May she rot

[Fen Canary 857]

5 minutes ago, Bobzilla said:

You've got personal experience of women's prison do you? Or are you just making assumptions based on sex? My understanding is that women's and young offenders prisons are worse than men's prisons because they need to go that little bit further to get in.

We get it, you’re happy for women to be placed in physical danger to appease the wants of biological men who claim to feel female. Your ideological beliefs are more important than women’s safety.

That’s fine, that’s your opinion, but you must also know that a vast majority of the general public disagrees with that view as highlighted by the recent Isla Bryson case in Scotland 

[Fen Canary 857]

8 minutes ago, Bobzilla said:

So the prison service is incapable of individual risk assessment? You're assuming that trans offenders are the most dangerous type rather than, say, drug dealing.  You're also assuming that dangerous criminals go in with general population.

Are you really telling me that putting a male low level drug dealer (where they aren't built because their clientele is city lawyers rather than junkies) in the same prison as a female violent sex offender built like a brick ****house who significantly sexually assaulted men is bad news because the woman is at risk?

It's difficult to see your assumed position as anything other than transpobic and sexist.

I’m the sexist one for believing that certain spaces should be female only in the interests of women’s safety? Not sure how you’ve managed to spin that one around but bravo!

[Bobzilla 151]

Just now, Fen Canary said:

I’m the sexist one for believing that certain spaces should be female only in the interests of women’s safety? Not sure how you’ve managed to spin that one around but bravo!

Let me replay it for you.

You're the sexist one for assuming that the women banged up in prison are at high risk of anything, that they're all delicate little flowers.

You have absolutely no interest in women's safety or comfort - none of us did until the trans question got publicised in the 'right' places. You did know that there's been a policy about where to place transgender prisoners for over 10 years, yes? And yet you're taking about it like it's a brand new issue.

[Fen Canary 857]

2 minutes ago, Bobzilla said:

Let me replay it for you.

You're the sexist one for assuming that the women banged up in prison are at high risk of anything, that they're all delicate little flowers.

You have absolutely no interest in women's safety or comfort - none of us did until the trans question got publicised in the 'right' places. You did know that there's been a policy about where to place transgender prisoners for over 10 years, yes? And yet you're taking about it like it's a brand new issue.

You mean nobody was aware that biological men were being housed in women’s prisons until a few recent cases came to light? In that regards you’re entirely correct, it was carried out with almost military levels of secrecy. But now the car is out of the bag so to speak, and as more people become aware of the fact they are unhappy that it’s been happening. You can’t accuse people of not caring due to the issue being largely hidden. Were people wrong to be angry about the Post Office scandal recently, even though it had happened years previously?

I also never claimed that all women are delicate little flowers, however I also know despite being a bang average man I could probably overpower 90% of them, hence why it’s dangerous for male criminals to be locked up with female ones 

[Bobzilla 151]

1 minute ago, Fen Canary said:

You mean nobody was aware that biological men were being housed in women’s prisons until a few recent cases came to light? In that regards you’re entirely correct, it was carried out with almost military levels of secrecy. But now the car is out of the bag so to speak, and as more people become aware of the fact they are unhappy that it’s been happening. You can’t accuse people of not caring due to the issue being largely hidden. Were people wrong to be angry about the Post Office scandal recently, even though it had happened years previously?

I also never claimed that all women are delicate little flowers, however I also know despite being a bang average man I could probably overpower 90% of them, hence why it’s dangerous for male criminals to be locked up with female ones 

1 - there was a whole policy document published on it in 2011.

2 - I presume that you know because you've done empirical studies on the size and strength of women in prison based on category of offence rather than just guessing? I'm bigger than the average man, and stronger, and I wouldn't want to be anywhere near category 1 female prisoners. You know why? Because they're dangerous.

