Trans woman convicted rapist sent to female prison
Discussion
We could try and sort out the immense mental illness problem this country (and others in the "west") have that lead to barmy situations like this.
Its a man, a man with massive problems with self image (the big obvious tattoos are a good indicator, especially facial ones) and a big problem with sexual control.
Mixed together its a recipe for the sort of thing we just read in the article.
He committed the crimes as a man with his penis, a penis he still has. No amount of "operations on the NHS" are going to fix his mental problems.
There are clear cases where being trans is a fact of life for an individual and I accept that in some cases transitioning is absolutely the right thing, I know several people who are genuinely now in the "right" body and present a public image that is the one they identify with, this guy is not one of them. He's a pervert rapist with severe mental disorders who is playing on the sympathies of the kinder and more accepting members of this society.
The trouble is this Man/rapist will do more harm for trans rights and acceptance than good. Pick your battles and don't back this horse, its wrong one.
Its a man, a man with massive problems with self image (the big obvious tattoos are a good indicator, especially facial ones) and a big problem with sexual control.
Mixed together its a recipe for the sort of thing we just read in the article.
He committed the crimes as a man with his penis, a penis he still has. No amount of "operations on the NHS" are going to fix his mental problems.
There are clear cases where being trans is a fact of life for an individual and I accept that in some cases transitioning is absolutely the right thing, I know several people who are genuinely now in the "right" body and present a public image that is the one they identify with, this guy is not one of them. He's a pervert rapist with severe mental disorders who is playing on the sympathies of the kinder and more accepting members of this society.
The trouble is this Man/rapist will do more harm for trans rights and acceptance than good. Pick your battles and don't back this horse, its wrong one.
Getragdogleg said:
We could try and sort out the immense mental illness problem this country (and others in the "west") have that lead to barmy situations like this.
Its a man, a man with massive problems with self image (the big obvious tattoos are a good indicator, especially facial ones) and a big problem with sexual control.
Mixed together its a recipe for the sort of thing we just read in the article.
He committed the crimes as a man with his penis, a penis he still has. No amount of "operations on the NHS" are going to fix his mental problems.
There are clear cases where being trans is a fact of life for an individual and I accept that in some cases transitioning is absolutely the right thing, I know several people who are genuinely now in the "right" body and present a public image that is the one they identify with, this guy is not one of them. He's a pervert rapist with severe mental disorders who is playing on the sympathies of the kinder and more accepting members of this society.
The trouble is this Man/rapist will do more harm for trans rights and acceptance than good. Pick your battles and don't back this horse, its wrong one.
QuiteIts a man, a man with massive problems with self image (the big obvious tattoos are a good indicator, especially facial ones) and a big problem with sexual control.
Mixed together its a recipe for the sort of thing we just read in the article.
He committed the crimes as a man with his penis, a penis he still has. No amount of "operations on the NHS" are going to fix his mental problems.
There are clear cases where being trans is a fact of life for an individual and I accept that in some cases transitioning is absolutely the right thing, I know several people who are genuinely now in the "right" body and present a public image that is the one they identify with, this guy is not one of them. He's a pervert rapist with severe mental disorders who is playing on the sympathies of the kinder and more accepting members of this society.
The trouble is this Man/rapist will do more harm for trans rights and acceptance than good. Pick your battles and don't back this horse, its wrong one.
and the flip side of this is having some consideration and empathy for the female offenders he will be housed with.
Female prisoners on the whole are a checklist of vulnerabilities - survivors of child neglect and abuse. Usually imprisoned for drug related and acquisitive crimes commonly as a result of being in adult abusive relationships.
It's a sick joke that the 'progressives' jump on the bandwagon supporting offenders like this and neglect the competing rights of the most vulnerable women in society.
Edited by oddman on Tuesday 24th January 20:57
plenty said:
Catastrophic Poo said:
Not really, although a pinch of arrogance ensures the blinkers stay fixed.
