It is a social experiment.
No person who respected female people and their needs would make this suggestion. Unless they were so ideologically driven that they believed that no female person can ever correctly sex a male person.
Because whoever tells women that ‘case by case’ safeguarding should allow even one male person to be housed in a female prison is really saying ‘any of you female people who DO correctly sex this male person just need to STFU, too bad if you are a victim of male people’s abuses.’
They are telling traumatised female people that they don’t have the same value that any male person has.
However, if people can convince themselves that they are actually female when they are male, I guess they will be able to believe anything they want to believe. It makes it very easy to dismiss the needs of female people when a group of male people’s needs has also been described as being the needs of female people.
convenient that, isn’t it? The script runs:
Insist that male people are female people.
Therefore any ‘male person who says they are female’s needs are just as validly described as female people’s needs.
Therefore any ‘male person who says they are female’s crimes are just as validly described as female people’s crimes. Meaning ‘female people do it too’.
Therefore ‘case by case’ is deemed appropriate. Because female people also commit these crimes using this definition and therefore all the needs of ‘female people’ now also apply to those male people too. So they must be treated as if they are female.
Meanwhile, material reality abides and those male people are simply male people.