Perverted man claims to be a woman - may be housed in a women's prison

Perhaps this might be partially enabled if the UK was to legally recognise non-binary identities. Presumably then spaces could be provided which would accommodate non-binary people and any others who chose to use them. The UK however still lags behind in legal recognition for this
In May 2021, the UK government rejected a petition calling for the legal recognition of non-binary as a gender identity.[138] Over 130,000 people signed the petition,[139] which stated allowing non-binary as a gender identity would ease gender dysphoria and protect non-binary people from transphobic hate crimes.[138] Despite 58% of respondents agreeing that a non-binary identity should be recognised in a 2018 consultation on the GRA,[140] the government stated in their response that there were no plans to extend the GRA, saying that to do so would have "complex practical consequences"

Please show me where I have made an assumption doodledog now you are making assumptions about my assumptions, assumption inception.

Yes when I first entered these discussions I asked if what was said was being descrimnatory or transphobic but we have talked through and past that and I have gained understanding with those who are honest about where their feelings are coming from. I do understand that some people aren't coming from a bad place and emotions are high.

There is nothing hidden in me, I don't have a filter, I say what I am thinking at the time. Luckily for me I don't tend to think many horrible things.

Here is your assumption which goes against everything I have been saying

VioletSky

doodledog I read the assumption and then idnt read past it.

That's not really my fault, I've been clear about disliking that in honest discussion, as have others

I would still like to know which 'assumption' in my post you are talking about, VS. I have reread my last three posts on this thread, and am genuinely at a loss. The only point I have made that is arguably guesswork is when I said that your use of the 'privilege' was reminiscent of the way it was used in the 'White Privilege' book, and explained what I saw to be the differences between that and the way you were using it. Your own posts are brimful of assumptions about what others understand, think and assume, which is unsurprising given that you often don't read to the end of posts.

The whole TWAW 'side' of the debate (or No Debate) is based on an assumption that the other 'side' is anti-trans, transphobic or that we don't see transpeople as 'valid'. I don't even understand the last point, and have said over and over (as have others) that the first ones are not true. That assumption is either stated explicitly or implied on pretty much every post that is not 'gender-critical'.

I'd also like to add to that and say, it is respectful in my mind towards both women and trans women to hold at least some distinction between the two as women will face issues trans women won't and vice versa.

We also have a lot in common and that is why I accept trans women under the umbrella of women

Bridging the different viewpoints is almost impossible. And made all the more difficult when women who voice their concerns and fears are shouted down as being transphobic, homophobic (as though that has any relevance ), threatened with violence and humiliated on public platforms.

Galaxy

That's what I mean about the crux of the matter. I think the only compromise I see is third spaces but I am guessing you wouldnt see that as ok. I mean third spaces for transwomen and any women who wanted to use them. But retaining single sex spaces alongside. When I am talking about spaces I am really meaning prisons refuges sport etc. I think there are ways to resolve the toilet issue but it does involve money! But yes I think it is an issue where the fundamental difference is so big that it is difficult. I probably see it as similar to the difference between those who support abortion and those who dont. Bridging the different viewpoints is almost impossible.

No I fully agree with that and have suggested that myself.

I think it would go a long way towards acceptance and equality. It would not convince every mind that trans women are women but it would create a society where no one is harmed by that thinking as there is less need to say it.

From my perspective as a trans ally

That's what I mean about the crux of the matter. I think the only compromise I see is third spaces but I am guessing you wouldnt see that as ok. I mean third spaces for transwomen and any women who wanted to use them. But retaining single sex spaces alongside. When I am talking about spaces I am really meaning prisons refuges sport etc. I think there are ways to resolve the toilet issue but it does involve money! But yes I think it is an issue where the fundamental difference is so big that it is difficult. I probably see it as similar to the difference between those who support abortion and those who dont. Bridging the different viewpoints is almost impossible.

doodledog I read the assumption and then idnt read past it.

That's not really my fault, I've been clear about disliking that in honest discussion, as have others

Well ok, I think I can see my mistake now.

I just didn't realise what I was getting into on these threads.

What I thought was that these threads were highlighting separate issues that needed to be resolved to help women feel safe which would possibly lead to more acceptance and equality or possibly not but at least women would feel safe.

What these threads are are sharing evidence towards a wider argument that trans women are not women and should not be accepted as such.

Which rightly or wrongly we disagree about on a fundamental level.

So issues remain unresolved due to stalemate which is a shame really because they do need resolving.

I don't expect anyone to read my comments or think that I am all important, I'm just asking for an honest discussion and setting boundaries that I won't engage with comments that make assumptions so I can't participate if it continues.
If you don't expect anyone to read your comments, why are you posting on an online discussion board? Anyone posting has to assume that people will read their comments - it's how these things work.

Simple.

Also, at the risk of STBO, how do you know that people are (supposedly) making assumptions if you haven't bothered to read what they have said?

By all means point out what has been said that you claim is an assumption, and then people can then respond by either showing where you have said what you say has been assumed, or explain what has led to that assumption. Just stropping off a thread without addressing the comments of others doesn't give us a chance to respond to you, which gives a distinct impression that you aren't interested in debate, and that your comments about wanting to find common ground are, in fact, disingenuous.

No the law is clear in that in certain circumstances transwomen can be excluded from single sex provision. I actually think the battle with regard to crime stats has been won from what I can remember. So I think there was an agreement that crime was recorded by sex but I have lost track a bit.
And actually the forstater case made it clear that gender critical beliefs were permitted under law so yes we can say transwomen are of the Male sex in the same way you can say TWAW.

Galaxy

The whole crux of the matter is that you believe TWAW and some people dont. It's the basis of the whole discussion.
I disagree with comments that TWAW, we cant really talk about sex segregated spaces without mentioning that fundamental disagreement.

Why?

I want women safe just as much as the next person so I can quite happily talk about how we resolve those issues.

Legally trans women are accepted as women and that's the way it stands currently so those are the parameters we have to work in.

Yes OK you could say taking away the rights of trans women would resolve those issues but, prisons are still not safe spaces so removing one issue actually removes a lot of voices protecting women. Logically that's not a good thing for women in prisons.

The whole crux of the matter is that you believe TWAW and some people dont. It's the basis of the whole discussion.
I disagree with comments that TWAW, we cant really talk about sex segregated spaces without mentioning that fundamental disagreement.

I speculated that if you believed in supporting women at all times Mollygo would you then not support a man with disabilities, you said you would. Which means then that you recognise that feminism is and must be intersectional, because otherwise it fails to recognise that others suffer discrimination. The next question is obviously if you would support the rights of a man with disabilities why would you not support the rights of a transwoman or transman?

PS, it is not just my time and energy it wastes, it wastes time and energy for everyone getting caught up in writing or reading assumptions on an emotional topic and just spreads discord.

As I said previously it should be us versus the problem not us versus each other. Although realistically none of us are responsible for policy or practise, while we are arguing amongst ourselves nothing sensible is being said to those who are in charge

Mollygo

But VS, making assumptions about others is what you and trisher do too. I remember yesterday when trisher decided I wouldn’t support a man with disabilities even though that every poster on here could read what I said. You assume that we all think TW should not be allowed, no matter how often we point out that this is not so.
Perhaps you could take the assumption beam out of your eye before you accuse other posters of having an assumption speck in their eyes.

No I don't, I said that there are comments saying that trans women are not women, which has been said several times. I disagree with those comments.

I haven't gone off on any tangents about what people must believe.

I also said that I make a great deal of effort not to make assumptions because I am aware it is an emotive topic.

I don't expect anyone to read my comments or think that I am all important, I'm just asking for an honest discussion and setting boundaries that I won't engage with comments that make assumptions so I can't participate if it continues.

Simple

Sorry trisher cross posted there. I was just pondering about Male prisons rather than specifically answering your point.

I know less about the issues in mens prisons although I think the statistics relating to the link between head injury and violent crime are interesting for want of a better word. How that information could be used to make everyone safer is difficult though.

Galaxy

There are reasons we segregate prisons by sex trisher. The fact that there is assault in both Male and female prisons doesnt negate the reasons for sex segregation. All the feminists I know in this discussion have been involved in looking at the many issues in womens prisons for a long time, which is why they understand the vulnerability of many.of those female prisoners. Usually convicted of non violent crimes, often a history of domestic abuse against them or of trauma in childhood.

I don't think I have questioned that Galaxy I simply questioned if an assault by a woman prisoner was of less importance than an assault by a transwoman prisoner. A history of abuse leaves women open to abuse by others whatever their gender. I

There are reasons we segregate prisons by sex trisher. The fact that there is assault in both Male and female prisons doesnt negate the reasons for sex segregation. All the feminists I know in this discussion have been involved in looking at the many issues in womens prisons for a long time, which is why they understand the vulnerability of many.of those female prisoners. Usually convicted of non violent crimes, often a history of domestic abuse against them or of trauma in childhood.

But VS, making assumptions about others is what you and trisher do too. I remember yesterday when trisher decided I wouldn’t support a man with disabilities even though that every poster on here could read what I said. You assume that we all think TW should not be allowed, no matter how often we point out that this is not so.
Perhaps you could take the assumption beam out of your eye before you accuse other posters of having an assumption speck in their eyes.

Maybe your not explaining yourself very well if you continually get misunderstood then vs?

Ah see, this is the problem, I thought I would just see if anyone had heard what I was actually saying and there are once again several comments asserting what I think/feel without simply asking me or remembering that I have already said that's not the case.

It is not rude or stroppy it is protecting myself.

Stop doing that and I of course will respectfully read comments.

I'm not here to continuously defend against assertions about me that aren't true and I don't put up with it.

Like trisher I agree it is true feminism to keep discussing this issue but personally I believe that the discussion will follow the same circles unless people stop making assumptions about others, rendering the whole thing pointless.

Chewbacca

I agree with every word of your very detailed and well articulated post at 01.55 Doodledog and it's a pity that vs has felt unable to take on board what is trying to be explained to her before again leaving in a strop. Like FarNorth I'm stunned that presenting male prisoners sexual violence against female prisoners is somehow acceptable because smuggled objects like phones and drugs to penetration without a penis for personal gratification, power, humiliation
are used by women anyway. I have no doubt that this may well be the case, but why would anyone, who cared one iota about women, want to add men with penises to that environment? In the link that I provided @ 01.05 women prisoners talk very frankly about what it's like to share a prison cell, shower facilities and work spaces with a man who says he's a woman and the penalties and punishments that women prisoners face for questioning whether they should be there. They have no rights at all.

But in focussing completely on the issues of transgender inmates and them assaulting women you are making out that female abuse of prisoners is in some way of less importance Chewbacca. Let's by all means have a debate about women being abused in prisons, but let's have it about all abuse and stop focussing upon the relatively few transgender assault cases. It's once again not looking at the whole picture but only the section of it you choose. Are you saying that a woman assaulted by another woman doesn't feel as much distress as one assaulted by a transwoman? If she does why should the focus be on the trans assault and not on keeping all women safe?

VioletSky

Calistermon

"could you elaborate"

"can you explain"

Much simpler, quicker, less antagonistic and less likely to influence interpretation by others reading as well as less likely to be off putting if you truly want others to join the discussion and share their thoughts

I'm sorry if you don't like the vocabulary I use Violetsky

Using the word elucidatewas not meant to be a
antagonistic, just a polite question.
However, if you think it was antagonistic then I think that is your problem, not mine.

If you think this post is antagonistic then no, I was just surprised at your response.

I won't ask anything you to clarify anything again.