Suppose it helps avoid awkward discussions.
If you consider 'awkward discussions' to include engaging posters in NPE who take DM articles at face value and use terms like 'arrogant' and 'blinkers' without provocation, then yes I'm glad to avoid them.Suppose it helps avoid awkward discussions.
Particularly when someone’s opening point was about avoiding discussion, while making quite a few odd assumptions.
Not that progressive really.
lrdisco said:
Sorry but he’s a man until his genitalia are removed. Quite simple really.
Genitalia is removed? Are women not supposed to have any genitalia or something? 
Perhaps you mean women don't have external genitalia? I've got to ask if exposed labia count as external genitalia in this? How about a prominent Clitoris?
Maybe you mean that genitalia that is anatomically similar to vagina as your qualifier for being a woman? But I’ve got to ask where does that leave my friend Steven? He’s been on testosterone for the best part of a decade, is built like a brick lavatory and is probably the hairiest person I know… is he a woman? Because he seems pretty adamant that he is a bloke?
Okay, maybe you think I am being obtuse, so let’s keep it mega cut and dry and assume that you meant having genital reconstructive surgery as your “simple”? – Absolutely practically how are you going to work this new requirement?
The waiting time for gender affirming medical care between first referral and first prescription is quite literally the best part of a decade in most areas of the country. First prescription remember, not surgery, that is usually a few more appointments and several more years wait on top of that.
What do you purpose trans people do in the meantime whilst waiting? Force them to continue to live as their assigned gender despite it being explicitly against the advice of countless doctors, therapists, psychologists and international bodies such as the world health origination
https://www.who.int/standards/classifications/freq...
And the United Nations
https://www.unfe.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/UN...
And as a result put the UK in such lovely progressive company of countries such as Sudan and Saudi Arabia?
Maybe you think trans people should pay for gender affirming surgeries out of pocket themselves to go private and avoid the waiting list? Fair point, but at which point I ask what other surgery related to a diagnosed medical condition should also force the patient to go have to go private?
What about the people that cannot afford genital reconstructive surgery? What about those that cannot have it for medical reasons? What about the people that just don't want it?
Why is this even a thing to get so worked up about? Out of the estimated UK population of trans people of 500,000 the number within the prison system was as of 2019... 163
. We are talking about a tiny minority of a small minority in terms of numbers, merely what the Mail is trying to stoke a reaction on is the usage of the recently revised framework (which I linked above) which was implemented to minimise the likelihood of anyone being at risk of assault whilst in custody.
But stick "trans" in the title and watch the phobes come
HustleRussell said:
Kes Arevo said:
HustleRussell said:
Well at least that's something.
It's worth me mentioning that I have not read the Daily Mail article and there is no statement of fact that Isla Bryson (as she is now) will see out her custodial sentence in a women's prison, not in the BBC article I read.
If you cared to ask me whether I think she should see out her custodial sentence in an open women's prison then my answer is no- and that is because sex offenders obviously shouldn't be given the opportunity to re-offend in custody. That also has nothing to do with whether or not she is a trans woman. Its very simple to me.
So we agree. What's the issue then?It's worth me mentioning that I have not read the Daily Mail article and there is no statement of fact that Isla Bryson (as she is now) will see out her custodial sentence in a women's prison, not in the BBC article I read.
If you cared to ask me whether I think she should see out her custodial sentence in an open women's prison then my answer is no- and that is because sex offenders obviously shouldn't be given the opportunity to re-offend in custody. That also has nothing to do with whether or not she is a trans woman. Its very simple to me.
The issue is the fact that the Daily Mail posts an article like this and it gets 50 posts in two and a half hours on a slow afternoon on PH. Very sadly, sexual offences of all kinds happen every day. Mostly without so much as a thread. What makes this one threadworthy is the fact that it involves a trans person. There is much to be outraged about if this person is going to see out her custodial sentence in an environment where she will have the opportunity to carry out further offences- however I don't know whether any of us know that that is the case. Unless that's the case, this is just another thread in which everyone basically gets very angry at trans people. The newspapers publish it because it goes over well.
