Breakdown In Civil Order

[Gospel]

This is a law Sb132? Passed in California, it’s not a “right” that men who don a dress and slap on some lipstick get to bunk in with the women prisoners.

Thanks for attempting to shift my argument, but that's not what I'm discussing. I'm stating that cisgender men aren't pretending to be transgender in large numbers to violate women. You're more than welcome to use my rooftop to scream they don't have a right to be there, but the reality is they are being housed there.

 

[TSwizzle]

This is a law Sb132? Passed in California, it’s not a “right” that men who don a dress and slap on some lipstick get to bunk in with the women prisoners.

Thanks for attempting to shift my argument, but that's not what I'm discussing. I'm stating that cisgender men aren't pretending to be transgender in large numbers to violate women.

So what if the number doesn’t reach your arbitrary threshold? Who are you to decide what number is acceptable to the women that are affected by this nonsense?

 

[Gospel]

So what if the number doesn’t reach your arbitrary threshold? Who are you to decide what number is acceptable to the women that are affected by this nonsense?

So one case isn't a fair request? You think no cases are even better? Because that's what you have.

 

[TSwizzle]

So what if the number doesn’t reach your arbitrary threshold? Who are you to decide what number is acceptable to the women that are affected by this nonsense?

So one case isn't a fair request? You think no cases are even better? Because that's what you have.

It’s not my job to catalog every incident for you, just tell me what the arbitrary number is you find is acceptable. I guarantee it’s higher than what actual women would say. And I think they should be the ones who get to decide.

 

[Jarhyn]

[C]isgender men aren't pretending to be transgender in large numbers to violate women.

I would also like to see even the slightest bit of evidence that there is anyone housed in such an estate that hasn't undergone a hormonal transition; I keep saying though that if people don't want unserious transition in the prisons, they could just support and call on their legislatures to sponsor a bill that bases qualifications on endocrine and reproductive status instead rather than making any attempt to define "man" or "woman".

Instead, they do not-that and make endless attempts to legally define "woman" in a way that would cause even more chaos and stupidity.

 

[Gospel]

Isla Bryson case for Scotland

Bryson was charged with rape in 2019 and began transitioning in 2020. If Bryson's intent was to use a transgender identity to facilitate rapes, starting the transition after being charged seems ill-timed. However, I can understand why it might be perceived as an attempt to exploit this identity to commit further assaults. Regardless of Bryson's gender identity, a person convicted of raping women should not be placed in a women's prison. This stance on prison placement doesn't require Bryson's transgender identity (which to date hasn't been proven faked yet).

 

[Gospel]

It’s not my job to catalog every incident for you, just tell me what the arbitrary number is you find is acceptable. I guarantee it’s higher than what actual women would say. And I think they should be the ones who get to decide.

Would zero cases be reasonable grounds for legislation? If we start making laws against things that don't actually happen, it would certainly create civic disorder just from the administrative burden alone.

 

[Gospel]

It’s not my job to catalog every incident for you

Based on what you've submitted so far, I wouldn't hire you if I had the choice.

 

[Jarhyn]

Bryson was charged with rape in 2019 and began transitioning in 2020. If Bryson's intent was to use a transgender identity to facilitate rapes, starting the transition after being charged seems ill-timed. However, I can understand why it might be perceived as an attempt to exploit this identity to commit further assaults. Regardless of Bryson's gender identity, a person convicted of raping women should not be placed in a women's prison. This stance on prison placement doesn't require Bryson's transgender identity (which to date hasn't been proven faked yet).

Not to mention that it would be useful to demonstrate whether or not this person is hormonally transitioning, and/or being rendered sterile, and/or being strictly physically segregated for their lack of either of those things.

Either way, I do think that rapists/sex criminals should be placed in their own separate facility where they are prevented effectively from raping through some manner of coordinated physical isolation.

 

[TSwizzle]

It’s not my job to catalog every incident for you

Based on what you've submitted so far, I wouldn't hire you if I had the choice.

It’s not my job to catalog every incident for you, just tell me what the arbitrary number is you find is acceptable. I guarantee it’s higher than what actual women would say. And I think they should be the ones who get to decide.

Would zero cases be reasonable grounds for legislation? If we start making laws against things that don't actually happen, it would certainly create civic disorder just from the administrative burden alone.

I see you have concluded assault against actual women by pretend women doesn’t happen in women’s prisons, that can be put to the side for the moment. But It seems going to great lengths into creating laws to allow male prisoners into women’s prisons is not a burden? There is no chaos for the women in these facilities when males are dropped in?

