment in educational facilities, and so on.

I can say, totally guilt-free, "I don't think you should be housed in the female estate. If you are in danger in the male estate, then separate units should be established for the use of trans-identifying male prisoners, in the male estate."

To be fair, I'd fear for my physical safety if I said it to someone like Karen White (who was placed in a women's prison with a mother and baby unit after being charged for raping a woman on a locked psychiatric ward. He injured her so badly she will never be able.to have children) or Tiffany Scott (Scotland's most violent male prisoner) but I wouldn't feel a drop of guilt. I'd feel a lot of guilt at ushering either of them into a room with another woman and locking the door though. And so I should!

Is it instinctive fear of violent reprisal that means you fear saying no to these prisoners when they demand to be in the women's estate? Do you realise you are using other women as your shield against these scary males? How can you feel comfortable with that?

I could never say to a woman, "I am going to let you get raped, in order to stop this man getting angry with me because he's terrifying".

extract from Keep Prisons Single Sex

“Being in prison with male prisoners, you always feel on edge. You know something could happen at any time. We know they are not women. They are physically threatening and aggressive. I was sexually assaulted and I am not the only woman who has been. They haven’t had surgery and they expose themselves. One of them had been told he couldn’t shower at the same time as us women. He made a formal complaint and said this was a breach of his human rights. So now he is allowed to shower with us. And because he now has that right, the other males have that right too. There’s only a shower curtain between us. He moves the curtain so we can all see his penis when he is washing himself or shaving his legs. This is disgusting and I think it is disgusting that the prison allows this.

We can’t complain about anything. They are very well protected and it feels like our rights as women just don’t count. We have to call them ‘she’ and ‘her’ and have to use their female names. If we don’t, we are punished and lose our enhanced prisoner or D-Category status. It is horrible to do that to women.

I am very upset that I lost my legal case. I can’t understand how anyone can say that imprisoning males alongside women is the right thing to do. The prisoner who attacked me was convicted of the most serious sexual offences against girls and still has his penis. How can the government say that putting him in prison with women is the right thing to do? It’s not. I am out of prison now. But I think about all the other women still in prison who have to live with these males. This is dangerous, disgusting and wrong.”

About Us - Keep Prisons Single Sex

Keep Prisons Single Sex was established in 2020 to campaign for the sex-based rights of women in prison to single-sex accommodation and same-sex searching.

https://kpssinfo.org/

Wellies54 · 07/04/2023 00:29

@NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision That is such a powerful post. It has also occurred to me that if a woman is raped and knows that her attacker identifies as a woman or simply might start once he's charged, if she reports him and he's convicted, she knows he's going to a woman's prison where he will be a danger to other women. Instead of feeling that him going to prison will ensure he will be unable to harm anyone for a while, a victim has to decide on which women to condemn.

RedToothBrush · 07/04/2023 00:36

I think the issue about fertility is that all girls and women assume they can reproduce (until they can't) and that's what their role in life is reduced to from their own perspective and society's perspective. This is relevant in terms of the expectation placed upon them from birth.

In this sense all women are fertile in ideological terms and social terms until they don't come up with the goods and they are declared unwomenly or in unuseful. That's why in these discussions 'menstrator' or 'gestator' are effectively default terms and anything that deviates from this is somehow unfeminine.

Also see women who are older than are 'unuseful' and are now 'barren'

NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision · 07/04/2023 00:36

Wellies54 · 07/04/2023 00:29

@NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision That is such a powerful post. It has also occurred to me that if a woman is raped and knows that her attacker identifies as a woman or simply might start once he's charged, if she reports him and he's convicted, she knows he's going to a woman's prison where he will be a danger to other women. Instead of feeling that him going to prison will ensure he will be unable to harm anyone for a while, a victim has to decide on which women to condemn.

On one thread a couple of years back, a woman disclosed she'd faced that exact quandary after a trans-identifying male raped her.

She'd finally chosen not to report it to the police, for that exact reason.

Ofcourseshecan · 07/04/2023 01:32

PlanetLuna · 04/04/2023 15:43

Exactly this @ConstanceOcean.

To have any feminism discussion related to gender that is not GC or that’s trans-inclusive is impossible without a lot of hostility and in some cases bullying.

