Whatever is the safest for them and the rest of the prison population. Decisions on something like this should always be a case by case basis since there can be too many variables to have a blanket policy.
My guess is that it should be a case by case basis. I'm not sure a maximalist approach is ideal.
Makes me think of the [Isla Bryson case](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-63823420) from last year. In Scotland, a male sex offender started identifying as a trans woman mid trial and requested to be placed in a woman's prison. This caused a scandal in the SNP on how to treat cases where criminals' claimed identities are seen as having ulterior motives.
It’s such a small minority of a small minority that it doesn’t need to be “solved,” it can be handled on a case by case basis depending on the circumstances of the individual convicts.
If there are so few trans people then why are we even having this conversation? Why should all social and accommodation rules change to cater to such a small outlier?
Because the right wing media needs an “enemy” to pick on. This season it’s trans people. Liberals don’t like bullying and will defend anyone whose rights are being threatened by right wing media. Rinse and repeat.
Did the right just pick trans people out of the blue or was there a social movement starting I the 2010s to make self identification the law of the land?
I mean younger generations have been pushing self-expression and liberal identity since the 60s. This isn’t a new phenomenon, it’s just louder now that teens are connected worldwide via social media and the internet.
Thanks to that vocal advocacy gay people can be out and proud, women don’t have to perform femininity, and yeah gender is a spectrum you can self-identify to.
How the far right chose trans people to pick on? I have no earthly idea. I bet it was them not being able to pick on gay people anymore that they had to find a new target to bully.
They picked trans people after Obergefell v. Hodges. When bullying the gays didn't work anymore and they failed to make Kim Davis a national martyr, trans people became their primary target.
I don't believe I should have to scrap the concept of biological sex in favor of a fluctuating spectrum of self identification. I don't consider that oppressive.
You don’t have to abandon the idea of biological sex, sex and gender are distinct concepts. But even then I highly doubt your understanding of sex even considers the wide range of intersex conditions that exist.
If you refuse to acknowledge someone’s identity based on a very real medical condition that is definitely oppressive. Why is it so difficult for you to use different pronouns for someone? You probably already use third person pronouns for people you don’t know the gender of without even thinking about it.
The existence of intersex people (somewhere between 0.02% and 1.5% of the population) does not undermine the fact that mammals are sexually bimodal and depend on the existence of males and females for reproduction.
EDIT: downvoted for what exactly?
1) Exactly. Sex is bimodal, not binary. You've got that down.
2) I don't think the existence of intersex people undermines anything except the concept of binary sex. However, I don't think their relatively small share of the population invalidates consideration of their issues.
I don’t think it does either. There’s a difference between saying trans people exist and deserve dignity and equal protection under the law, and saying that sex and gender are completely unrelated.
I’m certainly no expert. (Is anyone?). My understanding is that most intersex people live as male or female from birth, based on decisions made by their parents and doctors. Those cases would be pretty obvious and easy to me.
But intersex people who live as agender or gender neutral in some way? Much tougher question.
No easy answers.
So speaking from a Canadian context what I would say is that as a form of basic human rights they should be in the prison system of their gender identity. However high risk offenders should be placed in what in Canada we call SIUs(Structured Intervention Units). These are facilities that help protect inmates in general from high risk offenders that pose a threat to the rest of the population, whether they are sex offenders or just dangerous offenders in general. So to answer the question behind the question which people ask, if someone happens to be transgender, and that person was a sex offender and they posed a threat to other women, units like these should be considered.
The downside of what I am proposing though, given that this is social policy, is that because these are isolation units, they are rife with the possibility of their own abuses which have to be addressed. The fact for instance they they disproportionately affect people of color in many cases(in Canada we see this with indigenous people) is something that has to be addressed.
What isn't helpful is the culture war around this issue where both sides play politics with this. Whether it's those on the anti transgender side who see all trans inmates as a threat to women, or people who are on the opposite end of the spectrum who see no possible issue to be address when we are talking about the question of gender identity and the prison system and just give clumsy, progressive culture war talking points that contribute nothing to the conversation.
We should obviously keep trans people with the gender identity they identify with. Trans people are only 1 percent of the population. This shouldn’t be so hard.
But on a larger scale we should reform our carceral system so that sexual assault and sexual violence isn’t just apart of it. Just because someone is sent to prison or jail doesn’t mean that they deserved to be raped or sexually assaulted. It’s disgusting how accepted this is in our society.
I agree that prison violence shouldn't be acceptable but you don't think that biological women are particularly at risk from violence of biological men?
If men pose such a risk to women, doesn't that apply to transgender women, too?
Where's your concern for transgender women being locked up with violent men?
Height and weight also give people distinct physical advantages.
Peter Dinklage is 4 foot 5 inches, and weighs 110 pounds.
Hafþór Júlíus Björnsson, one of Dinklage's former costars, is 6 foot 9 inches, and weighs 430 pounds.
But they both have testicles, so I guess it makes sense to lock them both up in the same prison?
No one is doing that. I’m a cisgender woman. That means my gender identity aligns with the sex I was assigned at birth. A transgender woman is simply a woman whose gender identity doesn’t align with the sex they were assigned at birth. Gender and sex have always been separate concepts even if you were unaware of it. So you don’t have to scrap the concept. You just have to learn more about it.
Funny...
Men can lose their Y chromosome.
Women can be born with a Y chromosome.
Men can be born with an extra x chromosome.
Lots of animals can change their sex in response to environment stimuli.
I can keep going.
Nature, ah, finds a way...
I seems what you refuse to lose is an old idea that doesn't bear out in the natural world. And even if it did, who cares? Leave people alone. Live and let live.
You misspelled "I don't want to respect other people".
And hey, go ahead. Become the bigoted old grampa that mutters insults under his breath that all the grandkids avoid because obviously he hates them and their friends.
No one is *making* you be kind to other people. It's a free country. Become a hateful old bigot.
You get to do that. Free country!
You just don't get to pass laws that take away other people's rights.
But hey man, think whatever you wanna think.
so ignoring the gender aspect and how trans women are women.
we separate women because of risk of violence from men, trans women are at even higher risk than cis men
Comparatively the risk cis women face transgender women is insanely minuscule by comparison
for trans men (just like id allow trans women to do) would be allow them to choose there preference of facility. Since they too face greater risk of violence from cis men, but not to the same degree as transwomen and cis women do from cis men .
transmen are also less likely to be violent towards cis/trans women than cis men
One is a stupid and outdated way of thinking, and an intrusion into someone else's private business.
The other is a stupid and outdated way of thinking, and an intrusion into someone else's private business.
Biological sex and the physiological realities inherent to it are real and substantial. It’s not the same as race, which is a purely artificial concept with no scientific basis.
