UK Politics: It's Time To Think The Unthinkable But This Lot Can't Even Think The Thinkable

[A wilding]

Just now, JoannaL said:

The first part is whataboutism

Personally I would consider it calling out the many right wing types going on about this who never normally concern themselves about women's safety or well being.

[JoannaL]

4 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

What law specifically?

the law which make it possible for everyone (including twice time rapists) to change their gender just by saying so, without medicinal examination of the case.

[Varysblackfyre321]

3 minutes ago, JoannaL said:

the law which make it possible for everyone (including twice time rapists) to change their gender just by saying so, without medicinal examination of the case.

If you’re referring to the Scottish bill it didn’t do that and which didn’t take effect.

 

[Varysblackfyre321]

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

I’m just going to brush over this insane assertion that you can in some way compare male and female rapist numbers or draw some sort of comparison between them. It’s insane.

Ah more tacit misgendering.

And Okay no, hold up hoi you just cried about equivocation of male and female rapist, you didn’t specify about the quantity of each it’s not unreasonable inquire if you meant to say the harm done by each is as bad

In any case should cis women who’ve raped people or committed hard sex crimes be ever housed in women’s prisons(preferably segregated away)?

Do you think every trans woman whose ever found guilty of sex crimes should housed in men’s prisons?

 

[JoannaL]

10 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

If you’re referring to the Scottish bill it didn’t do that and which didn’t take effect.

 

hm , but you argued for it and it would not protect women in prison from  rapists who pretend to be a trans woman? I  really think that every legislation in this area should be inclusive in a way that considers also the effects for other vulnerable groups. in this case with the prisons perhaps the idea with the  special wings is the solution, but this must be included and explained.

[JoannaL]

3 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

In any case should cis who’ve raped people or committed hard sex crimes be ever housed in women’s prisons?

Men rape much more than women - look at any statistic in any country. The way women are now discussed as perpetrators as if they are as often guilty as men,  is very misogynist and wrong.

In the (much less likely) case of a cis woman who raped, it is still true that other women can defend easier against other woman but against (far more physically powerful) men. Still I think a special wing for all kind of violent prisoners is always a good idea.

 

[Week]

Wow, I had no idea that there was so much care and attention for the safety of prisoners. Is it something that you often discuss and care about frequently? Are you more of an abolitionist or support more humane treatment of prisoners like in Nordic countries? Or do you only care when you've decided that many large males guilty of sex crimes will pretend to be trans which will 1) Be legalized in a way where it could happen 2) actually happen and 3) will immediately endanger the prison population that they join and 4) this will be applauded (?) by someone?

The slippery slope argument assumes that people arguing for basic rights for trans people will HAPPILY endanger others which is utter nonsense. 

[Varysblackfyre321]

1 hour ago, JoannaL said:

hm , but you argued for it

I still do. Question do you think it’d be a good for 16 year olds to change legal documentation in regards to them to not misgender them?

1 hour ago, JoannaL said:

and it would not protect women in prison from  rapists who pretend to be a trans woman?

It wouldn’t have increased the likelihood of that happening in general alike the current laws have.

Yes you can find a smattering of edge cases which match the most ardent terf’s fears. Like you can find a smattering of cases that matches the most ardent MRA fears of false accusations of rape ruining a person’s life, you can find a smattering of cases of gay adoption that matches the most ardent homophobe’s expressed fears etc etc.

they’re just that however—edge cases.

You have to look at broader systemic trends.

1 hour ago, JoannaL said:

in this case with the prisons perhaps the idea with the  special wings is the solution, but this must be included and explained.

It’s already the standard.

1 hour ago, JoannaL said:

Men rape much more than women - look at any statistic in any country.

Absolutely 

1 hour ago, JoannaL said:

The way women are now discussed as perpetrators as if they are as often guilty as men,  is very misogynist and wrong.

 

Luckily no one here has done that.

They like me has simply Pointed out if you want to condemn any instance of rapist being in a women’s prisons you’d have to condemn instances where cis women who are found guilty of a sex crime as bad as rape or another form of sexual assault—like few as they are—being sent to women’s prisons.