OP, you feel you are being bullied. Can you connect this with your OP describing posters here with words like derision and hostility … toxic & intimidating …. we have to wade through unpleasant (for us) GC threads … toxicity and hostility?

I would dearly like to hear your viewpoint on two concepts that baffle me.

One is that I have known many strands of feminism, sometimes in conflict with each other. But all share the one fundamental thing that defines feminism: they are all about women and women’s rights.
How can a politics that centres men be called feminist? Allowing men into the category of women isn’t ‘inclusive’, it centres those men who are let in. And of course it abolishes single-sex spaces. By definition, that has to be anti feminist. What am I missing here?

And could you give me a definition of ‘gender identity’, please? I can only see it as a lifestyle choice equivalent to being a goth or a naturalist, but based on 1950s sex stereotypes.

BlueHeelers · 07/04/2023 05:26

One is that I have known many strands of feminism, sometimes in conflict with each other. But all share the one fundamental thing that defines feminism: they are all about women and women’s rights

This is very true, @Ofcourseshecan - we’d all be more accurate if we referred to “feminisms”. Twas always thus.

But any feminism centres women and women’s rights. Some go so far as to fight for women’s liberation.

Backstreets · 07/04/2023 06:15

@NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision 👏 great post

Wellies54 · 07/04/2023 06:26

@NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision That is shocking. Every time I think of something which hypothetically might be negative for women in all of this, I find out that it has already happened.

FuckeryOmbudsman · 07/04/2023 06:26

BlueHeelers · 07/04/2023 05:26

One is that I have known many strands of feminism, sometimes in conflict with each other. But all share the one fundamental thing that defines feminism: they are all about women and women’s rights

This is very true, @Ofcourseshecan - we’d all be more accurate if we referred to “feminisms”. Twas always thus.

But any feminism centres women and women’s rights. Some go so far as to fight for women’s liberation.

Yes, and that of course is true only if gender based.

Or you are deliberately, not just silencing, but actually erasing, all non-GC feminists.

Happylittlechicken · 07/04/2023 06:38

FuckeryOmbudsman · 07/04/2023 06:26

Yes, and that of course is true only if gender based.

Or you are deliberately, not just silencing, but actually erasing, all non-GC feminists.

Serious question. How can you be a feminist and not critical of the gender stereotypes which have oppressed women for centuries? What does a non GC feminist believe women should be fighting against?

the gender pay gap is due to gender so if you’re a non GC feminist are you actually in favour of that? The fact fewer women are in positions of power in companies is because gender norms have held girls back. If you are not critical of gender, do you actually think this is a good thing? Gender is responsible for girls and boys having poor mental health due to demands that they follow gender stereotypes even if they don’t want to. A lot of the children coming out as “trans” state they do not feel like a girl or a boy, but when questioned it seems it is because they do not like the things gender stereotypes tell them they must do. If you’re not critical of gender, do you actually believe a boy who likes dolls and makeup is not a boy. If you believe in gender stereotypes anyone who likes dolls and makeup Is a girl so he must be a girl right? Not a boy who likes dolls.

Helleofabore · 07/04/2023 06:54

NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision · 07/04/2023 00:08

Good evening. I've been catching up on this thread. I appreciate the following post is going to hark back to posts maybe a dozen pages back, but that's life.

There has been some lofty, idealistic phrasing about dealing with crime committed by males who don't identify as trans first.

So what does that look like, in terms of policy? By how much must male violence against women and girls be reduced before violence by trans-identifying offenders in historically single-sex spaces becomes worthy of preventing? Whatever your figure, what is the gameplan for eliminating that percentage of violence against women and girls?

What is the timescale for this?

Currently, women are being abused by male offenders in prison. How long do they have to wait before they are worth the effort of protecting? When you do your mental arithmetic, take into account that these rapes and sexual assaults are some of the simplest to prevent. All you have to do is separate prisons by sex again!

It can be done with the stroke of a pen.

Would you be willing to listen to the testimony of a woman currently locked in a building with a convicted rapist, and tell her that you don't think her physical and psychological welfare is worth the effort of moving those males into the male estate?

