Gender again. Sorry!

[classic33]

I don't note and date every podcast or interview I read. Seems like the kind of thing Eddie might share with his public if he had.

BK has another court appearance in April for threatening to kill women so seems unlikely they would be released before then but I suppose it's not the sort of thing they will announce.

Anyway, I'm sure you'll be hoping they're in a women's bail hostel. Fingers crossed, eh?

So you don't know. Why pretend you do?

Women threatening to kill other women, in a prison, is nothing new. But given she was only out of solitary for one hour a day, you have to wonder how those alleged threats were made.

Like it or not, she is legally a women in Ireland. All the required legal procedures have been followed.

Over here, Beverly Allitt is up for parole either this month or next. Six life sentence's for murder, and she could be walking the streets near you.

 

[icowden]

Over here, Beverly Allitt is up for parole either this month or next. Six life sentence's for murder, and she could be walking the streets near you.

But even if she were, she was imprisoned for the murder of young children and found to be mentally ill. She killed them with medication not heavy weaponry. She *could* still be a danger to children but she has been in prison for 33 years (She was 23 when convicted and is now 56 years old). If she *is* eligible for Parole and Parole is agreed, it means that the Parole board feel that she is not a danger to children or adults, otherwise she wouldn't be paroled. Her Parole will have quite strict terms - she isn't being set free which is what is often implied.

 

[classic33]

But even if she were, she was imprisoned for the murder of young children and found to be mentally ill. She killed them with medication not heavy weaponry. She *could* still be a danger to children but she has been in prison for 33 years (She was 23 when convicted and is now 56 years old). If she *is* eligible for Parole and Parole is agreed, it means that the Parole board feel that she is not a danger to children or adults, otherwise she wouldn't be paroled. Her Parole will have quite strict terms - she isn't being set free which is what is often implied.

She's spent the best part of those 31 years, sentence handed down in 1993, in a mental hospital. Working, for a while, in the medical wing of Rampton, which isn't a prison.

 

[icowden]

She's spent the best part of those 31 years, sentence handed down in 1993, in a mental hospital. Working, for a while, in the medical wing of Rampton, which isn't a prison.

But either way, she isn't a dangerous offender, and wouldn't be eligible for Parole if she was, so why bring her up?

 

[AuroraSaab]

Over here, Beverly Allitt is up for parole either this month or next. Six life sentence's for murder, and she could be walking the streets near you.

I'd rather take my chances defending myself from Beverley Allitt than from an adult male, thanks.

 

[Deleted member 121]

But either way, she isn't a dangerous offender, and wouldn't be eligible for Parole if she was, so why bring her up?

This is not a serious response and falls into the emotional whims of the current rhetoric of the gender violence argument going on here. Granted, it really deserves it's own thread and maybe we'll get one IF she is released but her actual motives have never been established and i would say a serial killer is a dangerous offender, whether medication, a claw hammer or a plastic bag is used and particularly of babies. Anything but is words of a madman...

 

[AndyRM]

I do love the turns this thread takes.

Serial killers eh? I did a whole module about them at Uni which freaked out one of my tutors a fair bit which was a lot of fun.

 

[AuroraSaab]

...... i would say a serial killer is a dangerous offender, whether medication, a claw hammer or a plastic bag is used and particularly of babies. Anything but is words of a madman...

The point is does being male add an extra risk on top of any based on previous history, minor or horrific? Statistically it does. At some point Allit will be in a half way house type hostel with other women. I'm pretty sure they'd rather not share with a serial killer. I'm absolutely sure they'd rather share with a female one than a male one.

 

[Bromptonaut]

There you go again - '12 or so trans people'. Pretending that only those with GRC's are transgender when you've spent hundreds of posts telling us people know who they are, 'It's enough to say I'm a woman', and all the other pro self ID stuff you come out with.

What happened to PEOPLE ARE WHO THEY SAY THEY ARE?

It's pretty simple I think. A summary is as follows.

@monkers herself believes, as I do, that we should respect people's decisions as to their identity. Brianna said she was a girl/woman and presented as such. I'd expect society to treat her as such and not question her choice of loos/changing rooms etc.

The MoJ, following HMG directions, treats people in that category as male. There is though, because the law requires it, a different route for people with a Gender Recognition Certificate the main consequence of which is that they've got a birth certificate in their acquired gender.

There are, according to the stats, 11 people in that group. MoJ won't provide a male/female breakdown of acquired gender for those people. I guess that's down to it being a small cohort with a risk, whether by accident or people completing a jigsaw, of individuals being identified.

If I've misread @monkers then no doubt she'll correct me.

 

[classic33]

The point is does being male add an extra risk on top of any based on previous history, minor or horrific? Statistically it does*. At some point Allit will be in a half way house type hostel with other women. I'm pretty sure they'd rather not share with a serial killer. I'm absolutely sure they'd rather share with a female one than a male one.

*You keep on saying that, with very little to back up like with like. Your common denominator being men, nothing else.

Allitt had no previous to work from, before she started killing. So you provide proof of a man, in the UK, with no previous criminal record, deciding to kill, and you may have something you can prove.

Odd because whilst in the secure unit, other inmates were requesting that they be either moved, to another site, or not have to be in the same area as her.
That from someone who was in the same secure unit for just over a year, before being deemed sane enough to spend the remainder of their sentence in a prison. Sadly she was killed, by another woman, whilst in that prison.