If only trans women are never to be sent to women’s prisons after such crimes that is bigoted.

45 minutes ago, Week said:

Wow, I had no idea that there was so much care and attention for the safety of prisoners. Is it something that you often discuss and care about frequently?

She honestly may.  It’s important to recognize people can have takes you find misplaced or bad in one area and be genuine in them.

Ghandi was really based on decolonization. He was a misogynistic creep.

JoanahL I’m not trying to imply you’re that bad in regards to trans issues 

[mormont]

2 hours ago, JoannaL said:

Yes, but that is not my point. I find it highly likely that this rapist is no trans woman at all but just want to take advantage of a bad-thought-out law by pretending to be one. Trans women as well as cis women are the likely victims here.

Have you done any reading about Bryson's personal history or background that leads you to think this is 'highly likely'?

1 hour ago, JoannaL said:

the law which make it possible for everyone (including twice time rapists) to change their gender just by saying so, without medicinal examination of the case.

There is no such law, you'll be glad to know.

ETA: there is some context that is relevant to this very difficult case and the general discussion, I think.

First of all, Bryson claims to have understood that she was trans since the age of four. Against that, her ex-wife is sceptical of this claim. Nevertheless, Bryson has lived as a woman full time now for more than two years, has been taking hormone treatment and has been assessed for surgery. She didn't just put on a wig.

Second, this is widely reported as being the first conviction of a trans woman for rapes committed while identifying as a man that has ever happened in Scotland. It's reasonable to say that this was a novel problem.

It's also a very difficult problem, and novel, difficult problems are notoriously bad reasons to make or reconsider legislation. The GRR Act isn't in force and wouldn't in any case be particularly relevant to the case as a gender reassignment certificate wouldn't entitle Bryson to be put in a women's prison.

I think the mature attitude to this case is not to weaponise it in a wider debate about the rights of people who are not involved in it.

[mormont]

11 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

a stark reminder about the very real costs of the catastrophic reduction in social care and the NHS under consecutive Tory goverments.  That being said, the family have a bit of a nerve throwing round criticism.  

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-64400776

 

A little more about this story, which I had a hunch there would be:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-64431776
 

Quote

The family of a woman who lay dead in a flat for more than three years have told how they were unable to have any contact because of privacy laws, and how they eventually found her body.

Laura Winham, 38, had schizophrenia and had refused contact with family who she believed were trying to harm her.

Her brother Roy said the family were unable to get information about her.

Sadly it's not uncommon to see this sort of thing, and honestly, as awful as the outcome here is - I can't say the laws here are wrong. If someone, even a mentally ill person, refuses contact then their privacy has to be respected because the alternative is worse.

[Week]

2 hours ago, mormont said:

I think the mature attitude to this case is not to weaponise it in a wider debate about the rights of people who are not involved in it.

Yes, thank you for putting it this way.

[Varysblackfyre321]

3 hours ago, mormont said:

think the mature attitude to this case is not to weaponise it in a wider debate about the rights of people who are not involved in it.

It’s a shame really extreme anecdotes that are meant to exploit people most visceral emotions are jettisoned as equal/superior to the plurality of data on the subject on trans rights.

Who needs data when you have scary anecdotes?

3 hours ago, mormont said:

The GRR Act isn't in force and wouldn't in any case be particularly relevant to the case as a gender reassignment certificate wouldn't entitle Bryson to be put in a women's prison.

It should also be noted 90% of trans women who are prisoners reside in men’s prisons.

[ants]

7 hours ago, Heartofice said:

...

The simple stats suggest that these individuals are much more of a danger to women than your average woman.

...

Wow, because comparing trans people who are criminals in gaol to the general population average woman is so much comparing apples with apples. You really should be ashamed. 

[Raja]

12 hours ago, karaddin said:

I'd urge anyone considering HoI a source of information, or even a conduit to reputable information, on the subject to reconsider.

Ants,

Karaddin said it best.