Incidentally, have you ever in your life said that bullying in school shouldn't be addressed until we've eliminated malaria, or anything like that?

At this point in a thread, some person self-identifying as a cleverclogs usually makes a fool of themselves by asking whether I ever cared about prison welfare before this issue came to the fore. Often in a highly patronising tone, with the clear expectation that they're going to trigger some kind of Damascene moment for me in which I'll realise that female prisoners don't matter.

Tonight, for the sake of my own bloody blood pressure, I'm going to pre-empt that. The answer is yes. In fact, I have cared about prison welfare since I was seven years old. Why seven? Because that was the first time my mother ever told me in any detail what her time in prison had been like. In the following years, I discovered that other adults I valued deeply, both female and male, had also served prison sentences. I do hope that's good enough for you.

I don't particularly need flower emojis, but donations to Keep Prisons Single Sex are always nice. Wink

For those who have the emotional perspicacity of a dead sheep, this longheld knowledge means that I have always been aware than incarcerated and formerly incarcerated people are... people! (Although my mother didn't believe that this applied to sex offenders and she brought me up to have no sympathy whatsoever. Grin)

Every single person in there is someone's daughter or son. The adults in my life wanted better for me than the lives they'd had, and they seem to have succeeded (unless I get arrested and imprisoned for calling men, men, at any rate!) but none of us know what the future holds for our own daughters and granddaughters.

Are you happy to turn a blind eye to your granddaughter being sexually assaulted in prison? Mine? The daughter of your sister's best friend?

What lies at the root of this lack of empathy for women? Is it people feeling guilty at saying no to particular subset of male prisoners. Why? The general public doesn't normally have any problem saying no to male prisoners asking for better food, more investment in educational facilities, and so on.

I can say, totally guilt-free, "I don't think you should be housed in the female estate. If you are in danger in the male estate, then separate units should be established for the use of trans-identifying male prisoners, in the male estate."

To be fair, I'd fear for my physical safety if I said it to someone like Karen White (who was placed in a women's prison with a mother and baby unit after being charged for raping a woman on a locked psychiatric ward. He injured her so badly she will never be able.to have children) or Tiffany Scott (Scotland's most violent male prisoner) but I wouldn't feel a drop of guilt. I'd feel a lot of guilt at ushering either of them into a room with another woman and locking the door though. And so I should!

Is it instinctive fear of violent reprisal that means you fear saying no to these prisoners when they demand to be in the women's estate? Do you realise you are using other women as your shield against these scary males? How can you feel comfortable with that?

I could never say to a woman, "I am going to let you get raped, in order to stop this man getting angry with me because he's terrifying".

extract from Keep Prisons Single Sex

“Being in prison with male prisoners, you always feel on edge. You know something could happen at any time. We know they are not women. They are physically threatening and aggressive. I was sexually assaulted and I am not the only woman who has been. They haven’t had surgery and they expose themselves. One of them had been told he couldn’t shower at the same time as us women. He made a formal complaint and said this was a breach of his human rights. So now he is allowed to shower with us. And because he now has that right, the other males have that right too. There’s only a shower curtain between us. He moves the curtain so we can all see his penis when he is washing himself or shaving his legs. This is disgusting and I think it is disgusting that the prison allows this.

We can’t complain about anything. They are very well protected and it feels like our rights as women just don’t count. We have to call them ‘she’ and ‘her’ and have to use their female names. If we don’t, we are punished and lose our enhanced prisoner or D-Category status. It is horrible to do that to women.

I am very upset that I lost my legal case. I can’t understand how anyone can say that imprisoning males alongside women is the right thing to do. The prisoner who attacked me was convicted of the most serious sexual offences against girls and still has his penis. How can the government say that putting him in prison with women is the right thing to do? It’s not. I am out of prison now. But I think about all the other women still in prison who have to live with these males. This is dangerous, disgusting and wrong.”

Thank you.

The question about how many women and children are acceptable collateral never gets answered. Yet those kind of posts keep coming back every thread. I often wonder if those who make them ever think about it and realise their fuckwittery really has gone too far and they realise that it is them who should be ashamed.