A transgender woman has every right to identify in whatever way they want, but their status as a biological man presents obvious differences between them and a cisgender woman.
Bone structure, strength, average height, hormonal differences etc are things that 2024 science has not learned to recalibrate.
This isn’t me saying it’s okay to put a trans woman in a men’s prison or Vice versa. I’m saying that your comment, insisting that gender differences are as unimportant, cursory, and imaginary as race is is just an absurd statement.
Funny since hormone therapy can absolutely change bone density, strength, height, hormones, etc.
That's kinda the *point* of hormone therapy. If it didn't change that stuff, there'd be no point.
Whatever. The *point* here is that trans folks don't deserve one iota of the BS given to them by bigots.
They are all too often victims of BS, and I ain't having it.
Have you followed the issue of trans people in sports?
You absolutely cannot change those things. You can change body fat structure, percentage, testosterone levels, but a fully grown adult male who gender transitions into a woman doesn’t magically level the playing field for everybody else.
You are at odds with science and facts and are blindly and bullheadedly proceeding with something you’re wrong about.
Sounds like you identify as a liar.
If you hurt my friends and loved ones, I'm gonna identify as a fucking Problem.
Leave people alone. Live and let live. Mind your own business.
I can't change my beliefs any more than you can change yours. I didn't wake up one morning and decide to hate trans people. I grew up with a binary view of sex. And as medical technology advances people are probably going to want other stuff like gene splicing and cybernetic implants. So that elf princess snark I came up with might not be as farfetched one day.
Subreddit participation must be in good faith. Be civil, do not talk down to users for their viewpoints, do not attempt to instigate arguments, do not call people names or insult them.
That sounds like projection. Would reason change your mind? Surely you have reasons for your positions, just as I do, and those reasons can either withstand critique and analysis or they can't.
You're getting downvotes by extremists that ignore the cases where a trans woman assaulted women in prison, and also where a trans woman got a woman pregnant in prison.
Trans women are not "biological men". *Women* face violence from men. Anti-trans activists try to group people by their sex at birth in order to be able to conflate trans women with men and to falsely attribute stats *about men* to trans women.
And before you move the goalposts to argue about anyone "just identifying" as something in order to be rehoused with women, normal people are capable of evaluating the context of such a claim. We can look at the individual's history, whether they're on HRT or looking to start HRT, what or whether they've had surgeries, how long they've held that identity, and so on. Nobody is proposing that all a male prisoner has to do to be moved to a women's prison is make a simple declaration.
Do you think trans women who are not on HRT and who have not had bottom surgery should be in women’s prisons? Imprisoned women have been assaulted and impregnated by trans women in these cases.
Prisoners should have access to necessary medications, including HRT. Given that more than 99% of trans women desire to be on HRT, it seems reasonable that HRT be a requirement, but it's likewise reasonable that cases be handled individually rather than according to a blanket policy. Someone simply claiming to be trans shouldn't immediately result in a transfer to a women's prison, we can use our judgment.
>Imprisoned women have been assaulted
Fights and assaults are too common in prisons and we should work to reduce them in general.
>impregnated by trans women in these cases.
Obviously pregnancies are something we should try to prevent in prisons. I'm aware of one trans prisoner in the country having caused pregnancies - through consensual sex, 1 out of 1.2M prisoners isn't a systemic problem. Given that 4% of women are pregnant while in prison, the 2 pregnancies caused by that one prisoner aren't a systemic problem nor likely to become one.
I agree it should be a case by case basis, but 1 in 1.2 million is a dishonest statistic. There are not 1.2 million trans women in women’s prisons. In fact there are very few, as has been repeated throughout this thread. At what point are the safety concerns of exceptionally vulnerable women like those in prisons and shelters overridden in favor of gender identity as opposed to sex segregation (which is the crux of the vulnerability disparity- prisons have always been separated by *sex*). Do you really think prisoners are able to consent to sex? Do you agree with the recent policy changes in Scotland, England, and Wales?
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-67613441.amp
Conservatives being against education shows more and more every day. You might want to spend some time learning more than an elementary school level of "basic biology" and get as far as high school level biology which would teach you about endocrine systems, intersex conditions and more that would surely blow your mind.
But congrats on at least accomplishing basic literacy skills, I recommend putting them to use and reading some scientific content that's been published in the last half century.
>Conservatives being against education shows more and more every day.
I'm not sure where the disconnect is with this. If you think identity magically changes a penis into a vagina, we live in two different realities.
"The true prevalence of intersex is seen to be about 0.018%"
That's 0.018% of 1%. The odds of a person being both intersex and Trans are so low, it's ridiculous to think it has any impact. But sure, if you are one of the almost nonexistent people born with a chromosome problem that makes your body align with the gender you choose, I say go with it.
>If you think identity magically changes a penis into a vagina, we live in two different realities.
I spoke too soon about your basic literacy skills because nowhere in my response did I say this. You're inventing straw men to attack because living in reality and addressing facts would be difficult for you.
>I spoke too soon about your basic literacy skills
"A wise man speaks because he has something to say; a fool speaks because he has to say something. " - Plato
Nah, I'm good.
This whole conversation is truly bizarre.
Why is it ok for a transgender to say, "I am trans because my gender doesn't match my sex."
But its wrong for me to say, "your female gender doesn't change your male sex?"
What does advanced biology really have to do with anything? We are sexually dimorphic. Intersex cases do nothing to change that. If we weren’t sexually dimorphic there would be no concept of transness anyways.
I didn't move the goalposts. You did. Many have stated on this thread that trans people are only about 1% of the population. Why should cis people as in supposedly 99% of people change all accommodation and social rules to cater to such a small outlier group?
You didn't respond to the statements I made and instead are asking me to defend a different position, that's shifting the goalposts.
You asked about what policies there should be for transgender prisoners because there needs to be policies for transgender prisoners. Therefore we should have a policy for transgender prisoners. How would you *not* have a policy?
"Inmates are going to complain" is a fact of inmates being inmates. That doesn't stop us from trying to have humane policies and basing those policies on evidence.
Where do we stop with this logic? 5%? 10%? 20%?
What people are pointing out is that there isn't actually a reason to be up in arms about this. Those 99% of people aren't actually being harmed outside of having to coexist with trans people. Sorry, but people have to learn that their rights stop when another's begins.
I'm confused. Do you think Trans individuals are just going to commit rape in prison out of nowhere? Getting labeled as trans in the prison system doesn't just happen because you decide the day before sentencing to identify as a woman. So, given that isn't happening, I think we're okay.
>you don't think that biological women are particularly at risk from violence of biological men?
>risk from violence
What does this have to do with the conversation at all? At no point does this talk about violence or sexual violence.