 

There's no point discussing this. You think I'm naive, I think you're transphobic, sexist and delusional. You think exclusionary policies and prodecures are fine, I think that you don't need exclusionary policies when you're doing effective individual risk assessments to work out where the problems actually are rather than presuming. You think that these are all your own ideas. I think you've been trained to think them through clever use of media and obscuring of the facts by purple who have a vested interest in having the little people engaged in fringe issues whilst they burn the country down.

Neither of us are going to move the views of the other.  Just know this. 

Your view is dying out.

[Naturalcynic 644]

45 minutes ago, Bobzilla said:

So the prison service is incapable of individual risk assessment? You're assuming that trans offenders are the most dangerous type rather than, say, drug dealing.  You're also assuming that dangerous criminals go in with general population.

Are you really telling me that putting a male low level drug dealer (where they aren't built because their clientele is city lawyers rather than junkies) in the same prison as a female violent sex offender built like a brick ****house who significantly sexually assaulted men is bad news because the woman is at risk?

It's difficult to see your assumed position as anything other than transpobic and sexist.

The logical conclusion of your argument is that all prisons should be unisex.  Do you think that would be a good idea?  Can you foresee any problems with that?

[Fen Canary 857]

2 minutes ago, Bobzilla said:

1 - there was a whole policy document published on it in 2011.

2 - I presume that you know because you've done empirical studies on the size and strength of women in prison based on category of offence rather than just guessing? I'm bigger than the average man, and stronger, and I wouldn't want to be anywhere near category 1 female prisoners. You know why? Because they're dangerous.

 

There's no point discussing this. You think I'm naive, I think you're transphobic, sexist and delusional. You think exclusionary policies and prodecures are fine, I think that you don't need exclusionary policies when you're doing effective individual risk assessments to work out where the problems actually are rather than presuming. You think that these are all your own ideas. I think you've been trained to think them through clever use of media and obscuring of the facts by purple who have a vested interest in having the little people engaged in fringe issues whilst they burn the country down.

Neither of us are going to move the views of the other.  Just know this. 

Your view is dying out.

The thing is, I think we both know that if it was ever put to a referendum my opinion (that men shouldn’t be housed in women’s prisons) would win convincingly. These policies have been around for a while, but as more people become aware of them the pushback against them from the public is increasing all the time.

The only arguments you have are to rely on insults and accusations of bigotry, which are no longer as effective as they once were. It’s all gone a bit boy who cried wolf for you hasn’t it?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,574]

3 hours ago, Naturalcynic said:

The logical conclusion of your argument is that all prisons should be unisex.  Do you think that would be a good idea?  Can you foresee any problems with that?

Digressing slightly, but driving back from the Pyrenees, I stopped at a motorway service station where the women's loos were completely out of service, so men and women were all using the men's without any fuss. The women didn't seem to be bothered by men using the urinals.

It did get me questioning whether sex segregation for toilets was possibly unnecessary, in which case the whole toilet problem is flushed away.

Prisons are a whole different kettle of fish though.

Edited March 2 by littleyellowbirdie

[Naturalcynic 644]

7 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Digressing slightly, but driving back from the Pyrenees, I stopped at a motorway service station where the women's loos were completely out of service, so men and women were all using the men's without any fuss. The women didn't seem to be bothered by men using the urinals.

It did get me questioning whether sex segregation for toilets was possibly unnecessary, in which case the whole toilet problem is flushed away.

Prisons are a whole different kettle of fish though.

A few years ago I went to a theatre and during the interval went to the rather crowded gents’ loo.  Whilst taking my turn at the communal urinal I noticed a chap with his very uncomfortable-looking young daughter queuing for a cubicle, having to stand right next to multiple men, todgers in hand, peeing in the trough.  The poor little girl didn’t know where to look and, like me, the men also appeared distinctly uncomfortable.  Presumably he thought taking her to the gents was better than him going in to the ladies, and I also noticed on the way out that the single disabled loo had a big queue so I guess he had little choice, but it really didn’t feel appropriate at the time.