DialSquare · 07/04/2023 07:54

Very powerful post NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision.
I too have visited family members in prison over the years. All of them now dead as a result of their lifestyle. I think posters like the OP must have lived a very privileged life if they can not see what this ideology will do to vulnerable women and girls if there is no pushback against it.

And Helle is right. They should be ashamed.

BenCoopersSupportWren · 07/04/2023 08:01

NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision · 07/04/2023 00:08

Good evening. I've been catching up on this thread. I appreciate the following post is going to hark back to posts maybe a dozen pages back, but that's life.

There has been some lofty, idealistic phrasing about dealing with crime committed by males who don't identify as trans first.

So what does that look like, in terms of policy? By how much must male violence against women and girls be reduced before violence by trans-identifying offenders in historically single-sex spaces becomes worthy of preventing? Whatever your figure, what is the gameplan for eliminating that percentage of violence against women and girls?

What is the timescale for this?

Currently, women are being abused by male offenders in prison. How long do they have to wait before they are worth the effort of protecting? When you do your mental arithmetic, take into account that these rapes and sexual assaults are some of the simplest to prevent. All you have to do is separate prisons by sex again!

It can be done with the stroke of a pen.

Would you be willing to listen to the testimony of a woman currently locked in a building with a convicted rapist, and tell her that you don't think her physical and psychological welfare is worth the effort of moving those males into the male estate?

Incidentally, have you ever in your life said that bullying in school shouldn't be addressed until we've eliminated malaria, or anything like that?

At this point in a thread, some person self-identifying as a cleverclogs usually makes a fool of themselves by asking whether I ever cared about prison welfare before this issue came to the fore. Often in a highly patronising tone, with the clear expectation that they're going to trigger some kind of Damascene moment for me in which I'll realise that female prisoners don't matter.

Tonight, for the sake of my own bloody blood pressure, I'm going to pre-empt that. The answer is yes. In fact, I have cared about prison welfare since I was seven years old. Why seven? Because that was the first time my mother ever told me in any detail what her time in prison had been like. In the following years, I discovered that other adults I valued deeply, both female and male, had also served prison sentences. I do hope that's good enough for you.

I don't particularly need flower emojis, but donations to Keep Prisons Single Sex are always nice. Wink

For those who have the emotional perspicacity of a dead sheep, this longheld knowledge means that I have always been aware than incarcerated and formerly incarcerated people are... people! (Although my mother didn't believe that this applied to sex offenders and she brought me up to have no sympathy whatsoever. Grin)

Every single person in there is someone's daughter or son. The adults in my life wanted better for me than the lives they'd had, and they seem to have succeeded (unless I get arrested and imprisoned for calling men, men, at any rate!) but none of us know what the future holds for our own daughters and granddaughters.

Are you happy to turn a blind eye to your granddaughter being sexually assaulted in prison? Mine? The daughter of your sister's best friend?

What lies at the root of this lack of empathy for women? Is it people feeling guilty at saying no to particular subset of male prisoners. Why? The general public doesn't normally have any problem saying no to male prisoners asking for better food, more investment in educational facilities, and so on.

I can say, totally guilt-free, "I don't think you should be housed in the female estate. If you are in danger in the male estate, then separate units should be established for the use of trans-identifying male prisoners, in the male estate."

To be fair, I'd fear for my physical safety if I said it to someone like Karen White (who was placed in a women's prison with a mother and baby unit after being charged for raping a woman on a locked psychiatric ward. He injured her so badly she will never be able.to have children) or Tiffany Scott (Scotland's most violent male prisoner) but I wouldn't feel a drop of guilt. I'd feel a lot of guilt at ushering either of them into a room with another woman and locking the door though. And so I should!

Is it instinctive fear of violent reprisal that means you fear saying no to these prisoners when they demand to be in the women's estate? Do you realise you are using other women as your shield against these scary males? How can you feel comfortable with that?

I could never say to a woman, "I am going to let you get raped, in order to stop this man getting angry with me because he's terrifying".

extract from Keep Prisons Single Sex

“Being in prison with male prisoners, you always feel on edge. You know something could happen at any time. We know they are not women. They are physically threatening and aggressive. I was sexually assaulted and I am not the only woman who has been. They haven’t had surgery and they expose themselves. One of them had been told he couldn’t shower at the same time as us women. He made a formal complaint and said this was a breach of his human rights. So now he is allowed to shower with us. And because he now has that right, the other males have that right too. There’s only a shower curtain between us. He moves the curtain so we can all see his penis when he is washing himself or shaving his legs. This is disgusting and I think it is disgusting that the prison allows this.