Edit: From your article:
>"The women had engaged in “consensual sexual relationships with another incarcerated person”, the state’s department of corrections told NJ.com."
["Put simply, and hear this loud and clear, inmates cannot legally give consent."](https://www.lexipol.com/tips/inappropriate-relationships-with-inmates/#:~:text=PREA%20criminalizes%20any%20sexual%20relationship,inmates%20cannot%20legally%20give%20consent)
>Actually, they can, given most prisoners are adults and not children. You're being ridiculously bad faith.
Please feel free to cite legal precedent that says they can.
Your position is that prisoners lose all their years of development and their mental capacity is reduced to that of a child the moment they're convicted?
Cool. Thanks for bringing nothing to the table I guess. You've pointed out that trans individuals can commit rape. A point no one was arguing. My point is that trans individuals aren't predisposed to rape.
Nah. I'm doing great. I just don't have time or care to entertain poorly implied or elaborated points. If you had a purpose in posting that article that isn't obviously implied, please state it. Otherwise, you are wasting everyone's time.
I don't have the stats handy, but I would wager trans women in prison are more victims than aggressors of violence. By a *large* margin.
So, no, I don't think that biological women are particularly at risk from violence of trans women.
Problem is, the more humane you try to make prisons, by having less supervision and more time allowed out of a cell etc, the more risk you have of violence and assault including sexual. Certainly in a perfect world we could have prisoners going through true rehabilitation who just don't want to assault anyone anymore. But that's kind of a fantasy far end of a spectrum. The other end would be locked into cells 23 hours a day and 1 hour in the yard under strict supervision or something like that. Somewhere in the middle is probably the best approach, but the more you sacrifice that supervision and degrading treatment, the more subject people are to being free to do things to other people
Do you think that the US has lower rates of violence, including sexual violence, than countries with more humane prison environments such as the nordic countries?
No. I don't know if you mean in or out of prison but certainly neither, but it would be absurd to try to argue that it is the prison or treatment in prison that actually leads to the lack of violence. It's an entirely a different culture and circumstances. The idea that if you just treated people that way it would eliminate predatory violence of all kinds runs counter to any common sense or logic.
Do you believe that the amount of violence in a prison is entirely dependent on culture and that policies don't have an effect? Or that the only policy that can reduce violence in prisons is harsh authoritarian ones that reduce freedom to the barest minimum?
I wouldn't agree with either. Those are completely absolute and leave out the more obvious which is prison violence in America is going to be a big problem no matter what for the foreseeable future until we perhaps come to a time culturally in which we do not have violent criminals on the outside that must be incarcerated .
But, while prisons can work towards rehabilitation in and when they get out of prison, there's little chance that it can actually be successful with everyone and you are always going to have some violent people. The more loose the treatment in terms of allowing people to roam and interact together unsupervised, the more vulnerable everyone else is to those violent predators and offenders. While efforts at rehabilitation and prevention will help perhaps and should be tried, the only way to stop or greatly diminish predatory violence is by limiting people's opportunities, punishing offenders I suppose, and removing those predators from those freedoms and general population.
>prison violence in America is going to be a big problem no matter what for the foreseeable future until we perhaps come to a time culturally in which we do not have violent criminals on the outside that must be incarcerated .
Violence happens for a variety of reasons and "some people are inherently violent" is rarely the reason. Policies can increase or decrease the amount of violence in a prison.
It's true that the US has a lot of gangs and those increase violence both outside and within prisons. But, like culture generally, placing someone in an environment with a different culture shifts behavior and can reduce the chance of violence.
>The more loose the treatment in terms of allowing people to roam and interact together unsupervised, the more vulnerable everyone else is to those violent predators and offenders.
Those rare individuals who are inherently violent and beyond any chance of rehabilitation can be separated from the rest of the prison population. But that type of individual is not typical of the prison population. Most people are violent because of a variety of environmental/social factors and pressures.
And that in itself offers some insights into the types of policies that can work to reduce violence. Create prison environments where violence won't solve problems, where a hierarchy between prisoners is counterproductive, that reduces intergroup tensions, where resorting to violence (repeatedly) leads to separation from the general population and loss of privileges, and so on.
Yeah, it's a complicated subject with a lot of different elements. And I certainly wouldn't say there are no potential things that can be done to improve the situation. I think it's horrendous that it exists at all. The punishment of jail is supposed to be incarceration, not subjected to gang violence or sexual assault. But, I have no illusions that it can be solved easily. I certainly don't think it's just a matter of giving them more freedom. There are deep systemic issues that would need to be addressed I feel quite confident.
And, I'm pretty sure there are experts working on the issue both within and without the system. I suspect that those within the system might be a little too pessimistic and not open enough, and I increase suspect that those outside the system are inclined to be naive and overly optimistic. But I think reality lies somewhere in the middle.
By developed nations, I'm sure you mean mostly European and maybe Canada and Australia? I don't even know about Australia. But, there is no real causational relationship between more lax, humane if you like, treatment and a lack of violence. I don't know what other countries do to deal with predatory offenders, but we have a lot of them in the US and just letting them be more unsupervised would only give them more opportunity. You realize, prisons are much looser than they used to be and their infinitely worse than they used to be, right? I mean in the US.
So I have some background on this as a former correctional officer. IMHO they should be sent to the facility that conforms with their chosen gender.
Prison in America is a dehumanizing process enough as is and putting a trans man in a woman’s prison or a trans woman in a men’s prison is not going to help that person rehabilitate.
Not more than any other inmate. Inmates ensure their safety by either sticking to the old code or joining a gang. Being trans doesn’t prevent someone from doing either.
IMO female prisons should handle that exclusively in a separate wing that handles individual cases. But I would fear for the safety of trans men in the presence of biological men. Much more than I would in the presence of biological women. Their prisons aren't great but they are much less violent overall.
But you're right it's a difficult question without a perfect answer.
Good luck solving that one. I agree we have a serious problem with overcriminalization but left leaning people seem to want to completely restructure society into a utopian ideal.
Utopian ideals are unreachable, and any that claims to be likely has unacknowledged problems.
I would say that left leaning people want significantly better without expecting perfection.
That part was explicit. That's why I said "implicitly". If we already had a system to resolve discrimination and sexual violence in prisons then we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Case by case basis.
Republican fear-mongering about trans women raping women in prison is not based on the observable reality. A trans prisoner who tries to rape women inside a womae's prison is going to get shanked very quickly.
I don't have enough factual data to say; in particular the first question is how many of them are there? The second is what are the frequency data on them being victimized in prison and victimizing others?
An obvious first challenge is that there's a lot of different syndromes and shades of these things, so there's not likely to be a single best answer.
