Trans woman convicted rapist sent to female prison
Discussion
gregs656 said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
They haven't.
Yes they have. Starts from page 20.Here's one example:
ZedLeg said:
They're having an argument with themselves. I don't think anyone said that this person should be in a women's prison. Personally I just laid out the process of how it's decided. They decided that this person shouldn't go there, so that's that.
and an agreementchrispmartha said:
Precisely
This was all raked over 2 months a go. RobbieTheTruth said:
Rivenink said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
Gecko1978 said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
They got it right when?
When they sent them to a female prison? Or when they changed their mind and sent them to a male prison?
Dis Sturgeon get it right when she said Bryson isn't a woman and is 'almost certainly faking it'? Or did she get it right when she continuously described Bryson a female after that?
Was Humza Yousaf right when he admitted he thinks Bryson is not a genuine woman? Or were the people who reported him to the police for a hate crime right?
Pure examples of the left eating the left. Sturgeon and Yousaf are absolute advocates for this kind of stuff - and in the end admitted this guy isn't a woman, which caused other lefties to call the police!
They got it right all the way through When they sent them to a female prison? Or when they changed their mind and sent them to a male prison?
Dis Sturgeon get it right when she said Bryson isn't a woman and is 'almost certainly faking it'? Or did she get it right when she continuously described Bryson a female after that?
Was Humza Yousaf right when he admitted he thinks Bryson is not a genuine woman? Or were the people who reported him to the police for a hate crime right?
Pure examples of the left eating the left. Sturgeon and Yousaf are absolute advocates for this kind of stuff - and in the end admitted this guy isn't a woman, which caused other lefties to call the police!
1) the incarcerated them
2) based on their claim they initially put them in Seg in a womens prison
3) based on further evidence they challenged their claim
4) they found Bryson was not truly trans
5) they moved them to a male facility
6) post this event they reviwed their polocies
No one was harmed
my only criticisum is someone in Cornton Vale who might have needed a place in Seg might have been deniend becaue of this but that is a assumption with no evidence
They got it right 'all the way through' when they put a male (in your own definition) who raped two women in a women's prison?
RobbieTheTruth said:
chrispmartha said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
chrispmartha said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
chrispmartha said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
How is disagreeing with it ignoring it?
The poster answered and said they got it right 'all the way through'.
I strongly disagree, and point out that how they handled it resulted in a national backlash, a complete u-turn, getting them out of a womens prison and into a mens, two left leaning politicians admitting they think Bryson isn't really a women etc.
How is that ignoring the answer.
It's debating it on a forum.
How do you think it was handled?
To be honest I regret replying now as I have absolutely no interest in discussing this issue with you.The poster answered and said they got it right 'all the way through'.
I strongly disagree, and point out that how they handled it resulted in a national backlash, a complete u-turn, getting them out of a womens prison and into a mens, two left leaning politicians admitting they think Bryson isn't really a women etc.
How is that ignoring the answer.
It's debating it on a forum.
How do you think it was handled?
You won't admit you think Sturgeon was right in the end and Bryson isn't a woman?
You won't admit that you believe Bryson is a woman and should be housed accordingly?
You can't answer the question truthfully because the answer doesn't match your agena?
So you'll walk away AGAIN and say people are arguing in bad faith etc.
Just offer an opinion? It's only a forum?
Just look at the absolute state of your reply I'm quoting.
I believe given the choice, you'd prefer to see her in a women's prison?
Rivenink said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
chrispmartha said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
chrispmartha said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
chrispmartha said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
How is disagreeing with it ignoring it?
The poster answered and said they got it right 'all the way through'.
I strongly disagree, and point out that how they handled it resulted in a national backlash, a complete u-turn, getting them out of a womens prison and into a mens, two left leaning politicians admitting they think Bryson isn't really a women etc.
How is that ignoring the answer.
It's debating it on a forum.
How do you think it was handled?
To be honest I regret replying now as I have absolutely no interest in discussing this issue with you.The poster answered and said they got it right 'all the way through'.
I strongly disagree, and point out that how they handled it resulted in a national backlash, a complete u-turn, getting them out of a womens prison and into a mens, two left leaning politicians admitting they think Bryson isn't really a women etc.
How is that ignoring the answer.
It's debating it on a forum.
How do you think it was handled?
You won't admit you think Sturgeon was right in the end and Bryson isn't a woman?
You won't admit that you believe Bryson is a woman and should be housed accordingly?
You can't answer the question truthfully because the answer doesn't match your agena?
So you'll walk away AGAIN and say people are arguing in bad faith etc.
Just offer an opinion? It's only a forum?