We can’t complain about anything. They are very well protected and it feels like our rights as women just don’t count. We have to call them ‘she’ and ‘her’ and have to use their female names. If we don’t, we are punished and lose our enhanced prisoner or D-Category status. It is horrible to do that to women.

I am very upset that I lost my legal case. I can’t understand how anyone can say that imprisoning males alongside women is the right thing to do. The prisoner who attacked me was convicted of the most serious sexual offences against girls and still has his penis. How can the government say that putting him in prison with women is the right thing to do? It’s not. I am out of prison now. But I think about all the other women still in prison who have to live with these males. This is dangerous, disgusting and wrong.”

<applauds every word>

Brefugee · 07/04/2023 09:21

The question about how many women and children are acceptable collateral never gets answered.

it's a very interesting question. Well, the non-existent answer is interesting. Because on the one hand we know there are figures relating to this "collateral damage" (victims of male violence) but nobody on the TRA side of the fence will commit to how high they don't mind that figure being. On the other hand based on MINISCULE numbers of murders (again, as i always say: any number of murders is too many) of trans women is "genocid". So perhaps we should reverse the question: how many murders of trans women are acceptable before we do something? (again: answer is none, as opposed to "answer came there none")

excellent post there by @NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision - i have only known one woman who went to prison, Holloway as there was no army prison for women. Your insight is valuable. Shocking.

But we don't ever have had to engage with the plight of women prisoners, ever, to see and talk about and rail against trans women being incarcerated with them. Because what we have - most of us feminists anyway - been talking about since the dawn of time is the position of women in society. So whether that is princesses being forced to marry some kingly cousin in a different country to consolidate power bases, to women being chucked out of the steel mills after the war, having kept up steel production in dangerous conditions, so the men could "have their jobs back", to the gender pay gap: our interest is that all women are treated with dignity and fairly.

nilsmousehammer · 07/04/2023 10:44

NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision · 07/04/2023 00:08

Good evening. I've been catching up on this thread. I appreciate the following post is going to hark back to posts maybe a dozen pages back, but that's life.

There has been some lofty, idealistic phrasing about dealing with crime committed by males who don't identify as trans first.

So what does that look like, in terms of policy? By how much must male violence against women and girls be reduced before violence by trans-identifying offenders in historically single-sex spaces becomes worthy of preventing? Whatever your figure, what is the gameplan for eliminating that percentage of violence against women and girls?

What is the timescale for this?

Currently, women are being abused by male offenders in prison. How long do they have to wait before they are worth the effort of protecting? When you do your mental arithmetic, take into account that these rapes and sexual assaults are some of the simplest to prevent. All you have to do is separate prisons by sex again!

It can be done with the stroke of a pen.

Would you be willing to listen to the testimony of a woman currently locked in a building with a convicted rapist, and tell her that you don't think her physical and psychological welfare is worth the effort of moving those males into the male estate?

Incidentally, have you ever in your life said that bullying in school shouldn't be addressed until we've eliminated malaria, or anything like that?

At this point in a thread, some person self-identifying as a cleverclogs usually makes a fool of themselves by asking whether I ever cared about prison welfare before this issue came to the fore. Often in a highly patronising tone, with the clear expectation that they're going to trigger some kind of Damascene moment for me in which I'll realise that female prisoners don't matter.

Tonight, for the sake of my own bloody blood pressure, I'm going to pre-empt that. The answer is yes. In fact, I have cared about prison welfare since I was seven years old. Why seven? Because that was the first time my mother ever told me in any detail what her time in prison had been like. In the following years, I discovered that other adults I valued deeply, both female and male, had also served prison sentences. I do hope that's good enough for you.