[karaddin]

7 hours ago, JoannaL said:

In the (much less likely) case of a cis woman who raped, it is still true that other women can defend easier against other woman but against (far more physically powerful) men. Still I think a special wing for all kind of violent prisoners is always a good idea.

If you don't want people to think you're transphobic a good start would be avoiding implicitly saying all trans women are men and walking up very close to the edge of saying it explicitly. It's also much less likely that a trans woman is a rapist, just like you're saying about in your first sentence here. If it's just about the physical prowess of any given prisoner, should it be based on a physical assessment of height, weight and muscle strength? 

6 hours ago, Week said:

Wow, I had no idea that there was so much care and attention for the safety of prisoners. Is it something that you often discuss and care about frequently? Are you more of an abolitionist or support more humane treatment of prisoners like in Nordic countries? 

Fuck yeah abolitionist. For the most part, I do think there are still some crimes that will need a smaller number of prison cells, those found guilty of rape, murder and major white collar crimes etc can still be imprisoned and in those minority of cases it should also be the more humane treatment of prisoners like in the Nordic countries. But dramatically cutting the number of people in there and instead focusing on rehabilitation and social services would save money and improve society.

ETA: BFC - thanks for the (depressing) personal confirmation of what you've seen. And that's just the victims willing to go to the police, I'm sure there are plenty who don't.

HoI - I think a trans woman sent to prison for rape should be treated the same way a cis women guilty of the same crime should be. That's only some horrifying statement if you reject trans people, but it sure as fuck doesn't confuse you to learn that it's my position. You do love to avoid honestly arguing your position as a rhetorical slight of hand.

[Derfel Cadarn]

The attempt to rehabilitate Prince Andrew continues. There’s been a few articles too of him perhaps contesting the Guiffee settlement. 

 

[Heartofice]

5 hours ago, karaddin said:

HoI - I think a trans woman sent to prison for rape should be treated the same way a cis women guilty of the same crime should be. That's only some horrifying statement if you reject trans people, but it sure as fuck doesn't confuse you to learn that it's my position. 

 

Except that what you said in response to the idea of a trans person being sent to jail for rape is that ‘cis women rape women too’. It’s a quite frankly bizarre statement because for a start 98% of sexual assaults are carried out by men, not women. 
 

You can only believe what you said to have sort of logical weight if you are trying to argue that trans women literally are women, and that the presence of a biologically male body and genitalia are nothing more than trivial irrelevances, rather than an important consideration. 
 

The reality here is that trans people should be accepted as a seperate category in these instances and there should be a seperate institution to house them. I’m not sure what the argument against doing that is.

 

 

 

[Heartofice]

11 hours ago, mormont said:

First of all, Bryson claims to have understood that she was trans since the age of four. Against that, her ex-wife is sceptical of this claim. Nevertheless, Bryson has lived as a woman full time now for more than two years, has been taking hormone treatment and has been assessed for surgery. She didn't just put on a wig.

Bryson only reported they wanted to change their gender just before the trial.. you missed that bit.

[mormont]

15 minutes ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

The attempt to rehabilitate Prince Andrew continues. There’s been a few articles too of him perhaps contesting the Guiffee settlement. 

 

It's wild that the only Royal who actually seems to have disappeared from public view and be perfectly happy with that is Edward.

ETA - although to be fair, I don't follow Royal affairs enough to know he's actually OK with it. Maybe he's like the Eric Trump of the Royal family, desperately trying to be relevant while the world is like 'oh yeah, there was another one, wasn't there?'

[Loge]

53 minutes ago, mormont said:

It's wild that the only Royal who actually seems to have disappeared from public view and be perfectly happy with that is Edward.

ETA - although to be fair, I don't follow Royal affairs enough to know he's actually OK with it. Maybe he's like the Eric Trump of the Royal family, desperately trying to be relevant while the world is like 'oh yeah, there was another one, wasn't there?'

How relevant is Andrew these days? He was the spare when he was young, and there was a big hype about him and Sarah back in the 1980s, but he has been pushed down in the line of succession by Charles's offspring. Would anybody even talk about him without that scandal? Does anybody talk about Edward and Anne? Or Sarah?