Simple fact is it's like any case involving a sexual offender. They cannot be detained in an environment where they have the opportunity to re-offend. There's a s
t ton of froth on it because the person happens to be trans. k seriously. The fact is that you may have a prisoner with male apendiges in a female prison. Are you offended for the people born as women prisoners at all?BBC link for all the daily wail frothers
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64388669
TX.
It just boils down to this.
Bloke rapes multiple women.
Gets arrested. Due in court.
Before he goes to court - decides to start transitioning ( for genuine or nefarious reasons )
Being detained in a Woman's prison
If found guilty could spend his whole sentence in a Woman's prison.
And with new Scottish bill - could get their gender legally changed before any crime gets to court.
World has gone mad.
Bloke rapes multiple women.
Gets arrested. Due in court.
Before he goes to court - decides to start transitioning ( for genuine or nefarious reasons )
Being detained in a Woman's prison
If found guilty could spend his whole sentence in a Woman's prison.
And with new Scottish bill - could get their gender legally changed before any crime gets to court.
World has gone mad.
Edited by Jenny Tailor on Tuesday 24th January 21:25
Terminator X said:
HustleRussell said:
Kes Arevo said:
HustleRussell said:
Well at least that's something.
It's worth me mentioning that I have not read the Daily Mail article and there is no statement of fact that Isla Bryson (as she is now) will see out her custodial sentence in a women's prison, not in the BBC article I read.
If you cared to ask me whether I think she should see out her custodial sentence in an open women's prison then my answer is no- and that is because sex offenders obviously shouldn't be given the opportunity to re-offend in custody. That also has nothing to do with whether or not she is a trans woman. Its very simple to me.
So we agree. What's the issue then?It's worth me mentioning that I have not read the Daily Mail article and there is no statement of fact that Isla Bryson (as she is now) will see out her custodial sentence in a women's prison, not in the BBC article I read.
If you cared to ask me whether I think she should see out her custodial sentence in an open women's prison then my answer is no- and that is because sex offenders obviously shouldn't be given the opportunity to re-offend in custody. That also has nothing to do with whether or not she is a trans woman. Its very simple to me.
The issue is the fact that the Daily Mail posts an article like this and it gets 50 posts in two and a half hours on a slow afternoon on PH. Very sadly, sexual offences of all kinds happen every day. Mostly without so much as a thread. What makes this one threadworthy is the fact that it involves a trans person. There is much to be outraged about if this person is going to see out her custodial sentence in an environment where she will have the opportunity to carry out further offences- however I don't know whether any of us know that that is the case. Unless that's the case, this is just another thread in which everyone basically gets very angry at trans people. The newspapers publish it because it goes over well.
Simple fact is it's like any case involving a sexual offender. They cannot be detained in an environment where they have the opportunity to re-offend. There's a s
t ton of froth on it because the person happens to be trans. k seriously. The fact is that you may have a prisoner with male apendiges in a female prison. Are you offended for the people born as women prisoners at all?BBC link for all the daily wail frothers
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64388669
TX.
Catastrophic Poo said:
plenty said:
Catastrophic Poo said:
Not really, although a pinch of arrogance ensures the blinkers stay fixed.
Suppose it helps avoid awkward discussions.
If you consider 'awkward discussions' to include engaging posters in NPE who take DM articles at face value and use terms like 'arrogant' and 'blinkers' without provocation, then yes I'm glad to avoid them.Suppose it helps avoid awkward discussions.
Particularly when someone’s opening point was about avoiding discussion, while making quite a few odd assumptions.
Not that progressive really.
survivalist said:
Terminator X said:
HustleRussell said:
Kes Arevo said:
HustleRussell said:
Well at least that's something.