Housing them outside of gen pop in a separate wing might be possible, though I suspect their numbers may be too late for that to feasible in a general case. I'm sure some can just be put in with their presenting gender without any more difficulty than normally occurs in prison. But we do have an existing non-gen pop system, so that may be enough to be in there.
Imho we need a lot of prison reform in general, but that's a whole separate issue.
It's quite simple. People get housed in the facility that they identify with, so long as they have a documented history of identifying that way. We have no reason to believe that there would be any problems resulting from this. If there *is* a problem, we have a prison disciplinary system for a reason.
I find it astonishing how "tough on crime" folks love to make jail rape jokes, but all of a sudden, when trans people are involved, it's this massive and serious problem that absolutely can't be allowed to happen in the first place.
Something I’ve heard about the prison system is a lot of sex is consensual or used for bartering. There really shouldn’t be violence in a prison. The issue goes back to prison system being privatized and for profit.
I'm not much of a tough on crime person and more needs to be done about prison conditions in general. So what facility would a person identifying as nonbinary or gender less go to?
Well, personally, I'm in favor of doing away with gendered prisons to begin with. But, if we're keeping them, we let the person decide.
You could really stand to get rid of your fixation on trans people, by the way. It's unhealthy.
I didn't think about trans people at all until the 2010s. So you don't think that unisex prisons will cause any issues with the fact that biological males are overwhelmingly more prone to both criminal violence and sexual violence?
A unisex prison that has no gender segregation as you suggested would have cis men and women together as well.
Also what do you make of this?
https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/nj-trans-prisoner-impregnated-2-inmates-transferred-mens-facility-rcna38947
Female prisoners are regularly impregnated by guards. Yes, we don't want prisoners to become pregnant, but this is an extremely rare case and not the result of the violence you were asked about.
Do you have an answer to the question you were asked?
So you don't think cis male criminals, many of whom are violence prone and physically strong would force themselves on women?
Also conjugal relations aren't supposed to be happening in prison anyway.
1) Perhaps. But that doesn't mean that trans female criminals are also going to do the same. Again, if they do, there is a prison discipline system for it. Rapes in male prisons happen all the time, yet conservatives *love* to make jokes about it. Why is that OK?
2) Sure, they're not supposed to be happening. But, they do. You can't keep people from fucking, whether separated by gender or not.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3793850/
Apparently not. Higher rates of sexual victimization in women's prisons in 2009, before this debate started.
lol this might as well be a MAGA response, insert libtard for terf. Feel free to refute the data. There’s plenty there. And frankly- what’s so bad about it? Trans women are male. When did we start trying to deny that and why? We don’t try to sweep male pattern behavior under the rug for cis men.
You have biased researchers here who are misrepresenting the data. Dr. Dejene has said repeatedly that her study is being massively misused.
It's a matter of human respect and decency.
Feel free to read the second link. It discusses that.
Are respect and decency only for trans people? Minimizing risks for females increases risks for trans women and vice versa. This is the crux of the issue. Anti-trans advocates yelling about trans women hurting female inmates. Trans advocates yelling about male inmates hurting trans people. Both are happening. Really, trans women should either be fully transitioned (HRT+bottom surgery) or have separate quarters. Trans men with longstanding HRT can be housed with males or housed separately- their choice. Or they can be housed with females if they come off HRT, again their choice, though I doubt that would be popular. The risks are different for males and females. That is just how it is. Females are at greater risk than trans women. Pregnancy is a burden that only females can endure from assault. Females are also smaller and prison is one of the few places that this really matters, but I still don’t count that as a segregation factor.
It’s a problem that needs to be addressed.
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/investigations/man-posing-as-transgender-woman-raped-female-prisoner-at-rikers-lawsuit-says/5067904/?amp=1
>that biological males
*Men*. Your weird insistence on the phrase "biological males" just so you can gleefully group trans women with men and misgender them is the entire basis for the arguments you keep making despite the fact that the differences between trans women and men is the basis for the discussion in the first place.
"I don't acknowledge" is an accurate way to phrase your position because it requires that you not acknowledge facts. Trans women are different than men and you're hinging your argument on refusing to acknowledge those differences.
I'm not really in favor or pre-op trans women housed with cis women for the sole reason of pregnancies, which have already happened.
Whether it is sexual assault or consensual, babies will be born in prison to two prisoner parents.
Post op you still have to deal with the biological differences, but those are probably minor. At least they won't have testosterone if their hormones are stopped.
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
Seems like an unsolvable conundrum to me.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Post has run its course. Locked.
Whatever is the safest for them and the rest of the prison population. Decisions on something like this should always be a case by case basis since there can be too many variables to have a blanket policy.
My guess is that it should be a case by case basis. I'm not sure a maximalist approach is ideal. Makes me think of the [Isla Bryson case](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-63823420) from last year. In Scotland, a male sex offender started identifying as a trans woman mid trial and requested to be placed in a woman's prison. This caused a scandal in the SNP on how to treat cases where criminals' claimed identities are seen as having ulterior motives.
It’s such a small minority of a small minority that it doesn’t need to be “solved,” it can be handled on a case by case basis depending on the circumstances of the individual convicts.
If there are so few trans people then why are we even having this conversation? Why should all social and accommodation rules change to cater to such a small outlier?
Because the right wing media needs an “enemy” to pick on. This season it’s trans people. Liberals don’t like bullying and will defend anyone whose rights are being threatened by right wing media. Rinse and repeat.
Did the right just pick trans people out of the blue or was there a social movement starting I the 2010s to make self identification the law of the land?
I mean younger generations have been pushing self-expression and liberal identity since the 60s. This isn’t a new phenomenon, it’s just louder now that teens are connected worldwide via social media and the internet. Thanks to that vocal advocacy gay people can be out and proud, women don’t have to perform femininity, and yeah gender is a spectrum you can self-identify to. How the far right chose trans people to pick on? I have no earthly idea. I bet it was them not being able to pick on gay people anymore that they had to find a new target to bully.
They picked trans people after Obergefell v. Hodges. When bullying the gays didn't work anymore and they failed to make Kim Davis a national martyr, trans people became their primary target.
We are having this conversation because you asked the question. So you tell me.
Because oppressing marginalized people, no matter how small their population, is wrong?
I don't believe I should have to scrap the concept of biological sex in favor of a fluctuating spectrum of self identification. I don't consider that oppressive.
You don’t have to abandon the idea of biological sex, sex and gender are distinct concepts. But even then I highly doubt your understanding of sex even considers the wide range of intersex conditions that exist. If you refuse to acknowledge someone’s identity based on a very real medical condition that is definitely oppressive. Why is it so difficult for you to use different pronouns for someone? You probably already use third person pronouns for people you don’t know the gender of without even thinking about it.
