Gender again. Sorry!

[monkers]

I see what you've done though. You've read the stats on the graphic that say '92 transwomen in jail for sex offences' (it doesn't say women's jail) as '192 transwomen sex offenders in women's jails'. Instead of admitting you misread it, you're doubling down and trying to deflect.

Listen up. It's no good doing a Paula Vennels.

I asked a specific question to which the most likely answer is zero. You provided a graphical representation in response.

But this typical of what you do.

The numbers of trans women convicted of harming women and girls in women's prisons in England & Wales is likely to be zero. The number of cis women convicted for sexual offences in women's prisons in the UK is about 60 by my estimate, and 103 according the small print on the graphic you provided.

From this you deduce that trans women are the problem in women's prisons in England & Wales.

The evidence is under your nose, you've been indoctrinated by alarmists.

Yet you will persist won't you. I know you will.

 

[monkers]

Now let's be truthful about JK Rowling and rape crisis centres. It is assumed by some that Rowling's intentions are noble.

Here I will show that they are not. If Rowling had the genuinely held belief that trans women are to be helped in a separate facility, what would she do?

a) open a separate facility for trans women in crisis.

b) open a facility that excludes trans women in crisis.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Now let's be truthful about JK Rowling and rape crisis centres. It is assumed by some that Rowling's intentions are noble.

Here I will show that they are not. If Rowling had the genuinely held belief that trans women are to be helped in a separate facility, what would she do?

a) open a separate facility for trans women in crisis.

b) open a facility that excludes trans women in crisis.

I thought she believed that women should be treated separately.
Wikipedia:
the express goal of providing "women-centered and women-delivered care".[6][7] Rowling's impetus to set up the centre was fury about Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre CEO Mridul Wadhwa's comment that victims of sexual abuse "holding prejudice" toward transgender people may need to "reframe their trauma".[8][9][10] I

 

[monkers]

I thought she believed that women should be treated separately.
Wikipedia:
the express goal of providing "women-centered and women-delivered care".[6][7] Rowling's impetus to set up the centre was fury about Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre CEO Mridul Wadhwa's comment that victims of sexual abuse "holding prejudice" toward transgender people may need to "reframe their trauma".[8][9][10] I

yeh but ...

There were already crisis centres. Rowling's problems was the those crisis centres were including trans women. Some say they did so to fulfill duties in equality law.

Rowling had the opportunity to instead open a separate facility for trans women in crisis. That would have achieved her objective, cis women and trans women in separate facilities, with no women excluded. Yet, she has chosen to use her money to duplicate services for women and exclude trans women.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Rowling had the opportunity to instead open a separate facility for trans women in crisis

That's not really true is it. See the quote above and last week's court ruling (search for Kafka if you're not sure which one).

 

[AuroraSaab]

The numbers of trans women convicted of harming women and girls in women's prisons in England & Wales is likely to be zero.

You have provided no evidence for this. The graphic is MOJ stats.

The number of cis women convicted for sexual offences in women's prisons in the UK is about 60 by my estimate, and 103 according the small print on the graphic you provided.

The 103 is from MOJ stats. Your stats are from your own estimations based on who knows what.

From this you deduce that trans women are the problem in women's prisons in England & Wales.
The evidence is under your nose, you've been indoctrinated by alarmists. Yet you will persist won't you. I know you will.

I persist because the problem is men. Not all men, but nearly always men. That doesn't change because some men identify as women.

Rowling had the opportunity to instead open a separate facility for trans women in crisis. That would have achieved her objective, cis women and trans women in separate facilities, with no women excluded. Yet, she has chosen to use her money to duplicate services for women and exclude trans women.

It's not duplication. She has chosen to provide something unique and currently unavailable in Edinburgh: a service that guarantees women only care for women. Men will be referred to an appropriate service. Why should she open a facility for trans identifying men when Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre are that already, serving trans identifying male users and employing a trans identifying male as their CEO?

I have never once seen you advocate for trans only services, only ever for men to use women's services. Trans people deserve to have their own services but it's a bit cheeky suggesting JKR should fund it for you now.

 

[monkers]

That's not really true is it. See the quote above and last week's court ruling (search for Kafka if you're not sure which one).

Now put the two things in chronological order and see the problem with that argument.

 

[monkers]

You have provided no evidence for this. The graphic is MOJ stats.

Nope. It even declares in the corner, 'derived'. They've made their own interpretation of data, and a purposely misleading one at that - and maybe you fell for it, or maybe you saw it as a useful tool.

Anyway, we got there in the end didn't we. The correct answer was a number in the range of 0 to 5. I'm going with 0.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Now put the two things in chronological order and see the problem with that argument.

Please explain, as you know, I'm a bit thick.

 

[monkers]

Please explain, as you know, I'm a bit thick.

Rowling opened her centre long before the Judge said stuff about Kafka.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Rowling opened her centre long before the Judge said stuff about Kafka.

That's true. Any further thoughts? Perhaps the Wikipedia quote will give you a clue.

 

[monkers]

The 103 is from MOJ stats. Your stats are from your own estimations based on who knows what.

Would you prefer me to say my estimate is half of the number of 103 or double it. It could claim to be flexible, but that would be a lie.

Instead I can quote the numbers from the MofJ first report from 2022 / 23.

As of 15 July 2022, there were 3,219 women in prison

That 2% of women prisoners are in prison for sexual offences. 3219 x 2% = 64.

The female prison population is being gradually reduced as matter of policy.

My estimate of the current number of females in prison for sexual offences = 60 ish give or take a few.

The number of trans women in women's prisons convicted of sexual offences against women is likely zero.

But the prisoners most likely to harm female prisoners is in your estimate likely to be trans women, and by estimate most likely to be cis women.

On top of which therefore the women most likely to be harmed by others is trans women.

Now try spinning all that away to defend your graphic and explanations.

 

[monkers]

I persist because the problem is men. Not all men, but nearly always men. That doesn't change because some men identify as women.

Deviation. The problem is not the presence of men in women's prisons.

The problem is that there are a higher number of male offenders. But then there is a higher number of male victims. I don't happen to care just about women and girls, but all victims. The injuries received by young men are typically much more violent, and more often life-changing than those inflicted on women. Yes, there needs to be a separate discussion about emotional trauma.

 

[AuroraSaab]

The 103 is from March 2021 MOJ stats, not the cobbled together estimate you've made.

Again though, why is the number of trans identified men in women's jails so low now? Because women campaigned and got men removed. You try to spin this as meaning there isn't a problem. Well it's less of a problem because it was a problem and it was (partially) sorted out. Somehow you think this win for women supports your case. Gaslighting again.

All prisons are unpleasant places. Saying 'Well they're full of violent women anyway, adding trans identifying men won't matter' is a poor argument. Not least, it sets the bar for women's discomfort at actual physical assault.
No woman prisoners ever benefitted from men being placed in women's jails. It benefits only men.

 

[monkers]

The 103 is from March 2021 MOJ stats, not the cobbled together estimate you've made.

If you prefer the 2021 stats to my later MoJ stats, then fine.

Then that's number of cis women who imprisoned for sexual offences in female prisons in the UK is 103. Number of trans women zero. Is that better?