Why are these women being locked up with men?

Post Reply New Topic

I'm going to pull a Dumbledore here and quote from Chapter 35 of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: "King's Cross":

And let me introduce you to an area of psychiatry which is wed to philosophy: phenomenological psychiatry, a branch of psychiatry that tries to understand mental illness by getting inside the person's head and capturing their experiences, which can bring great insight into the nature of the different mental illnesses.

you did not include an opening sarcasm bracket so i do not know where the sarcasm begins. maybe back a few posts ago but i will not bother to check.

anyway, why does it take years of thinking you're a woman to make you a woman? what is the case when you first start thinking you are a woman? what happens if you decide you are a woman at 17 and go to jail at 18?

also, if all it took was "years" of thinking you are a woman to be a woman, then many smart young criminal men would ensure their futures by claiming they were woman at an early age so that they know that if they ever go to jail, they would be locked up with who they desire.

the transgender people would probably protest morally if someone was dismissed as not authentic because they have "only just realized" they were the opposite sex, so if it is the case (as they may assert) that the length of time one has been in the notion that they were the opposite sex is irrelevant, then many men pending prison time would decide they were women at the drop of a hat and chaos would ensue.

i think men are inherently incompatible with women in a prison setting because of obvious reasons. strength, assertiveness, brutality and other things would ensure that men rise to the top of the pecking order, and the women would be mainly groupies if they were to prevail.

it goes without saying that a man who smuggles himself disguised as a woman into a prison would be a cause for concern on a level that it is not economically viable to investigate or monitor.

if they could have segregated sections of prisons where they could be incarcerated with only other transgendered people (of the same notional sex), then that may be a solution if there are enough of them to make it viable which there probably would be.

b9, go read up on transgender people before returning to this thread. I find your lack of knowledge... disturbing.

I mean, seriously claiming that men would choose to go through the rigmarole of pretending to be transwoman, with all the shaming and abuse that entails, just so they could get locked up with women? Only to find that they don't have any sex drive now, because of the hormone therapy they had so they could complete their disguise? And that even if they did, they're now about as strong as the other women as a result of the therapy, so they'll find it hard to force themselves on a woman - assuming they could get an erection, which they can't because of the aforementioned hormone therapy...

Putting transwomen in women's prisons would not mean allowing any male who claims to be a woman to go there. Well, maybe, if he manages to deceive the psych evaluation, but now he has to deal with a prison that is legally bound to give "her" the medicine "she" needs...

sorry about that.



it depends on how desperate they are i suppose, and i also suspect that desperation is a common phenomena amongst criminals. that is a tinderbox in itself.


it is not conclusive to my satisfaction that the mere papers that indicate that a male has been medicated is proof of their innocuousness in a woman's setting.



it is better to be safe than sorry i guess. it would cost too much to hire psychologists and other people necessary to confirm the fitness for introduction into a female prison for every person who files on by trying to get in with a wig and a dress on.

Ahh ... the Subjectivist Fallacy ... rarely has there ever been a finer example.

If you are a man who identifies himself as a woman, then you are a man who identifies himself as a woman - that is all.

Men who identify themselves as women are being locked up with men who identify themselves as men, no more and no less.

Man-on-man brutality in prison is nothing new. No women are being harmed.

What does it take to be a woman ?

As I read the article (which is about detained asylum seekers, not prisoners) it looks like solutions have already been arrived at, just not implemented. Implementing the solutions that are on paper but not in practice is what needs to happen. The wrongness of detaining (they aren't criminals) transwomen with men has already been accepted by the immigration authorities, according to the article. That hasn't trickled down to the ones doing the actual sorting of detainees.

So the guidelines are already in place. Their gender identity is a done deal, according to the guidelines. But those guidelines aren't being followed- which is the actual problem.

These are asylum seekers being held pending judgement of whether to give them asylum, not prisoners. It is unsurprising that there is a skew towards gay and transgender since they are fleeing countries where that is not allowed. Since they are not prisoners (but rather detainees) I see no reason to treat this as a prison rape problem. Why can't they simply deport the attackers rather than keep them here as possible future immigrants? Anyway, there is no absolute mandate why we have to stick to the gender binary and only have 2 places to sort people into. Why not 3? They actually came up with that solution too:


I think that^^^ is an excellent solution. It needs to be expanded.

No, it is not an example of the relativist fallacy.

Jannisy,

Exactly. The guidelines already recognize the importance of gender identity and current lived experience, but for whatever reason that has not filtered down to the actual people in charge of implementing them.

...is only applicable if the principle of non-contradiction is adhered to. Since we don't live in the Dark Ages anymore, we have access to paraconsistent logics which are quite capable of evaluating collections of propositions which might appear contradictory under a primitive syllogistic analysis.

But that's probably overkill; a first-order logical quantification of the proposition in question is sufficient to dispel the accusation of subjectivism.

Let P be the set of all human persons;
For any p in P, let gi(p) be the gender which p identifies as;
For any p in P, let ga(p) be the function which returns whatever gender-identity andrethemoogle would assign to p;
For any p in P, let gf(p) be the function which returns whatever gender-identity Fnord would assign to p on the basis of whatever decision-structure causes Fnord to make such a determination (presumably some subset of biological characteristics but it doesn't make a difference to the logical structure of the argument);

All andrethemoogle stated was:
For the subset Q of P such that, for every q in Q, gi(q) = female; then for any q in Q, ga(q) = gi(q).

Your response parses to:
It is not necessarily the case that, for every q in Q, gf(q) = gi(q).

It's not a subjectivist fallacy to employ operational definitions when describing phenomena which the description-provider(s) cannot experience directly (such as the internal mental states of other people). However, the dismissal of any treatment of subjective phenomena as necessarily fallacious, via appeal to the relativist fallacy, is itself always and necessarily a petitio principii fallacy.

Hail Eris!

The division between male and female prisons doesn't have anything to do with how you identify, its just biology and only that. Nobody would advocate putting female-to-male transgenders in male prison, the same applies to male-to-female. You go where your parts match, the only leeway I think would be if you've had full SRS and no longer have those parts. Some jails and prisons house homosexuals and transgenders in their own unit which I guess could be an option if need be but putting somebody of the opposite gender biologically into the prison they "identify" as because feelings doesn't seem very logical to me and is asking for a lot of problems.

As I mentioned before, I dislike the whole idea of incarceration and don't think anybody should be at risk of sexual assault regardless of their gender. I think by addressing this issue this one would become largely moot.

It'd be nice for people in this country to all have access to SRS. Have you considered donating?

http://jimcollinsfoundation.org/

http://jimcollinsfoundation.org/why-is- ... on-needed/

Thread unlocked due to popular demand.

Carry-on, folks.