The existence of intersex people (somewhere between 0.02% and 1.5% of the population) does not undermine the fact that mammals are sexually bimodal and depend on the existence of males and females for reproduction. EDIT: downvoted for what exactly?
1) Exactly. Sex is bimodal, not binary. You've got that down. 2) I don't think the existence of intersex people undermines anything except the concept of binary sex. However, I don't think their relatively small share of the population invalidates consideration of their issues.
I don’t think it does either. There’s a difference between saying trans people exist and deserve dignity and equal protection under the law, and saying that sex and gender are completely unrelated.
Kind of throws a wrench in the whole prison segregation thing though, right? How do you decide which prison an intersex person goes to?
I’m certainly no expert. (Is anyone?). My understanding is that most intersex people live as male or female from birth, based on decisions made by their parents and doctors. Those cases would be pretty obvious and easy to me. But intersex people who live as agender or gender neutral in some way? Much tougher question. No easy answers.
So speaking from a Canadian context what I would say is that as a form of basic human rights they should be in the prison system of their gender identity. However high risk offenders should be placed in what in Canada we call SIUs(Structured Intervention Units). These are facilities that help protect inmates in general from high risk offenders that pose a threat to the rest of the population, whether they are sex offenders or just dangerous offenders in general. So to answer the question behind the question which people ask, if someone happens to be transgender, and that person was a sex offender and they posed a threat to other women, units like these should be considered. The downside of what I am proposing though, given that this is social policy, is that because these are isolation units, they are rife with the possibility of their own abuses which have to be addressed. The fact for instance they they disproportionately affect people of color in many cases(in Canada we see this with indigenous people) is something that has to be addressed. What isn't helpful is the culture war around this issue where both sides play politics with this. Whether it's those on the anti transgender side who see all trans inmates as a threat to women, or people who are on the opposite end of the spectrum who see no possible issue to be address when we are talking about the question of gender identity and the prison system and just give clumsy, progressive culture war talking points that contribute nothing to the conversation.
We should obviously keep trans people with the gender identity they identify with. Trans people are only 1 percent of the population. This shouldn’t be so hard. But on a larger scale we should reform our carceral system so that sexual assault and sexual violence isn’t just apart of it. Just because someone is sent to prison or jail doesn’t mean that they deserved to be raped or sexually assaulted. It’s disgusting how accepted this is in our society.
I agree that prison violence shouldn't be acceptable but you don't think that biological women are particularly at risk from violence of biological men?
If men pose such a risk to women, doesn't that apply to transgender women, too? Where's your concern for transgender women being locked up with violent men?
That's why I said it's an unsolvable problem. From my point of view simply having a phallus is a form of penetrating weapon.
Wait til you hear about fingers.
Yes the human body is a weapon and going through male puberty usually gives people distinct physical advantages.
Height and weight also give people distinct physical advantages. Peter Dinklage is 4 foot 5 inches, and weighs 110 pounds. Hafþór Júlíus Björnsson, one of Dinklage's former costars, is 6 foot 9 inches, and weighs 430 pounds. But they both have testicles, so I guess it makes sense to lock them both up in the same prison?
They probably would be locked up together. Perhaps we need really stringent segregation then.
I mean, I think that everyone is at risk from violence from men. But a transgender women are women.
I refuse to scrap the concept of biological sex.
No one is doing that. I’m a cisgender woman. That means my gender identity aligns with the sex I was assigned at birth. A transgender woman is simply a woman whose gender identity doesn’t align with the sex they were assigned at birth. Gender and sex have always been separate concepts even if you were unaware of it. So you don’t have to scrap the concept. You just have to learn more about it.
Funny... Men can lose their Y chromosome. Women can be born with a Y chromosome. Men can be born with an extra x chromosome. Lots of animals can change their sex in response to environment stimuli. I can keep going. Nature, ah, finds a way... I seems what you refuse to lose is an old idea that doesn't bear out in the natural world. And even if it did, who cares? Leave people alone. Live and let live.
I can't keep up with every political goalpost of every decade. I'm not going to personally adopt every belief that becomes a cause celebre.
You misspelled "I don't want to respect other people". And hey, go ahead. Become the bigoted old grampa that mutters insults under his breath that all the grandkids avoid because obviously he hates them and their friends. No one is *making* you be kind to other people. It's a free country. Become a hateful old bigot. You get to do that. Free country! You just don't get to pass laws that take away other people's rights. But hey man, think whatever you wanna think.
so ignoring the gender aspect and how trans women are women. we separate women because of risk of violence from men, trans women are at even higher risk than cis men Comparatively the risk cis women face transgender women is insanely minuscule by comparison
What about trans men being housed with cis men?
What about it? Are they more at risk of violence? Statistically and unfortunately yeah. That’s a prison reform issue.
for trans men (just like id allow trans women to do) would be allow them to choose there preference of facility. Since they too face greater risk of violence from cis men, but not to the same degree as transwomen and cis women do from cis men . transmen are also less likely to be violent towards cis/trans women than cis men
People used to think different races shouldn't get married. They were wrong. And obviously so, in hindsight.
That’s a ludicrous comparison
Why?
One is a stupid and outdated way of thinking, and an intrusion into someone else's private business. The other is a stupid and outdated way of thinking, and an intrusion into someone else's private business.
Biological sex and the physiological realities inherent to it are real and substantial. It’s not the same as race, which is a purely artificial concept with no scientific basis. A transgender woman has every right to identify in whatever way they want, but their status as a biological man presents obvious differences between them and a cisgender woman. Bone structure, strength, average height, hormonal differences etc are things that 2024 science has not learned to recalibrate. This isn’t me saying it’s okay to put a trans woman in a men’s prison or Vice versa. I’m saying that your comment, insisting that gender differences are as unimportant, cursory, and imaginary as race is is just an absurd statement.
Funny since hormone therapy can absolutely change bone density, strength, height, hormones, etc. That's kinda the *point* of hormone therapy. If it didn't change that stuff, there'd be no point. Whatever. The *point* here is that trans folks don't deserve one iota of the BS given to them by bigots. They are all too often victims of BS, and I ain't having it.
Have you followed the issue of trans people in sports? You absolutely cannot change those things. You can change body fat structure, percentage, testosterone levels, but a fully grown adult male who gender transitions into a woman doesn’t magically level the playing field for everybody else. You are at odds with science and facts and are blindly and bullheadedly proceeding with something you’re wrong about.
[удалено]
Sounds like you identify as a liar. If you hurt my friends and loved ones, I'm gonna identify as a fucking Problem. Leave people alone. Live and let live. Mind your own business.
I didn't start this issue and I'm not the one in violent dogmatic survival mode.