 

[Gospel]

I see you have concluded assault against actual women by pretend women doesn’t happen in women’s prisons, that can be put to the side for the moment.

What you're perceiving is an illusion, so it should be easy to disregard an argument that wasn't actually made, at least for me.

But It seems going to great lengths into creating laws to allow male prisoners into women’s prisons is not a burden?

Transgender women =/= male based on the understanding and definitions provided by medical, psychological, and sociological communities.

There is no chaos for the women in these facilities when males are dropped in?

Let's get serious about what I've said and avoid playing jeopardy. My point is clear: no individual who has raped a woman should be housed with women, regardless of their gender identity. This is a straightforward solution that doesn't require legislation targeting a specific group. Feel free to grind that axe of yours but that's my argument.

 

[TSwizzle]

Let's get serious about what I've said and avoid playing jeopardy. My point is clear: no individual who has raped a woman should be housed with women, regardless of their gender identity.

and yet it does happen from time to time and the law enables it to happen, which is my point (And I assume you don’t mean rape alone but any type of sexual assault.)

 

[Gospel]

Yes, your assumption is correct. And yes. I believe this happens because our prison system is poorly managed.

 

[bilby]

The whole idea that prisoners need to leverage rules about gender identity in order to commit rapes in prison is beyond absurd.

Male prisoners need to leverage rules about gender identity in order to commit rapes of female inmates.

I fail to see how rape is made worse by being male on female.

But it's irrelevant to my main point: Prisoners are denied the liberty to run away, or to defend themselves effectively against assaults (including rape). The prison system therefore has a moral obligation to defend prisoners against other prisoners. If the system did not fail to meet that obligation, it wouldn't be any more possible for a male rapist to attack a female prisoner, if he persuaded the system to treat him as a woman, than if he didn't.

It shouldn't be possible for a female inmate to rape another female inmate. But it happens, a lot, because the prison system is vile and broken.

 

[Jarhyn]

I fail to see how rape is made worse by being male on female

Arguably rape babies, or fear of them, abound.

Also there's the question of physical ability to force and perpetrate the act.

Then, I don't see how I haven't already answered that with my point about actually requiring substantive transition or your point of taking real measures to actually prevent prison rapes in general.

These are the goals which tie to substantive and effective pathways of action.

I wonder what real "quiet part out loud" goals attach to the desire to "legally define" "woman". Most of the people who want that, I wouldn't trust alone in a room with a child.

 

[ZiprHead]

Determining value is easy. What was the value of the stock at the close of business on the day it was issued? That's the value when it was issued.

The problem is why should an asset like stock (which is generally easy to value) be treated differently than an asset that's harder to value (say, a house)?

Valuation is the same, what people are willing to pay for it.

But for something that doesn't trade often how do you reliably figure a value?

Again, Valuation is the same, what people are willing to pay for it.

 

[Derec]

Regardless of Bryson's gender identity, a person convicted of raping women should not be placed in a women's prison.

A cis-woman who was convicted of raping another woman should be placed in a men's prison?

 

[Jarhyn]

Regardless of Bryson's gender identity, a person convicted of raping women should not be placed in a women's prison.

A cis-woman who was convicted of raping another woman should be placed in a men's prison?

You lean on a false dichotomy, though I'll leave Gospel to explain it to you if you fail to figure it out and correct yourself

 

[Derec]

You lean on a false dichotomy, though I'll leave Gospel to explain it to you if you fail to figure it out and correct yourself

It's not a false dichotomy, as, to my knowledge, there are only two kinds of prisons in the US - those housing men and those housing women.
But let's see what Gospel meant.

 

[TSwizzle]

Gavin Newson, that great protector of Democracy gets the CA supreme court to prevent an initiative going on the November ballot;

The California Supreme Court on Thursday took the rare step of removing a measure from the November ballot that would have made it harder to raise taxes, siding with Gov. Gavin Newsom by ruling the change would have upended the way government works. More than 1 million people signed a petition to put a measure on the ballot this November that would have required voters to approve any tax increase passed by the state Legislature. It also would have required all local tax increases to be approved by two-thirds of voters instead of a simple majority vote. That prospect alarmed Newsom and legislative leaders so much that they took the unusual step of asking the state Supreme Court to remove the measure from the ballot before voters had a chance to decide it.

AP News

Can't wait for the insufferable prick Newsom to run for president.