It's worth me mentioning that I have not read the Daily Mail article and there is no statement of fact that Isla Bryson (as she is now) will see out her custodial sentence in a women's prison, not in the BBC article I read.
If you cared to ask me whether I think she should see out her custodial sentence in an open women's prison then my answer is no- and that is because sex offenders obviously shouldn't be given the opportunity to re-offend in custody. That also has nothing to do with whether or not she is a trans woman. Its very simple to me.
So we agree. What's the issue then?It's worth me mentioning that I have not read the Daily Mail article and there is no statement of fact that Isla Bryson (as she is now) will see out her custodial sentence in a women's prison, not in the BBC article I read.
If you cared to ask me whether I think she should see out her custodial sentence in an open women's prison then my answer is no- and that is because sex offenders obviously shouldn't be given the opportunity to re-offend in custody. That also has nothing to do with whether or not she is a trans woman. Its very simple to me.
The issue is the fact that the Daily Mail posts an article like this and it gets 50 posts in two and a half hours on a slow afternoon on PH. Very sadly, sexual offences of all kinds happen every day. Mostly without so much as a thread. What makes this one threadworthy is the fact that it involves a trans person. There is much to be outraged about if this person is going to see out her custodial sentence in an environment where she will have the opportunity to carry out further offences- however I don't know whether any of us know that that is the case. Unless that's the case, this is just another thread in which everyone basically gets very angry at trans people. The newspapers publish it because it goes over well.
Simple fact is it's like any case involving a sexual offender. They cannot be detained in an environment where they have the opportunity to re-offend. There's a s
t ton of froth on it because the person happens to be trans. k seriously. The fact is that you may have a prisoner with male apendiges in a female prison. Are you offended for the people born as women prisoners at all?BBC link for all the daily wail frothers
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64388669
TX.
"BBC Scotland understands Bryson is being sent to Cornton Vale women's prison in Stirling but will not be held alongside the jail's general population."
So...sorry but where's the issue? If the concern is that the individual poses a threat to biological women, surely the fact they're not being kept with the general population mitigates that? Yet another storm in a teacup to get the ruddy-faced apoplectic with rage at the state of society today, innit.
HM-2 said:
From aforementioned BBC link:
"BBC Scotland understands Bryson is being sent to Cornton Vale women's prison in Stirling but will not be held alongside the jail's general population."
So...sorry but where's the issue? If the concern is that the individual poses a threat to biological women, surely the fact they're not being kept with the general population mitigates that? Yet another storm in a teacup to get the ruddy-faced apoplectic with rage at the state of society today, innit.
I had a quick scan of the DM article a couple of times and couldn't find a mention of the specific conditions they were being held under, but it makes sense."BBC Scotland understands Bryson is being sent to Cornton Vale women's prison in Stirling but will not be held alongside the jail's general population."
So...sorry but where's the issue? If the concern is that the individual poses a threat to biological women, surely the fact they're not being kept with the general population mitigates that? Yet another storm in a teacup to get the ruddy-faced apoplectic with rage at the state of society today, innit.
The DM rushed to go into the wider trans debate.
gregs656 said:
HM-2 said:
From aforementioned BBC link:
"BBC Scotland understands Bryson is being sent to Cornton Vale women's prison in Stirling but will not be held alongside the jail's general population."
So...sorry but where's the issue? If the concern is that the individual poses a threat to biological women, surely the fact they're not being kept with the general population mitigates that? Yet another storm in a teacup to get the ruddy-faced apoplectic with rage at the state of society today, innit.
I had a quick scan of the DM article a couple of times and couldn't find a mention of the specific conditions they were being held under, but it makes sense."BBC Scotland understands Bryson is being sent to Cornton Vale women's prison in Stirling but will not be held alongside the jail's general population."
So...sorry but where's the issue? If the concern is that the individual poses a threat to biological women, surely the fact they're not being kept with the general population mitigates that? Yet another storm in a teacup to get the ruddy-faced apoplectic with rage at the state of society today, innit.