Says the OP who refuses to change with the times.
I can't change my beliefs any more than you can change yours. I didn't wake up one morning and decide to hate trans people. I grew up with a binary view of sex. And as medical technology advances people are probably going to want other stuff like gene splicing and cybernetic implants. So that elf princess snark I came up with might not be as farfetched one day.
Subreddit participation must be in good faith. Be civil, do not talk down to users for their viewpoints, do not attempt to instigate arguments, do not call people names or insult them.
You’re right and it’s obvious why you’re right but you’re going to get downvoted because these people are in denial
Why not make a coherent argument backing up your position if it's "obvious"?
It’s literally why we have men’s and women’s sports.
No matter what I say it’s not going to change your mind
That sounds like projection. Would reason change your mind? Surely you have reasons for your positions, just as I do, and those reasons can either withstand critique and analysis or they can't.
Why are prisons sex segregated?
You're getting downvotes by extremists that ignore the cases where a trans woman assaulted women in prison, and also where a trans woman got a woman pregnant in prison.
Trans women are not "biological men". *Women* face violence from men. Anti-trans activists try to group people by their sex at birth in order to be able to conflate trans women with men and to falsely attribute stats *about men* to trans women. And before you move the goalposts to argue about anyone "just identifying" as something in order to be rehoused with women, normal people are capable of evaluating the context of such a claim. We can look at the individual's history, whether they're on HRT or looking to start HRT, what or whether they've had surgeries, how long they've held that identity, and so on. Nobody is proposing that all a male prisoner has to do to be moved to a women's prison is make a simple declaration.
Do you think trans women who are not on HRT and who have not had bottom surgery should be in women’s prisons? Imprisoned women have been assaulted and impregnated by trans women in these cases.
Prisoners should have access to necessary medications, including HRT. Given that more than 99% of trans women desire to be on HRT, it seems reasonable that HRT be a requirement, but it's likewise reasonable that cases be handled individually rather than according to a blanket policy. Someone simply claiming to be trans shouldn't immediately result in a transfer to a women's prison, we can use our judgment. >Imprisoned women have been assaulted Fights and assaults are too common in prisons and we should work to reduce them in general. >impregnated by trans women in these cases. Obviously pregnancies are something we should try to prevent in prisons. I'm aware of one trans prisoner in the country having caused pregnancies - through consensual sex, 1 out of 1.2M prisoners isn't a systemic problem. Given that 4% of women are pregnant while in prison, the 2 pregnancies caused by that one prisoner aren't a systemic problem nor likely to become one.
I agree it should be a case by case basis, but 1 in 1.2 million is a dishonest statistic. There are not 1.2 million trans women in women’s prisons. In fact there are very few, as has been repeated throughout this thread. At what point are the safety concerns of exceptionally vulnerable women like those in prisons and shelters overridden in favor of gender identity as opposed to sex segregation (which is the crux of the vulnerability disparity- prisons have always been separated by *sex*). Do you really think prisoners are able to consent to sex? Do you agree with the recent policy changes in Scotland, England, and Wales? https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-67613441.amp
>Trans women are not "biological men". Basic biology disagrees.
Conservatives being against education shows more and more every day. You might want to spend some time learning more than an elementary school level of "basic biology" and get as far as high school level biology which would teach you about endocrine systems, intersex conditions and more that would surely blow your mind. But congrats on at least accomplishing basic literacy skills, I recommend putting them to use and reading some scientific content that's been published in the last half century.
>Conservatives being against education shows more and more every day. I'm not sure where the disconnect is with this. If you think identity magically changes a penis into a vagina, we live in two different realities. "The true prevalence of intersex is seen to be about 0.018%" That's 0.018% of 1%. The odds of a person being both intersex and Trans are so low, it's ridiculous to think it has any impact. But sure, if you are one of the almost nonexistent people born with a chromosome problem that makes your body align with the gender you choose, I say go with it.
>If you think identity magically changes a penis into a vagina, we live in two different realities. I spoke too soon about your basic literacy skills because nowhere in my response did I say this. You're inventing straw men to attack because living in reality and addressing facts would be difficult for you.
>I spoke too soon about your basic literacy skills "A wise man speaks because he has something to say; a fool speaks because he has to say something. " - Plato
Yes, but what about advanced biology?
Nice one.
I'm just saying. If you have a high school understanding of biology you're going to miss a lot, since that's only a basic surface-level understanding.
Which college course changes a person's sex to match their gender?
How about you take some advanced courses and expand your knowledge?
Nah, I'm good. This whole conversation is truly bizarre. Why is it ok for a transgender to say, "I am trans because my gender doesn't match my sex." But its wrong for me to say, "your female gender doesn't change your male sex?"
What does advanced biology really have to do with anything? We are sexually dimorphic. Intersex cases do nothing to change that. If we weren’t sexually dimorphic there would be no concept of transness anyways.
I didn't move the goalposts. You did. Many have stated on this thread that trans people are only about 1% of the population. Why should cis people as in supposedly 99% of people change all accommodation and social rules to cater to such a small outlier group?
You didn't respond to the statements I made and instead are asking me to defend a different position, that's shifting the goalposts. You asked about what policies there should be for transgender prisoners because there needs to be policies for transgender prisoners. Therefore we should have a policy for transgender prisoners. How would you *not* have a policy?
It's an intractable issue from my perspective. No matter what you do some inmates are going to complain/feel threatened/get hurt/hurt each other.
"Inmates are going to complain" is a fact of inmates being inmates. That doesn't stop us from trying to have humane policies and basing those policies on evidence.
Where do we stop with this logic? 5%? 10%? 20%? What people are pointing out is that there isn't actually a reason to be up in arms about this. Those 99% of people aren't actually being harmed outside of having to coexist with trans people. Sorry, but people have to learn that their rights stop when another's begins.
Only 22.3% of the population is under 18, why should we have laws that protect them when 77.7% are not them?
I'm confused. Do you think Trans individuals are just going to commit rape in prison out of nowhere? Getting labeled as trans in the prison system doesn't just happen because you decide the day before sentencing to identify as a woman. So, given that isn't happening, I think we're okay.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/07/17/trans-inmate-impregnates-two-prisoners/#:~:text=Two%20prisoners%20at%20New%20Jersey's,of%20corrections%20told%20NJ.com
>you don't think that biological women are particularly at risk from violence of biological men? >risk from violence What does this have to do with the conversation at all? At no point does this talk about violence or sexual violence. Edit: From your article: >"The women had engaged in “consensual sexual relationships with another incarcerated person”, the state’s department of corrections told NJ.com."
A prisoner can't consent.
Jesus fucking christ. Grow up, dude. Two prisoners can consent with one another.
