Transgender is it just me that is totally perplexed?

[Miranda Yardley]

Neither of those links support the claim you made.

See this: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...fender-equalities-annual-report-2016-2017.pdf

There were 125 prisoners currently living in, or presenting in, a gender different to their sex assigned at birth and who have had a local transgender case board.

(page 9)

For the purposes of this report, transgender prisoners are defined as those individuals known within prison to be currently living in, or are presenting in, a gender different to their sex assigned at birth and who have had a case conference (as defined by PSI 17/2016 The Care and Management of Transgender Offenders16).

The number of prisoners who have already transitioned and have a full Gender Recognition Certificate are thought to be excluded. Statistics on the number of all applications to the Gender Recognition Panel are published in Tribunals and gender recognition statistics quarterly at www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunals-statistics.

The figures give an estimate of the number of transgender prisoners and are likely to underestimate the true number. There may be some transgender prisoners who have not declared that they are transgender or had a local transgender case board, and some who have a Gender Recognition Certificate

(page 13)

The gender is self-reported on reception to the prison and based on information recorded on central administrative databases. It is not possible to determine if this is the legal gender or whether the gender has changed.

(footnote 18, page 13)

 

[Pickman's model]

See this: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...fender-equalities-annual-report-2016-2017.pdf



(page 9)



(page 13)



(footnote 18, page 13)

just to clarify, are you saying you were wrong in your earlier claim about the prison stats and key facts?

 

[Pickman's model]

See this: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...fender-equalities-annual-report-2016-2017.pdf



(page 9)



(page 13)



(footnote 18, page 13)

yeh. sexual violence. you're not mentioning it now. why not?

 

[Pickman's model]

it's quieter than a library on the stats front

 

[Miranda Yardley]

This is absurd:

So if the law requires that a person is male or female, should that sex be assigned by anatomy, hormones, cells or chromosomes, and what should be done if they clash? “My feeling is that since there is not one biological parameter that takes over every other parameter, at the end of the day, gender identity seems to be the most reasonable parameter,” says Vilain. In other words, if you want to know whether someone is male or female, it may be best just to ask.

Sex redefined

 

[Teaboy]

if you work in an office you'll see a fair proportion of men (at any rate in london) wearing pink, pink ties, pink shirts... it is lazy and untrue to say that liking pink, let alone wearing pink, is exclusively attributed to femininity. in addition, what you discern as aggression in women may be but assertion.

I wear pink a lot, frankly I look great in it. This is not pertinent to the thread but I think it needed saying anyway.

 

[smokedout]

See this: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...fender-equalities-annual-report-2016-2017.pdf

No this doesn't support your claim either, it doesn't mention sexual offences.

 

[Pickman's model]

No this doesn't support your claim either, it doesn't mention sexual offences.

Once, twice - will it be three times a failure?

 

[Miranda Yardley]

No this doesn't support your claim either, it doesn't mention sexual offences.

The point is that we just don't know how many transgender prisoners are in the estate. There were 93 women in prison in 2015 for sexual offences, and this rose to 120 in 2016 (source http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN04334/SN04334.pdf). Even if a small number of transgnder prisoners form part of this statistic, they distort the true numbers.

There is another issue in that it would appear that a large number of transgender prisoners are incarcerated in a facility for sex offenders. Whether these prisoners are sex offenders themselves, or are in there because (as has been suggested) that facility best serves their need for personal safety from other prisoners, is again not known.

Transgender prisoners have very different needs to other prisoners. Many are fearful, depressed or suffering other mental health disorders, or are isolated from family. Treating them as a homogeneous part of a homogeneous male or female population doesn't serve them well at all. As more people transition, ceterus paribus there will be more trans prisoners, and this problem will get worse (and, undoubtedly with all the funding cuts, so will our prisons).

 

[MochaSoul]

It's very difficult not to gender someone when you meet them, based on physical characteristics but also dress, mannerisms, speech patterns etc. Surely that's where the line is drawn, and it's something we do with every new social interaction.

When I mentioned to you the day before yesterday how I was taught to sit was to make the point that dress, mannerisms, etc are taught and/or have reasons behind them some of them to do with one's sex. I find hard to believe my mannerisms and speech patterns come from an inner gender identity rather than the way I have been socialised. Of course, I come to choose some things, and some of those things I may even come to like like clothes or wearing make-up. But those things will be confined to the [artificially] ascribed feminine millieu. If I decide to go outside of that millieu I pay a price that can go from being looked at suspiciously all the way to being taught a "lesson" such as a "corrective rape" as has been the case with some lesbians. Moreover, even though keeping confined to the feminine millieu is not a guarantee of safety. Which means some of us grow in a semi-permanent conflict within ourselves and the unfairness of the society that thus treat us for a long time until we can come to terms with not being able to fight it (at least not by ourselves).

if you work in an office you'll see a fair proportion of men (at any rate in london) wearing pink, pink ties, pink shirts... it is lazy and untrue to say that liking pink, let alone wearing pink, is exclusively attributed to femininity.

Replace wearing pink with wearing a lot of make-up. The example is not the important thing. It's just an example.

in addition, what you discern as aggression in women may be but assertion.

I discern nothing. I'm simply giving examples of what has been thought to be attributed to masculinity/femininity. It's not as if assertion has not been deliberately classed as aggression by society when it needs to "put a woman in her place" so to speak.
You could choose to see them as an hyperbolic means to get a point across but nah.... You're obviously having fun. Ah well...

 

[Pickman's model]

When I mentioned to you the day before yesterday how I was taught to sit was to make the point that dress, mannerisms, etc are taught and/or have reasons behind them some of them to do with one's sex. I find hard to believe my mannerisms and speech patterns come from an inner gender identity rather than the way I have been socialised. Of course, I come to choose some things, and some of those things I may even come to like like clothes or wearing make-up. But those things will be confined to the [artificially] ascribed feminine millieu. If I decide to go outside of that millieu I pay a price that can go from being looked at suspiciously all the way to being taught a "lesson" such as a "corrective rape" as has been the case with some lesbians. Moreover, even though keeping confined to the feminine millieu is not a guarantee of safety. Which means some of us grow in a semi-permanent conflict within ourselves and the unfairness of the society that thus treat us for a long time until we can come to terms with not being able to fight it (at least not by ourselves).

Replace wearing pink with wearing a lot of make-up. The example is not the important thing. It's just an example.

I discern nothing. I'm simply giving examples of what has been thought to be attributed to masculinity/femininity. It's not as if assertion has not been deliberately classed as aggression by society when it needs to "put a woman in her place" so to speak.
You could choose to see them as an hyperbolic means to get a point across but nah.... You're obviously having fun. Ah well...

I am reminded of the posters in bookies' windows: when the fun stops, stop. I don't see your examples as hyperbolick, I think they were ill chosen.

 

[Ralph Llama]

Someone asked me to call them `it` once FFS. I refused because I thought it was a little demeaning. It is amazing what an Oxford education combined with a Crimethink obsession can achieve; Facism(the attack) as was pointed out by the Peace News article I linked to many moons ago on this quite interesting thread.

I`m sticking with good old-fashioned Queer Theory

 

[MochaSoul]

I am reminded of the posters in bookies' windows: when the fun stops, stop. I don't see your examples as hyperbolick, I think they were ill chosen.

Spoiler

http://i.onionstatic.com/avclub/5479/16/16x9/1200.jpg

 

[Pickman's model]

http://i.onionstatic.com/avclub/5479/16/16x9/1200.jpg

Yeh. Bit of a fail there, you should have put the [img ] code round the url

 

[MochaSoul]

Yeh. Bit of a fail there, you should have put the [img ] code round the url

Ooops!

 

[Pickman's model]

To oppose sexual violence, one needs to be able to identify the agent. If the agent is misreported, for example as female when male, we are not identifying where the problem lies. For example, the imprisonment statistics for sexually violent women are often quoted by transactivists claiming 'woman can be violent too'. Yes, they can, sure. But as the figures released by the government last year show, a proportion of the 110-odd women reported for being in prison for sexual violence are 'trans women' with gender recognition certificates.

Note I am not saying 'trans women' are at higher risk of being sexually violent.

The point is that we just don't know how many transgender prisoners are in the estate. There were 93 women in prison in 2015 for sexual offences, and this rose to 120 in 2016 (source http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN04334/SN04334.pdf). Even if a small number of transgnder prisoners form part of this statistic, they distort the true numbers.

oh dear oh dear. how yesterday's claim about women incarcerated for sexual violence becomes today's goalpost shifting sexual offences.

not only that but i see you've retreated from the claim about the figures showing some of the women are trans women with grcs.

once, twice, three times a failure, miranda.

 

[smokedout]

The point is that we just don't know how many transgender prisoners are in the estate. There were 93 women in prison in 2015 for sexual offences, and this rose to 120 in 2016 (source http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN04334/SN04334.pdf). Even if a small number of transgnder prisoners form part of this statistic, they distort the true numbers.

126 according to Table 5b, plus another 86 under 18s. But you don't know if any of these are trans, whether they are trans women or trans men, or how trans people are recorded for the purpose of those statistics. And given how low the figure is - and that according to the Women and the Criminal Justice System report in 2015, prisoner statistics are far from exact, use the measure of biological sex rather than gender, and in some cases neither is known - would a handful of trans women really make such a difference to the statistics? Enough of a difference that it justifies treating trans people seperately? Let's say five of them are trans, what does this actually tell us in any kind of meaningful way, what policy decisions would be made differently?


All government statistics are a bodge, the fact that it might skew crime statistics by a fraction of a percent, or even a couple of percent, has always struck me as a pretty desperate reason for denying trans people the right to be legally seen as their acquired gender.


And whilst you say trans prisoners have very specific needs, I'm willing to bet you've never been to prison. What trans prisoners seem to want is to be treated according to their acquired gender. Who are you to go round telling them what they really want and need?

 

[smokedout]

This is absurd:



Sex redefined

More absurd than defining someone's sex purely on their reproductive function which clearly doesn't work for everyone? Strikes me as a clash of ideology rather than delusions versus hard science. Which reminds me, would you respect an intersex person's gender if they lived in the gender role counter to their reproductive potential?

And do you condemn the transcrime website?

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

.

 

[weepiper]

Absurd. Right.

 

[Athos]

More absurd than defining someone's sex purely on their reproductive function which clearly doesn't work for everyone? Strikes me as a clash of ideology rather than delusions versus hard science. Which reminds me, would you respect an intersex person's gender if they lived in the gender role counter to their reproductive potential?

And do you condemn the transcrime website?

What is absurd about defining sex by reproductive system (regardless of whether or not it functions)? That's the single most obvious material difference, the one that the vast majority of people subscribe to, and one which reflects arguably the most important basis for the subjugation of women. It's fine to recognise that there can be other other arguments for alternative bases of gender, and recognise that the decision about which to adopt is ideological, but to claim that it's absurd to define sex by reproductive system is, itself, absurd.

 

[bimble]

Timely:

(you have to click on it to read the thread, in which Lily Madigan is explaining to a female person who rejects self definition that they are not a woman, as far as Young Labour is concerned.

 

[Pickman's model]

Timely:


(you have to click on it to read the thread, in which Lily Madigan is explaining to a female person who rejects self definition that they are not a woman, as far as Young Labour is concerned.

that's why you should post screen grabs

 

[MochaSoul]

Timely:

(you have to click on it to read the thread, in which Lily Madigan is explaining to a female person who rejects self definition that they are not a woman, as far as Young Labour is concerned.

OMG! We go from struggling to be treated as "humans" to having to fight for a place at the fucking table to continue the struggle by reasons of refusing the very thing that "keeps us in our place". I have no words.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

Told ya.

Lily Madigan is a teflon coated piss taker. And a massively gynophobic.

Trolling the whole of the Labour Party, who are bending over backwards lest they by deemed less than woke.

It's masterful trolling. And shows labour to be totally sexist.

 

[MochaSoul]

The screen grabs. The first one should come last. It's a response to Madigan.

 

[ElizabethofYork]

Oh My God.

 

[MochaSoul]

Told ya.

Lily Madigan is a teflon coated piss taker. And a massively gynophobic.

Trolling the whole of the Labour Party, and they are bending over backwards lest they by deemed less than woke.

It's masterful trolling. And shows labour to be totally sexist.

I'm behind on the whole debate so I've always been skeptical of accusations of men's rights activism. It's hard to dismiss them now as merely hyperbolic.
P.S. Hate "woke" btw.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

I'm behind on the whole debate so I've always been skeptical of accusations of men's rights activism. It's hard to dismiss it now as hyperbolic.

No, it isn't hyperbolic at all. The nasty side of the Men's Rights Movement (MRA's) say that we, by our very biology, opress those who are born male. It also asserts that we have a female essence that makes us act the way we do. The way to rectify this is to remove rights for women either by being "Egalitarian" (read, ignoring gender as a socialised imposition) and removing sex based shortlists, protections etc.

Current trans rhetoric seems to be that women who are "cis" opress those born male (trans women) by their biology. It also asserts we have some female essence which makes us act a certain way. The way to rectify this is to redefine woman to include males, thus eroding sex based protections, shortlists etc

Looks like the same shit. Smells like the same shit.

It doesn't have to be like this.

 

[kabbes]

It does feel like feminism and what certainly used to be called “women’s studies” increasingly starts with and is focussed as a primary concern on transsexual views and issues. At the best, it’s the tail wagging the dog. At worst, such as in the example posted there, it’s a way of writing women out of their own equality activism.