You insist that someone, you say is a man*, making threats to kill someone they haven't seen since they were removed from them at the age of ten, is a greater danger than someone who has already killed. Purely and simply because the threats were made against a women.

*The law of the land says she is a women. Whatever you may think.

 

[AuroraSaab]

It's pretty simple I think. A summary is as follows.

@monkers herself believes, as I do, that we should respect people's decisions as to their identity. Brianna said she was a girl/woman and presented as such. I'd expect society to treat her as such and not question her choice of loos/changing rooms etc.

The MoJ, following HMG directions, treats people in that category as male. There is though, because the law requires it, a different route for people with a Gender Recognition Certificate the main consequence of which is that they've got a birth certificate in their acquired gender.

There are, according to the stats, 11 people in that group. MoJ won't provide a male/female breakdown of acquired gender for those people. I guess that's down to it being a small cohort with a risk, whether by accident or people completing a jigsaw, of individuals being identified.

If I've misread @monkers then no doubt she'll correct me.

I understand the argument, Bromptonaut. However, the corollary, which is that there are only 11 transgender people in prison in England and Wales, goes completely against what you and notable others have said throughout this thread - that people are who they say they are, regardless of a certificate. The MOJ count trans prisoners with GRC's, and trans prisoners without GRC's. They don't say only those with GRC's are genuinely transgender - which is what is being asserted now. And it's all to pretend that there are only 11 trans people in jail. It's nonsense.

Are people without a GRC transgender or not? The MOJ say they are. If gender is innate they are. If you believe in 'You are who you say you are', then they are.

Perhaps the next question should be: 'Have you committed a crime?' Answer No = you can be trans. Answer yes = no, you aren't trans.

 

[monkers]

I understand the argument, Bromptonaut. However, the corollary, which is that there are only 11 transgender people in prison in England and Wales, goes completely against what you and notable others have said throughout this thread - that people are who they say they are, regardless of a certificate. The MOJ count trans prisoners with GRC's, and trans prisoners without GRC's. They don't say only those with GRC's are genuinely transgender - which is what is being asserted now. And it's all to pretend that there are only 11 trans people in jail. It's nonsense.

Are people without a GRC transgender or not? The MOJ say they are. If gender is innate they are. If you believe in 'You are who you say you are', then they are.

Perhaps the next question should be: 'Have you committed a crime?' Answer No = you can be trans. Answer yes = no, you aren't trans.

It isn't fruitloops. The MoJ stats said that of the 187 transgender prisoners, 181 of them identify as male, the other six identify as female.
None of the 187 have legal protection from the GRA, though six of them have some protection under the EqA. There are also 11 or so people with a GRC. The incongruent six and the congruent eleven are held appropriately following the safety protocols.

In one period of a few years, there were 97 sexual assaults reported in UK women's prisons. 91 of those were committed by cis women, and 6 by transgender prisoners. There are no reports of sexual assaults committed by women with GRCs in recent years.

To listen to you and other hysterical GC, all of the 187 are running amok in female prisons with access to women and routinely victimising women in what are otherwise safe spaces - which of course is alarmist nonsense. It is a deliberate mischaracterisation of the actual situation in UK prisons.

 

[Bromptonaut]

I understand the argument, Bromptonaut. However, the corollary, which is that there are only 11 transgender people in prison in England and Wales, goes completely against what you and notable others have said throughout this thread - that people are who they say they are, regardless of a certificate.

Not at all.

If we're going to understand Trans offending via the prism of MoJ stats then we need to understand what they tell us.

There's no contradiction between accepting MoJ numbers on their terms for what they tell us about offending by people they treat as Trans and my view that people are who they say they are and present as.

 

[Deleted member 121]

The point is does being male add an extra risk on top of any based on previous history, minor or horrific? Statistically it does. At some point Allit will be in a half way house type hostel with other women. I'm pretty sure they'd rather not share with a serial killer. I'm absolutely sure they'd rather share with a female one than a male one.

Again. I think the this thread has become a bubble for which there is no escape. The actual point is Icow is claiming allitt is not a dangerous offender because she used medication to dispatch of her victims.. He doesn't realise it but he is claiming by proxy that one of the worlds most prolific serial killers is not (or would not) be a dangerous offender. That is Harold Shipman.

 

[AuroraSaab]

So you agree, Bromptonaut, that the 200 plus without a GRC are trans, as are the 11 with a GRC. Which is what the MOJ say....

It isn't fruitloops.

What isn't fruitloops? Porridge? Corn flakes?

In one period of a few years, there were 97 sexual assaults reported in UK women's prisons. 91 of those were committed by cis women, and 6 by transgender prisoners.

So 91 assaults from a prison population of around 3,500 women. And 6 from a prison population of 280 ish transgender people? I'm not sure those figures help you out.

Here's the Times report showing that trans prisoners are disproportionately responsible for sexual assaults in women's jails.

https://archive.ph/20gtP

"Transgender inmates make up about one per cent of the 3,600 female jail population but are responsible for 5.6 per cent of sexual assaults in women’s prisons".

It's not just about safety obviously, but There's only a few sexual assaults is a very poor argument for allowing men into the women's estate.

It's the same as the There's only a few men winning in women's sports, so what does it matter? argument. Nobody seems to want to put a figure on the number of times it is ok before women are allowed to say No.