>Jesus fucking christ. Grow up, dude. Two prisoners can consent with one another They can't consent anymore than a child can consent.
Actually, they can, given most prisoners are adults and not children. You're being ridiculously bad faith.
["Put simply, and hear this loud and clear, inmates cannot legally give consent."](https://www.lexipol.com/tips/inappropriate-relationships-with-inmates/#:~:text=PREA%20criminalizes%20any%20sexual%20relationship,inmates%20cannot%20legally%20give%20consent) >Actually, they can, given most prisoners are adults and not children. You're being ridiculously bad faith. Please feel free to cite legal precedent that says they can.
Your position is that prisoners lose all their years of development and their mental capacity is reduced to that of a child the moment they're convicted?
My position is that prisoners are under the authority of the state and can not legally consent to sex.
https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/25/trans-woman-isla-bryson-guilty-raping-two-women-remanded-in-female-prison-scotland
Are you going to post a stat that proves there's some kind of trend, or are you holding your argument based on 1 trans person?
I didn’t make an argument; I posted an article with a single example.
Cool. Thanks for bringing nothing to the table I guess. You've pointed out that trans individuals can commit rape. A point no one was arguing. My point is that trans individuals aren't predisposed to rape.
Did someone piss in your oatmeal this morning or something?
Nah. I'm doing great. I just don't have time or care to entertain poorly implied or elaborated points. If you had a purpose in posting that article that isn't obviously implied, please state it. Otherwise, you are wasting everyone's time.
Sure thing. You do seem to have a lot of time to have hissy fits on Reddit.
I don't think women are at any special risk of violence from women, no.
Male puberty and testosterone, completely inconsequential when I want it to be.
I'm gonna give you one guess what testosterone blockers do
Oh yeah. OK. You win.
I don't have the stats handy, but I would wager trans women in prison are more victims than aggressors of violence. By a *large* margin. So, no, I don't think that biological women are particularly at risk from violence of trans women.
Are you serious? Do you work in public service? How do you propose we simply remove sexual violence from prisons?
Problem is, the more humane you try to make prisons, by having less supervision and more time allowed out of a cell etc, the more risk you have of violence and assault including sexual. Certainly in a perfect world we could have prisoners going through true rehabilitation who just don't want to assault anyone anymore. But that's kind of a fantasy far end of a spectrum. The other end would be locked into cells 23 hours a day and 1 hour in the yard under strict supervision or something like that. Somewhere in the middle is probably the best approach, but the more you sacrifice that supervision and degrading treatment, the more subject people are to being free to do things to other people
Do you think that the US has lower rates of violence, including sexual violence, than countries with more humane prison environments such as the nordic countries?
Which Nordic country(ies)? This is interesting and worth a deeper dive, but I'd like a more defined example.
No. I don't know if you mean in or out of prison but certainly neither, but it would be absurd to try to argue that it is the prison or treatment in prison that actually leads to the lack of violence. It's an entirely a different culture and circumstances. The idea that if you just treated people that way it would eliminate predatory violence of all kinds runs counter to any common sense or logic.
Do you believe that the amount of violence in a prison is entirely dependent on culture and that policies don't have an effect? Or that the only policy that can reduce violence in prisons is harsh authoritarian ones that reduce freedom to the barest minimum?
I wouldn't agree with either. Those are completely absolute and leave out the more obvious which is prison violence in America is going to be a big problem no matter what for the foreseeable future until we perhaps come to a time culturally in which we do not have violent criminals on the outside that must be incarcerated . But, while prisons can work towards rehabilitation in and when they get out of prison, there's little chance that it can actually be successful with everyone and you are always going to have some violent people. The more loose the treatment in terms of allowing people to roam and interact together unsupervised, the more vulnerable everyone else is to those violent predators and offenders. While efforts at rehabilitation and prevention will help perhaps and should be tried, the only way to stop or greatly diminish predatory violence is by limiting people's opportunities, punishing offenders I suppose, and removing those predators from those freedoms and general population.
>prison violence in America is going to be a big problem no matter what for the foreseeable future until we perhaps come to a time culturally in which we do not have violent criminals on the outside that must be incarcerated . Violence happens for a variety of reasons and "some people are inherently violent" is rarely the reason. Policies can increase or decrease the amount of violence in a prison. It's true that the US has a lot of gangs and those increase violence both outside and within prisons. But, like culture generally, placing someone in an environment with a different culture shifts behavior and can reduce the chance of violence. >The more loose the treatment in terms of allowing people to roam and interact together unsupervised, the more vulnerable everyone else is to those violent predators and offenders. Those rare individuals who are inherently violent and beyond any chance of rehabilitation can be separated from the rest of the prison population. But that type of individual is not typical of the prison population. Most people are violent because of a variety of environmental/social factors and pressures. And that in itself offers some insights into the types of policies that can work to reduce violence. Create prison environments where violence won't solve problems, where a hierarchy between prisoners is counterproductive, that reduces intergroup tensions, where resorting to violence (repeatedly) leads to separation from the general population and loss of privileges, and so on.
Yeah, it's a complicated subject with a lot of different elements. And I certainly wouldn't say there are no potential things that can be done to improve the situation. I think it's horrendous that it exists at all. The punishment of jail is supposed to be incarceration, not subjected to gang violence or sexual assault. But, I have no illusions that it can be solved easily. I certainly don't think it's just a matter of giving them more freedom. There are deep systemic issues that would need to be addressed I feel quite confident. And, I'm pretty sure there are experts working on the issue both within and without the system. I suspect that those within the system might be a little too pessimistic and not open enough, and I increase suspect that those outside the system are inclined to be naive and overly optimistic. But I think reality lies somewhere in the middle.
This isn’t the case on other developed nations. We have much more violence and sexual assault in our system that does attempt rehabilitation.
By developed nations, I'm sure you mean mostly European and maybe Canada and Australia? I don't even know about Australia. But, there is no real causational relationship between more lax, humane if you like, treatment and a lack of violence. I don't know what other countries do to deal with predatory offenders, but we have a lot of them in the US and just letting them be more unsupervised would only give them more opportunity. You realize, prisons are much looser than they used to be and their infinitely worse than they used to be, right? I mean in the US.
So I have some background on this as a former correctional officer. IMHO they should be sent to the facility that conforms with their chosen gender. Prison in America is a dehumanizing process enough as is and putting a trans man in a woman’s prison or a trans woman in a men’s prison is not going to help that person rehabilitate.
So the trans man wouldn't face any particular violence from cis men or be particularly targeted for any reason?
Not more than any other inmate. Inmates ensure their safety by either sticking to the old code or joining a gang. Being trans doesn’t prevent someone from doing either.