The DM rushed to go into the wider trans debate.
HM-2 said:
survivalist said:
Terminator X said:
HustleRussell said:
Kes Arevo said:
HustleRussell said:
Well at least that's something.
It's worth me mentioning that I have not read the Daily Mail article and there is no statement of fact that Isla Bryson (as she is now) will see out her custodial sentence in a women's prison, not in the BBC article I read.
If you cared to ask me whether I think she should see out her custodial sentence in an open women's prison then my answer is no- and that is because sex offenders obviously shouldn't be given the opportunity to re-offend in custody. That also has nothing to do with whether or not she is a trans woman. Its very simple to me.
So we agree. What's the issue then?It's worth me mentioning that I have not read the Daily Mail article and there is no statement of fact that Isla Bryson (as she is now) will see out her custodial sentence in a women's prison, not in the BBC article I read.
If you cared to ask me whether I think she should see out her custodial sentence in an open women's prison then my answer is no- and that is because sex offenders obviously shouldn't be given the opportunity to re-offend in custody. That also has nothing to do with whether or not she is a trans woman. Its very simple to me.
The issue is the fact that the Daily Mail posts an article like this and it gets 50 posts in two and a half hours on a slow afternoon on PH. Very sadly, sexual offences of all kinds happen every day. Mostly without so much as a thread. What makes this one threadworthy is the fact that it involves a trans person. There is much to be outraged about if this person is going to see out her custodial sentence in an environment where she will have the opportunity to carry out further offences- however I don't know whether any of us know that that is the case. Unless that's the case, this is just another thread in which everyone basically gets very angry at trans people. The newspapers publish it because it goes over well.
Simple fact is it's like any case involving a sexual offender. They cannot be detained in an environment where they have the opportunity to re-offend. There's a s
t ton of froth on it because the person happens to be trans. k seriously. The fact is that you may have a prisoner with male apendiges in a female prison. Are you offended for the people born as women prisoners at all?BBC link for all the daily wail frothers
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64388669
TX.
"BBC Scotland understands Bryson is being sent to Cornton Vale women's prison in Stirling but will not be held alongside the jail's general population."
So...sorry but where's the issue? If the concern is that the individual poses a threat to biological women, surely the fact they're not being kept with the general population mitigates that? Yet another storm in a teacup to get the ruddy-faced apoplectic with rage at the state of society today, innit.
What’s the relevance of this particular individual not being held alongside the general population? Does it mean that the prisoners she will be spending time with somehow less vulnerable?
Edited by survivalist on Tuesday 24th January 21:52
survivalist said:
Does it mean that the prisoners she will be spending time with somehow less vulnerable?
That's usually the purpose behind segregating prisoners outside of the general population, yes. I mean, do you think the idea is to house alongside the most vulnerable?!Edited by HM-2 on Tuesday 24th January 21:59
HM-2 said:
survivalist said:
Does it mean that the prisoners she will be spending time with somehow less vulnerable?
That's usually the purpose behind segregating prisoners outside of the general population, yes. I mean, do you think the idea is to house alongside the most vulnerable?!Edited by HM-2 on Tuesday 24th January 21:59
In a men’s prison sex offenders would be high risk, even when segregated from the general prison population.
In a women’s prison, even when segregated, I doubt someone biologically male would be at high risk. Even in segregation I’d suggest they would be a risk to other prisoners rather than at risk.
HM-2 said:
Yes, very true, but it also cuts the other way. Segregation is also used to separate prisoners who are judged to pose a risk to others. Which is what I suspect I'd happening here, at least until such a time as a proper risk assessment can take place.
Indeed it is and people will have a variety of experiences and opinions on how likely this will be effectively implemented. Either way, this is a good illustration of how pro-trans legislation has given rise to a number of complex and challenging issues and that having a discussion about them isn’t immediately anti-trans / transphobic.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff