Cont: Trans Women are not Women II: The Bath Of Khan

[caveman1917]

Nah. It really should be MESF - Male exclusionary semi-feminists. Because the vast majority of people who get slathered with that label are nowhere near radical feminists at all. I wouldn't class either myself or Rolfe as radical feminists, just run-of-the-mill common sense feminists who used to believe that women had made progress, and now are seeing those steps slide back.

Sure, the point was simply that the exclusion criterion is obviously being male and not being trans, hence the "TERF" term is, contrary to the claims of those using it, anything but accurate. And indeed, neither is the "radical feminist" part accurate. This is what "trans exclusionary" would look like:

included: cis-men and cis-women
excluded: trans-men and trans-women

and this is what "male exclusionary" would look like:

included: cis-women and trans-men
excluded: cis-men and trans-women

Clearly the proposals of those called "TERFS" regarding female prisons are the latter and not the former.

 

[caveman1917]

But the number they added to the 125 was 7, aka 5% of 125.

That is terribly misleading.

How is it misleading? Heck, it's even an over-estimate (there is no reason to include shorter sentences as those aren't eligible for transfer to the female estate in the first place) so no need for adding the 4%. What is misleading is people complaining about how shorter sentences aren't included in the 125 number.

 

[Garb]

How is it misleading? Heck, it's even an over-estimate (there is no reason to include shorter sentences as those aren't eligible for transfer to the female estate in the first place) so no need for adding the 4%. What is misleading is people complaining about how shorter sentences aren't included in the 125 number.

It is misleading because those percentages have nothing to do with trans inmates. At least the 4% doesn't, as that was in relation to men serving short sentences.

They aren't interchangeable.

 

[caveman1917]

It is misleading because those percentages have nothing to do with trans inmates. At least the 4% doesn't, as that was in relation to men serving short sentences.

They aren't interchangeable.

Lacking data on specifically what fraction of trans-women serve short vs long sentences it's not unreasonable to assume that it's a similar fraction to that of the prison population in general. Why would trans-women serve shorter/longer sentences than the rest of the population? And of course, that 4% isn't even needed as we're considering specifically the group that may transfer to the female estate, and those with short sentences are not eligible for that (or rather, they are eligible but it's pointless as the process takes longer than their sentence).

 

[Emily's Cat]

On what evidence do you base that? I posted earlier research in which women who run these shelters were interviewed, and they said that the cis women in those shelters were entirely welcoming of trans women.

Here is a YouGov poll that tackles the subject. This is one of the questions: "In the following questions a transgender woman is someone who was biologically male at birth, but now identifies as a woman. A transgender man is someone who was biologically female at birth, but now identifies as a man. Do you think transgender women should or should not be allowed to...Use women's refuges for victims of rape or assault (if they are a victim themselves)?"

The answers from women are:



Another question is "Do you believe that allowing transgender women to use spaces reserved for women, such as women's toilets or changing rooms, does or does not present any genuine risk of harm to women?"

The answers from women are:



On what are you basing your assertion that most women see it as a significant problem?

Different questions. First question is whether or not sexual misbehavior in women's safe space by men is a legitimate and significant concern, the answer to which is yes, even if it's uncommon.

Second is whether transwomen increase that risk.

And while sure, it's not technically true that "most" women think there's increased risk from transwomen, it's not really clear that "most" women think there's no risk.

I'd be more interested in a question that asks whether allowing access to self-identified transwomen, who are not required to have transitioned in any way, increases the risk of cis-men gaining access to women's safe spaces and causing harm.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Every woman I've ever talked to said those women are miserable TERFs.

This is clearly false.

 

[Garb]

Lacking data on specifically what fraction of trans-women serve short vs long sentences it's not unreasonable to assume that it's a similar fraction to that of the prison population in general. Why would trans-women serve shorter/longer sentences than the rest of the population? And of course, that 4% isn't even needed as we're considering specifically the group that may transfer to the female estate, and those with short sentences are not eligible for that (or rather, they are eligible but it's pointless as the process takes longer than their sentence).

Trans women serving shorter sentences IS relevant because we are talking about the "trans inmates are disproportionately sexual offenders" discussion. Trans inmates who are not sexual offenders but aren't included in the number is important.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I didn't, it's just the opinion of every woman I've ever talked to.

Since we're doing the skeptical thing here and refuting poll data with anecdotes about women's real fears, I'd thought I'd contribute.

You know, as a woman, I find it incredible privileged and insensitive as well as completely tone-deaf of you to dismiss my real fears as "anecdote".

 

[Rolfe]

One thing that stuck out to me with the "Fair Play for Women" article regarding the number of trans women who were convicted of sexual assault:

https://fairplayforwomen.com/transgender-prisoners/

Why is the 4% and 1% coming from the 125 number? That math doesn't make sense.

I think what they're saying is that there have been claims that the denominator of 125 trans prisoners in total is much too small, therefore saying that the 60 trans sex offenders represents nearly 50% of all trans prisoners is not correct. They're saying that if trans prisoners serving short sentences and trans prisoners with a GRC are included there are many more than 125 trans prisoners altogether.

They then refute that argument by pointing out that only a very small proportion (1%) of trans-identifying people have a GRC and only a small proportion (4%) of male prisoners are serving short sentences, therefore the numbers that might fall to be added from those to categories are small and not likely to make a significant difference to the ~50% calculation. They estimate that only seven more trans inmates are likely to accrue from these categories, based on the 4% and 1% figures.

 

[Emily's Cat]

One complaint I hear from transmen is that when they are in a group of trans people they're told to shut up and defer to the transwomen because they're men and men have all the advantages so they need to make way for the poor oppressed transwomen.

So having transitioned often because they bitterly resented being treated as second-class citizens as women, they now face being relegated to second-class status again because they're now told they're part of the oppressor class and only those who identify as women (that is, in this company, men) have the right to a voice.

It still ends up being those with the lived experience of male privilege dominating those with the lived experience of female disadvantage. Regardless of whether they identify themselves as men or women.

 

[Rolfe]

It still ends up being those with the lived experience of male privilege dominating those with the lived experience of female disadvantage. Regardless of whether they identify themselves as men or women.

Oh yes. We noticed.

 

[caveman1917]

Trans women serving shorter sentences IS relevant because we are talking about the "trans inmates are disproportionately sexual offenders" discussion. Trans inmates who are not sexual offenders but aren't included in the number is important.

Yeah but the context for this statistic is safe-guarding prisoners in the female estate, so the only relevant group is the ones who could, at least in principle, request a transfer to the female estate - ie those serving long sentences. The whole trans-women serving short sentences is a red herring really.

 

[Emily's Cat]

You have citation for that? The article discussed earlier listed 7 out of 124 reported sexual assaults against women inmates were from a trans inmate. Am I missing something here? Where the 100+ other assaults perpetrated by male staff? Because it sure seems like a lot of cis-women are committing sex crimes in the prison.

You're missing the per-capita element of it. That's 7 instances out of something like 10 transwomen housed in women's prisons versus 117 instances out of a about 3,500 ciswomen housed in women's prisons.

7 isn't a lot all by itself. But it's 5.6% of the assaults, for something less than 1% of the population. It's like 20 times the rate of sexual assaults committed by ciswomen.

All of my response was wrong. I made a mistake in what I thought those numbers were representing, sorry about that.

 

[Emily's Cat]

But the number they added to the 125 was 7, aka 5% of 125.

That is terribly misleading.

I don't really know, I will need to go read their methodology more closely.

 

[Garb]

You're missing the per-capita element of it. That's 7 instances out of something like 10 transwomen housed in women's prisons versus 117 instances out of a about 3,500 ciswomen housed in women's prisons.

7 isn't a lot all by itself. But it's 5.6% of the assaults, for something less than 1% of the population. It's like 20 times the rate of sexual assaults committed by ciswomen.

Trans women are also severely impacted negatively by being placed in male prisons, as even more trans women were sexually assaulted last year.

A "one size fits all" solution in either direction puts women at risk.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Oh yes. We noticed.

We noticed... but those with the male privilege seem blind to it.

I suppose that's part and parcel of privilege: to those who have it, it's invisible; to those who don't, it's a sharp and clear contrast.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Trans women are also severely impacted negatively by being placed in male prisons, as even more trans women were sexually assaulted last year.

A "one size fits all" solution in either direction puts women at risk.

I agree. Which is why I oppose either of the one-size solutions, and why I think the position that Squeegee and Suburban Turkey seem to support is bollocks. I don't think that allowing self-identifying transwomen to transfer to the female unit on the basis of their claim alone is a good solution to transwomen being assaulted by men in the male units. I definitely think a separate wing or a common sense case-by-case solution is a much, much better idea.

 

[caveman1917]

You're missing the per-capita element of it. That's 7 instances out of something like 10 transwomen housed in women's prisons versus 117 instances out of a about 3,500 ciswomen housed in women's prisons.

7 isn't a lot all by itself. But it's 5.6% of the assaults, for something less than 1% of the population. It's like 20 times the rate of sexual assaults committed by ciswomen.

All of my response was wrong. I made a mistake in what I thought those numbers were representing, sorry about that.

About 300x the rate by my earlier calculation. Either way, definitely more than an order of magnitude.

 

[caveman1917]

Trans women are also severely impacted negatively by being placed in male prisons, as even more trans women were sexually assaulted last year.

A "one size fits all" solution in either direction puts women at risk.

Hence the "TERF" idea of a third separate estate.

 

[The Atheist]

They've been doing that all along. Why do you think I seldom post in this thread? While men who "perform femininity" are elevated to the status of Most Oppressed who must have their every whim catered to, actual women are dismissed and see their arguments distorted and misrepresented.

Looks to me like you won that among blokes 3-2, so small steps...

Transwomen should not be allowed to usurp women's specific protections and provisions because they are men.

I'd be happier with "not women" than "are men".

I wouldn't class either myself or Rolfe as radical feminists, just run-of-the-mill common sense feminists who used to believe that women had made progress, and now are seeing those steps slide back.

It's the "radical" part that makes it a pejorative.

As you alluded to earlier, virtuously throwing "TERF" around doesn't seem to fit very well with the idea of allegedly protecting someone else's rights.

It's quite Trumpian to denigrate one group to try to advantage another.