I don't particularly need flower emojis, but donations to Keep Prisons Single Sex are always nice. Wink

For those who have the emotional perspicacity of a dead sheep, this longheld knowledge means that I have always been aware than incarcerated and formerly incarcerated people are... people! (Although my mother didn't believe that this applied to sex offenders and she brought me up to have no sympathy whatsoever. Grin)

Every single person in there is someone's daughter or son. The adults in my life wanted better for me than the lives they'd had, and they seem to have succeeded (unless I get arrested and imprisoned for calling men, men, at any rate!) but none of us know what the future holds for our own daughters and granddaughters.

Are you happy to turn a blind eye to your granddaughter being sexually assaulted in prison? Mine? The daughter of your sister's best friend?

What lies at the root of this lack of empathy for women? Is it people feeling guilty at saying no to particular subset of male prisoners. Why? The general public doesn't normally have any problem saying no to male prisoners asking for better food, more investment in educational facilities, and so on.

I can say, totally guilt-free, "I don't think you should be housed in the female estate. If you are in danger in the male estate, then separate units should be established for the use of trans-identifying male prisoners, in the male estate."

To be fair, I'd fear for my physical safety if I said it to someone like Karen White (who was placed in a women's prison with a mother and baby unit after being charged for raping a woman on a locked psychiatric ward. He injured her so badly she will never be able.to have children) or Tiffany Scott (Scotland's most violent male prisoner) but I wouldn't feel a drop of guilt. I'd feel a lot of guilt at ushering either of them into a room with another woman and locking the door though. And so I should!

Is it instinctive fear of violent reprisal that means you fear saying no to these prisoners when they demand to be in the women's estate? Do you realise you are using other women as your shield against these scary males? How can you feel comfortable with that?

I could never say to a woman, "I am going to let you get raped, in order to stop this man getting angry with me because he's terrifying".

extract from Keep Prisons Single Sex

“Being in prison with male prisoners, you always feel on edge. You know something could happen at any time. We know they are not women. They are physically threatening and aggressive. I was sexually assaulted and I am not the only woman who has been. They haven’t had surgery and they expose themselves. One of them had been told he couldn’t shower at the same time as us women. He made a formal complaint and said this was a breach of his human rights. So now he is allowed to shower with us. And because he now has that right, the other males have that right too. There’s only a shower curtain between us. He moves the curtain so we can all see his penis when he is washing himself or shaving his legs. This is disgusting and I think it is disgusting that the prison allows this.

We can’t complain about anything. They are very well protected and it feels like our rights as women just don’t count. We have to call them ‘she’ and ‘her’ and have to use their female names. If we don’t, we are punished and lose our enhanced prisoner or D-Category status. It is horrible to do that to women.

I am very upset that I lost my legal case. I can’t understand how anyone can say that imprisoning males alongside women is the right thing to do. The prisoner who attacked me was convicted of the most serious sexual offences against girls and still has his penis. How can the government say that putting him in prison with women is the right thing to do? It’s not. I am out of prison now. But I think about all the other women still in prison who have to live with these males. This is dangerous, disgusting and wrong.”

Outstanding post. I agree with every word.

If a person (or an entire political party) believes that female people should not expect equality or safety if it makes some male people sad then really, you have to question this belief they hold that female people are not as human or important as male ones.

On a binary, biological sex based basis.

And whether you are happy yourself or for your daughter to accept this subhuman, second class human status as a walking resource for male humans. Without right to refuse.

In 2023.

FFS.

BlueHeelers · 07/04/2023 11:10

Yes, and that of course is true only if gender based.

Sorry, no. I don't think you understand the fundamental critique of any strand of feminist thought or activism. The thinking/activism centres on the analysis of gender roles and stereotypes, and understands that sex (biological & unchanging) and gender (historically and culturally specific, changing) are linked but NOT THE SAME.

"Gender" refers to the set of socially conditioned/imposed roles and stereotypes which map onto (shifting, mutable) concepts of femininity and masculinity.

Femininity and masculinity (mutable) are, in turn, mapped onto biological sex (immutable). Feminist thought & activism aims to make space between sex and gender to allow women (and men, actually) to pursue liberated lives which are not wholly determined by their sex, and their sex difference [from men].

It's a long-standing central tenet of any feminist thought: Mary Wollstonecraft realised this, as did Harriet Taylor & John Stuart Mill. Taylor & Mill are particularly good on conditioning of women into socially imposed roles which were oppressive and violent.