Edited March 3 by Naturalcynic

[Fen Canary 857]

8 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Digressing slightly, but driving back from the Pyrenees, I stopped at a motorway service station where the women's loos were completely out of service, so men and women were all using the men's without any fuss. The women didn't seem to be bothered by men using the urinals.

It did get me questioning whether sex segregation for toilets was possibly unnecessary, in which case the whole toilet problem is flushed away.

Prisons are a whole different kettle of fish though.

A busy toilet strangely enough probably wouldn’t be as bad as there’s enough people in there. Would women feel comfortable in a quieter place though, if they went in and there was only one slightly strange looking bloke loitering in there? 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,574]

I've got it! Instead of trying to separate on sex and gender, which are very confusing, why don't we separate based on whether or not people have penises? We could have prisons for people with penises and prisons for people without penises, changing rooms for people with penises and others for people without penises, toilets for people with penises and for people without penises.

We could maybe even come up with new words for the two categories. What do you think? I think it might be a solution. Has anyone got any thoughts for words we could use for the two categories? How about nale for people with penises and fenale for people without penises? I think it could work as the necessary infrastructure changes to accomodate the new paradigm shouldn't be too big.

Personally, I think it makes a lot of sense given penises are the main issue in the most serious sexual crimes.

Then over time the nonsense about sex and gender will go away because both have become so wooly, esoteric, and incomprehensible that only a few fringe academics will be interested.

Edited March 3 by littleyellowbirdie

[Fen Canary 857]

48 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I've got it! Instead of trying to separate on sex and gender, which are very confusing, why don't we separate based on whether or not people have penises? We could have prisons for people with penises and prisons for people without penises, changing rooms for people with penises and others for people without penises, toilets for people with penises and for people without penises.

We could maybe even come up with new words for the two categories. What do you think? I think it might be a solution. Has anyone got any thoughts for words we could use for the two categories? How about nale for people with penises and fenale for people without penises? I think it could work as the necessary infrastructure changes to accomodate the new paradigm shouldn't be too big.

Personally, I think it makes a lot of sense given penises are the main issue in the most serious sexual crimes.

Then over time the nonsense about sex and gender will go away because both have become so wooly, esoteric, and incomprehensible that only a few fringe academics will be interested.

I must say I like it, and I think it could possibly work out quite well. How you ever thought up such a radical scheme I’ll never know! 

[Naturalcynic 644]

6 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I've got it! Instead of trying to separate on sex and gender, which are very confusing, why don't we separate based on whether or not people have penises? We could have prisons for people with penises and prisons for people without penises, changing rooms for people with penises and others for people without penises, toilets for people with penises and for people without penises.

We could maybe even come up with new words for the two categories. What do you think? I think it might be a solution. Has anyone got any thoughts for words we could use for the two categories? How about nale for people with penises and fenale for people without penises? I think it could work as the necessary infrastructure changes to accomodate the new paradigm shouldn't be too big.

Personally, I think it makes a lot of sense given penises are the main issue in the most serious sexual crimes.

Then over time the nonsense about sex and gender will go away because both have become so wooly, esoteric, and incomprehensible that only a few fringe academics will be interested.

What’s more, the infrastructure is already pretty much there and, other than some very minor changes in signage, could be implemented immediately.

[Herman 9,817]

I think we should have a poll on how many people have met and talked with someone from the trans community. I bet it's very close to zero.

Makes you think, or something like that.

[Fen Canary 857]

2 hours ago, Herman said:

I think we should have a poll on how many people have met and talked with someone from the trans community. I bet it's very close to zero.

Makes you think, or something like that.

I have actually, a friends family member. It hasn’t changed my opinion in regards to single sex spaces however.

He’s free to act and dress as he pleases in my opinion, however that doesn’t mean he gets to impose himself onto others. 

[king canary 7,654]

3 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

I have actually, a friends family member. It hasn’t changed my opinion in regards to single sex spaces however.

He’s free to act and dress as he pleases in my opinion, however that doesn’t mean he gets to impose himself onto others. 

Same. Worked with a few people in the past who are trans or non-binary. The biggest shame about all of this is most people in this group are very reasonable people who just want to be left to live in peace with respect. They have always been entirely forgiving if someone makes an error with a pronoun or similar as long as it is an error made in good faith. 

I think the general public and a good % of the trans community are actually on the same page with a relatively live and let live attitude. They don't buy into the highly divisive culture war stuff from the Tories but they also don't buy into the more extreme TRA talking points about female penises and cotton ceilings. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,574]

11 minutes ago, king canary said:

Same. Worked with a few people in the past who are trans or non-binary. The biggest shame about all of this is most people in this group are very reasonable people who just want to be left to live in peace with respect. They have always been entirely forgiving if someone makes an error with a pronoun or similar as long as it is an error made in good faith. 

I think the general public and a good % of the trans community are actually on the same page with a relatively live and let live attitude. They don't buy into the highly divisive culture war stuff from the Tories but they also don't buy into the more extreme TRA talking points about female penises and cotton ceilings. 

I agree with all of that except the bit in bold, where the 'culture war' has been created by the most aggressive pro campaigners on the subject who make a point of attacking people who object very aggressively, such as JK Rowling, who definitely isn't a Tory.

I also think as soon as you start bringing political parties into anything you polarise things, so maybe best not do it, eh?

6 hours ago, Herman said:

I think we should have a poll on how many people have met and talked with someone from the trans community. I bet it's very close to zero.

Makes you think, or something like that.

I know three, one in passing and two I've had drinks with. None older than 24. Funnily enough, one started transitioning from female to male, i.e. taking hormones and getting a penis grafted, after having started a lesbian relationship with another friend of mine who started the relationship after splitting up with her husband. That didn't last. The other two aren't going as far as hormones and the like as far as I can tell.

There's certainly no harm in any of them. Are they happy? No idea. I hope they are. As far as cross-dressing and the like is concerned, I couldn't care less, but when it comes to forcing real women to accept people born with penises as one of their own because they want to go out with lipstick and a dress on  then that's going too far; that's impinging on the rights of women who merit social protections in their own right.

As far as sport is concerned, women's sport exists because women are physically weaker than men in general and they can't compete fairly. Therefore, before athletes who've transitioned from having a penis to not having a penis can be allowed to compete with them it should proven beyond doubt that they don't carry over any advantages from the other physical developments that come from being born with a penis. That has not happened. Perhaps the whole subject of categorisation in sport should be changed away from male to female in favour of things like natural testoserone levels etc.

For the most part, the segregation is all about the risk of rape. If you have a penis then you can potentially rape a woman. You can also potentially rape a man, but generally men are less vulnerable to it. This applies without exception where people with penises are concerned, so it really shouldn't matter what they think or feel , or claim to think or feel, they should be in their own heads when they still possess the physical capability to be a rapist.

As far as transitioning itself for adults is concerned, I can't see any reason why not, but for children who've not yet gone through puberty this subject should not be impinging on them at all; puberty is difficult enough as it is for most teenagers without adding to the confusion.

In summation, for me this has nothing to do with promoting a live and let live attitude to people who are trans; this is to do with legal changes where the treatment of trans people is negatively impacting women and children.

Edited March 4 by littleyellowbirdie

[Naturalcynic 644]

10 hours ago, Herman said:

I think we should have a poll on how many people have met and talked with someone from the trans community. I bet it's very close to zero.

Makes you think, or something like that.

Met professionally and talked in some depth with two middle-aged transwomen who’d had hormone treatment and full gender reassignment surgery.  Both expressed similar sentiments that although it had seemed a good idea beforehand, the reality was that they had become even more unhappy than they previously were and wished they’d never had it done.

So there you go.  It seems most of us have, in fact, met and talked with members of the trans community.

Edited March 4 by Naturalcynic