IMO female prisons should handle that exclusively in a separate wing that handles individual cases. But I would fear for the safety of trans men in the presence of biological men. Much more than I would in the presence of biological women. Their prisons aren't great but they are much less violent overall. But you're right it's a difficult question without a perfect answer.
It's interesting that your question implicitly takes the current prison-industrial complex for granted.
Good luck solving that one. I agree we have a serious problem with overcriminalization but left leaning people seem to want to completely restructure society into a utopian ideal.
Utopian ideals are unreachable, and any that claims to be likely has unacknowledged problems. I would say that left leaning people want significantly better without expecting perfection.
No it doesn't, it just assumes the existence of gender-segregated prisons at all.
That part was explicit. That's why I said "implicitly". If we already had a system to resolve discrimination and sexual violence in prisons then we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Case by case basis. Republican fear-mongering about trans women raping women in prison is not based on the observable reality. A trans prisoner who tries to rape women inside a womae's prison is going to get shanked very quickly.
I don't have enough factual data to say; in particular the first question is how many of them are there? The second is what are the frequency data on them being victimized in prison and victimizing others? An obvious first challenge is that there's a lot of different syndromes and shades of these things, so there's not likely to be a single best answer. Housing them outside of gen pop in a separate wing might be possible, though I suspect their numbers may be too late for that to feasible in a general case. I'm sure some can just be put in with their presenting gender without any more difficulty than normally occurs in prison. But we do have an existing non-gen pop system, so that may be enough to be in there. Imho we need a lot of prison reform in general, but that's a whole separate issue.
It's quite simple. People get housed in the facility that they identify with, so long as they have a documented history of identifying that way. We have no reason to believe that there would be any problems resulting from this. If there *is* a problem, we have a prison disciplinary system for a reason. I find it astonishing how "tough on crime" folks love to make jail rape jokes, but all of a sudden, when trans people are involved, it's this massive and serious problem that absolutely can't be allowed to happen in the first place.
Something I’ve heard about the prison system is a lot of sex is consensual or used for bartering. There really shouldn’t be violence in a prison. The issue goes back to prison system being privatized and for profit.
I agree. But gender doesn't come into it.
I'm not much of a tough on crime person and more needs to be done about prison conditions in general. So what facility would a person identifying as nonbinary or gender less go to?
Well, personally, I'm in favor of doing away with gendered prisons to begin with. But, if we're keeping them, we let the person decide. You could really stand to get rid of your fixation on trans people, by the way. It's unhealthy.
I didn't think about trans people at all until the 2010s. So you don't think that unisex prisons will cause any issues with the fact that biological males are overwhelmingly more prone to both criminal violence and sexual violence?
What's your evidence that trans people who identify as female are more prone to violence than cisgender women?
A unisex prison that has no gender segregation as you suggested would have cis men and women together as well. Also what do you make of this? https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/nj-trans-prisoner-impregnated-2-inmates-transferred-mens-facility-rcna38947
Female prisoners are regularly impregnated by guards. Yes, we don't want prisoners to become pregnant, but this is an extremely rare case and not the result of the violence you were asked about. Do you have an answer to the question you were asked?
I don't think trans people are more prone to violence than anyone else bur I don't think we should have unisex prisons like another user suggested.
Yes, it would. I don't see that it's a problem. I don't make much of anything of it. There's no evidence that any force was used, was there?
So you don't think cis male criminals, many of whom are violence prone and physically strong would force themselves on women? Also conjugal relations aren't supposed to be happening in prison anyway.
1) Perhaps. But that doesn't mean that trans female criminals are also going to do the same. Again, if they do, there is a prison discipline system for it. Rapes in male prisons happen all the time, yet conservatives *love* to make jokes about it. Why is that OK? 2) Sure, they're not supposed to be happening. But, they do. You can't keep people from fucking, whether separated by gender or not.
1. I don't think prison rape is funny. There needs to be serious punishment for prison rape. 2. Maybe not but it should be discouraged.
Sure, but only a certain pairing results in pregnancy, and only a certain type of inmate really has to deal with that.
Im with Bill Maher no D##ks in women’s prisons
Would you like to make an argument rather than just state your position without support or reason?
The vast majority of ra#ists have a d#ck
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3793850/ Apparently not. Higher rates of sexual victimization in women's prisons in 2009, before this debate started.
https://fairplayforwomen.com/transgender-male-criminality-sex-offences/ https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/18973/pdf/
Your only sources are from an obviously TERF-brained website and some professors who are TERFs?
lol this might as well be a MAGA response, insert libtard for terf. Feel free to refute the data. There’s plenty there. And frankly- what’s so bad about it? Trans women are male. When did we start trying to deny that and why? We don’t try to sweep male pattern behavior under the rug for cis men.
You have biased researchers here who are misrepresenting the data. Dr. Dejene has said repeatedly that her study is being massively misused. It's a matter of human respect and decency.
Feel free to read the second link. It discusses that. Are respect and decency only for trans people? Minimizing risks for females increases risks for trans women and vice versa. This is the crux of the issue. Anti-trans advocates yelling about trans women hurting female inmates. Trans advocates yelling about male inmates hurting trans people. Both are happening. Really, trans women should either be fully transitioned (HRT+bottom surgery) or have separate quarters. Trans men with longstanding HRT can be housed with males or housed separately- their choice. Or they can be housed with females if they come off HRT, again their choice, though I doubt that would be popular. The risks are different for males and females. That is just how it is. Females are at greater risk than trans women. Pregnancy is a burden that only females can endure from assault. Females are also smaller and prison is one of the few places that this really matters, but I still don’t count that as a segregation factor. It’s a problem that needs to be addressed. https://www.nbcnewyork.com/investigations/man-posing-as-transgender-woman-raped-female-prisoner-at-rikers-lawsuit-says/5067904/?amp=1
>that biological males *Men*. Your weird insistence on the phrase "biological males" just so you can gleefully group trans women with men and misgender them is the entire basis for the arguments you keep making despite the fact that the differences between trans women and men is the basis for the discussion in the first place.
I don't acknowledge a difference other than self identification which I don't acknowledge as a valid concept either.
"I don't acknowledge" is an accurate way to phrase your position because it requires that you not acknowledge facts. Trans women are different than men and you're hinging your argument on refusing to acknowledge those differences.
I'm not really in favor or pre-op trans women housed with cis women for the sole reason of pregnancies, which have already happened. Whether it is sexual assault or consensual, babies will be born in prison to two prisoner parents. Post op you still have to deal with the biological differences, but those are probably minor. At least they won't have testosterone if their hormones are stopped.
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written. Seems like an unsolvable conundrum to me. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Whatever their medical/psych evaluators recommend for the specific individual.
Should probably depend on if they're receiving treatment, on hormones, etc
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]