Just look at the absolute state of your reply I'm quoting.
I believe given the choice, you'd prefer to see her in a women's prison?
RobbieTheTruth said:
As much proof as you have of knowing they were going to keep them in solitary confinement for their whole stay.
I never said, suggested or imagined that would be the case. 
It's no wonder everyone thinks you're arguing in bad faith, everything you post is straw men or other fallacies. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you've just got issues with reading comprehension for now, but it's no wonder nobody else wants to talk to you when you post this drivel.
RobbieTheTruth said:
Do you genuinely think they will just keep trans prisoners in permanent solitary confinement if they acted in violence?
No, I think a prisoner was kept in solitary confinement during an evaluation that resulted in them being sent to a male prison. Which is...exactly how the process should work. And, spoiler alert, was exactly what happened. Even you don't even seem to know what point you're trying to make here.
RobbieTheTruth said:
Rivenink said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
chrispmartha said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
chrispmartha said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
chrispmartha said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
How is disagreeing with it ignoring it?
The poster answered and said they got it right 'all the way through'.
I strongly disagree, and point out that how they handled it resulted in a national backlash, a complete u-turn, getting them out of a womens prison and into a mens, two left leaning politicians admitting they think Bryson isn't really a women etc.
How is that ignoring the answer.
It's debating it on a forum.
How do you think it was handled?
To be honest I regret replying now as I have absolutely no interest in discussing this issue with you.The poster answered and said they got it right 'all the way through'.
I strongly disagree, and point out that how they handled it resulted in a national backlash, a complete u-turn, getting them out of a womens prison and into a mens, two left leaning politicians admitting they think Bryson isn't really a women etc.
How is that ignoring the answer.
It's debating it on a forum.
How do you think it was handled?
You won't admit you think Sturgeon was right in the end and Bryson isn't a woman?
You won't admit that you believe Bryson is a woman and should be housed accordingly?
You can't answer the question truthfully because the answer doesn't match your agena?
So you'll walk away AGAIN and say people are arguing in bad faith etc.
Just offer an opinion? It's only a forum?
Just look at the absolute state of your reply I'm quoting.
I believe given the choice, you'd prefer to see her in a women's prison?
RobbieTheTruth said:
What part of that answers the questions?
You accused people of not being open with their opinion. At least two of the people you accuse are satisfied the prison service reviewed the situation and took action.
It’s interesting that at the start of this thread there was a general attitude that they weren’t trans, but after the decision was made they were definitely trans and it is evidence of how awful trans people are.
But your two months late for that conversation.
gregs656 said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
What part of that answers the questions?
You accused people of not being open with their opinion. At least two of the people you accuse are satisfied the prison service reviewed the situation and took action.
It’s interesting that at the start of this thread there was a general attitude that they weren’t trans, but after the decision was made they were definitely trans and it is evidence of how awful trans people are.
But your two months late for that conversation.
HM-2 said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
As much proof as you have of knowing they were going to keep them in solitary confinement for their whole stay.
I never said, suggested or imagined that would be the case. It's no wonder everyone thinks you're arguing in bad faith, everything you post is straw men or other fallacies. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you've just got issues with reading comprehension for now, but it's no wonder nobody else wants to talk to you when you post this drivel.
RobbieTheTruth said:
Do you genuinely think they will just keep trans prisoners in permanent solitary confinement if they acted in violence?
No, I think a prisoner was kept in solitary confinement during an evaluation that resulted in them being sent to a male prison. Which is...exactly how the process should work. And, spoiler alert, was exactly what happened. Even you don't even seem to know what point you're trying to make here.
So we are at a point where you aren't a woman if you say you are and are living as one. You still have to convince others that your reality can be other peoples reality?
Not saying that's a bad thing - and by your answer, you are ok with that too?
HM-2 said:
gregs656 said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
What part of that answers the questions?
You accused people of not being open with their opinion. At least two of the people you accuse are satisfied the prison service reviewed the situation and took action.
It’s interesting that at the start of this thread there was a general attitude that they weren’t trans, but after the decision was made they were definitely trans and it is evidence of how awful trans people are.
But your two months late for that conversation.
Ignorant to reality? I'm satisfied the correct decision was made eventually.
However it took a complete political U-turn, England to try and overrule the Scottish decision, them to actually go get them out of a women's prison, politicians to actually publicly say Bryson isn't a woman, and people to counter that by calling the police due to hate crimes being committed by saying those words.
Yet some say 'they got it right in every step'
RobbieTheTruth said:
Fair point, however that process caused two left leaning politicians to say that men can't be women if they say they are and dress like women, which led them to be reported to the police for hate crimes.
So we are at a point where you aren't a woman if you say you are and are living as one. You still have to convince others that your reality can be other peoples reality?
Not saying that's a bad thing - and by your answer, you are ok with that too?
Where on earth are you getting any of this from? This has absolutely nothing to do with how people choose to identify, and everything to do with an evaluation of risk made by professionals. So we are at a point where you aren't a woman if you say you are and are living as one. You still have to convince others that your reality can be other peoples reality?
Not saying that's a bad thing - and by your answer, you are ok with that too?
Biological women incarcerated in male prisons don't magically become men because the prison service deemed them to be too great a risk to other women. I'm.really not sure what point you think you're making here, but I'm very confident it has absolutely nothing to do with anything I've said.
Yet again.
RobbieTheTruth said:
However it took a complete political U-turn
On what are you basing this assertion? Do you have any evidence at all to support the suggestion that Bryson was only relocated to a male prison because of political intervention? Because if so, you'd better present it. Edited by HM-2 on Monday 20th March 18:16
RobbieTheTruth said:
However it took a complete political U-turn
On what are you basing this assertion? Do you have any evidence at all to support the suggestion that Bryson was only relocated to a male prison because of political intervention? Because if so, you'd better present it. Edited by HM-2 on Monday 20th March 18:16
Following the Bryson case, and that of Tiffany Scott, a transgender woman convicted of stalking a 13-year-old girl who had successfully applied to be transferred to a women's facility, on 29 January 2023, the Scottish Prison Service announced it would pause the movement of all transgender prisoners while it carried out an "urgent review" into all of the transgender cases within its estate
So you mean "no, [something that's not been discussed or mentioned and which has no bearing on whether the right thing was done in this case]"? I'm starting to see why you can only speak in fallacy now. Infuriating people out of discussing with you lets you pretend you've "won" by default 
HM-2 said:
RobbieTheTruth said:
Fair point, however that process caused two left leaning politicians to say that men can't be women if they say they are and dress like women, which led them to be reported to the police for hate crimes.
So we are at a point where you aren't a woman if you say you are and are living as one. You still have to convince others that your reality can be other peoples reality?
Not saying that's a bad thing - and by your answer, you are ok with that too?
Where on earth are you getting any of this from? This has absolutely nothing to do with how people choose to identify, and everything to do with an evaluation of risk made by professionals. So we are at a point where you aren't a woman if you say you are and are living as one. You still have to convince others that your reality can be other peoples reality?
Not saying that's a bad thing - and by your answer, you are ok with that too?
Biological women incarcerated in male prisons don't magically become men because the prison service deemed them to be too great a risk to other women. I'm.really not sure what point you think you're making here, but I'm very confident it has absolutely nothing to do with anything I've said.
Yet again.
RobbieTheTruth said:
However it took a complete political U-turn
On what are you basing this assertion? Do you have any evidence at all to support the suggestion that Bryson was only relocated to a male prison because of political intervention? Because if so, you'd better present it. Edited by HM-2 on Monday 20th March 18:16
"No, I think a prisoner was kept in solitary confinement during an evaluation that resulted in them being sent to a male prison. Which is...exactly how the process should work. And, spoiler alert, was exactly what happened."
So you think the process worked fine?
It doesn't matter that Bryson says she's a woman and lives as a woman, because an evaluation (i.e others opinion) says she's a man?
People can't just pick a gender/sex? Others have to validate it?
I'm literally using your words.
Bryson said they were a woman, Others (via an evaluation) said they weren't. So they aren't.
Perfectly reasonable conclusion IMO. I don't think there is anything transphobic about what you said. Others would want you in prison.
I've already answered your question. I'm not going to again. If you can't read and understand the posts I've made, which are exceptionally clear, then i really don't think you should be posting.
This is fast becoming farcical.
HM-2 said:
Biological women incarcerated in male prisons don't magically become men because the prison service deemed them to be too great a risk to other women.
You even quoted the post in question and said "fair point".This is fast becoming farcical.
RobbieTheTruth said:
I haven't decided though - that's why I'm asking.
I believe given the choice, you'd prefer to see her in a women's prison?
So why do I think they got it right.I believe given the choice, you'd prefer to see her in a women's prison?
1) they followed the protocol at the time
2) they assessed Bryson
3) they acted on new information (he is a lying piece of s
t and not trans)4) they moved him out of seg at cornton to a male jail
5) he was not harmed
6) no other inmates were harmed
7) no prison officers were harmed
8) based on the out cry policy was changed
The prison service got it right and a violent sex offender is in prison what more do you want.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff