Split Gendered spaces, split from Drag Shows

[Emily Lake]

They were not claiming trans identity at the time of the offense.

Hannah Tubbs is a male woman who sexually assaulted a female in the women's restroom of a family restaurant.

I don't care what she was wearing at the time.
Tom

Which shows you do not understand the issue.

At the time of their actions they were male presenting and not declared trans. Thus they should be treated as a male, not as a transwoman. This case is a strawman and shows how weak the anti-trans case actually is. Why don't they present a case of a female-presenting rapist in a women's room? Somehow I think the lack of presenting such a case means none exist.

Okay. Let's pretend what you're saying makes some sort of sense. There are many men in prison who have "discovered" their transgender identities while incarcerated, many of them quite recently. It seems that most of them have come to this realization only after learning of changes to the prison system that the ACLU pushed, which requires that prisons house inmates according to their claimed gender identity rather than their sex.

Would you be willing to take the stance that any male who was "male presenting" and had not previously "declared" a transgender identity at the time they committed their crimes be disallowed transfer to a women's prison? Would you consider their "apparent" gender identity to disqualify them from a transfer?

 

[Emily Lake]

Question for the class

Should a post op, top and bottom, trans woman be considered a woman who should be allow in women-only spaces?

Provided they behave, I have no objection.

The question I have is... how do we tell? And that's the problem. Short of asking any male-looking person to drop trou and prove they haven't got a willy, there's no way to tell.

And if I end up in a position of having to allow in any male who says they're trans, or allowing in no males at all, I'm going to have to land on none at all.

It's not my preference, but the good will of women has been abused and exploited, and I'm not standing for it any longer.

And what do you do with a male-looking woman?? It's been a problem for my SIL. She's cis-female but has on several occasions been thought to be a man trying to sneak into the women's room.

Do a double take and ask questions.

Seriously, I get that some women are "masculine". In my experience, however, it's more often men who mistake them for men that it is women. Women have been supportive and accepting of butch women pretty much forever. It's almost always been men who give butch women a hard time.

 

[Emily Lake]

In your society there aren't, either--that "women" sign doesn't keep rapists out.

Oh, well gee. I suppose that means I should just resign myself to being raped, and not bother trying to protect myself at all! You make such a compelling argument as to why women should just throw caution to the wind and let ourselves be sacrificed to the whims of men.

Seriously, just go look into sentinel effect, and figure some shit out before you keep banging this drum.

That "no tresspassing" sign doesn't keep thieves out. That locked door doesn't keep robbers from breaking in.

 

[Emily Lake]

So hey, this is a pretty good video that touches on how "trans" today is not at all like the "trans" we learned about when we were young. This is just part 1, but Mr. Menno does a pretty good job of not being insulting, but still pointing out that a very large portion of modern transwomen are "trans" for a very, very different reason than the transsexuals we tend to think of as poor folks going through some terrible dysphoria, who really want to just live their lives as best they're able. He goes into some of the misconceptions about current trans that really should come into play when we're talking about policy decisions.

 

[TSwizzle]

Transphobic bigots (terfs?) refused to perform search of "woman" prisoner;

Female prison officers claim their human rights went “out of the window” when they were ordered to carry out intimate searches on dangerous trans prisoner Tiffany Scott. Full body searches of Scott began being carried out by women officers when Scott’s gender identity changed from “male” to “female” on a prisons computer record system, the Daily Record can reveal. But one prison insider said “nothing else about Scott has changed physically,” and women officers who refused to do the searches have to submit their reasons in writing.
The transfer of 31-year-old Scott – formerly Andrew Burns – from HMP Low Moss, near Glasgow, to a women’s prison later this year was blocked after the Record revealed the Scottish Prison Service plans. The political storm, which brought huge criticism for Nicola Sturgeon, led to the halting of all trans prisoners with a history of violence against women being sent to women’s prisons. Now female officers from the Low Moss male prison have come forward to express their concerns over women having to carry out searches on Scott – who has to remove clothing for the procedure. One whistle-blower revealed that several female prison staff have repeatedly refused to do searches on Scott, who still has male genitalia.

Scottish Daily Record

 

[Oleg]

Transphobic bigots (terfs?) refused to perform search of "woman" prisoner;

Female prison officers claim their human rights went “out of the window” when they were ordered to carry out intimate searches on dangerous trans prisoner Tiffany Scott. Full body searches of Scott began being carried out by women officers when Scott’s gender identity changed from “male” to “female” on a prisons computer record system, the Daily Record can reveal. But one prison insider said “nothing else about Scott has changed physically,” and women officers who refused to do the searches have to submit their reasons in writing.
The transfer of 31-year-old Scott – formerly Andrew Burns – from HMP Low Moss, near Glasgow, to a women’s prison later this year was blocked after the Record revealed the Scottish Prison Service plans. The political storm, which brought huge criticism for Nicola Sturgeon, led to the halting of all trans prisoners with a history of violence against women being sent to women’s prisons. Now female officers from the Low Moss male prison have come forward to express their concerns over women having to carry out searches on Scott – who has to remove clothing for the procedure. One whistle-blower revealed that several female prison staff have repeatedly refused to do searches on Scott, who still has male genitalia.

Scottish Daily Record

Why are they afraid of lady penis?

 

[Oleg]

So hey, this is a pretty good video that touches on how "trans" today is not at all like the "trans" we learned about when we were young. This is just part 1, but Mr. Menno does a pretty good job of not being insulting, but still pointing out that a very large portion of modern transwomen are "trans" for a very, very different reason than the transsexuals we tend to think of as poor folks going through some terrible dysphoria, who really want to just live their lives as best they're able. He goes into some of the misconceptions about current trans that really should come into play when we're talking about policy decisions.

The understanding that a lot of these guys get sexually aroused when “affirmed” as women, or while in women’s spaces, and that many are outright contemptuous of real women, is often missing in these trans discussions.

 

[TomC]

Transphobic bigots (terfs?) refused to perform search of "woman" prisoner;

Female prison officers claim their human rights went “out of the window” when they were ordered to carry out intimate searches on dangerous trans prisoner Tiffany Scott. Full body searches of Scott began being carried out by women officers when Scott’s gender identity changed from “male” to “female” on a prisons computer record system, the Daily Record can reveal. But one prison insider said “nothing else about Scott has changed physically,” and women officers who refused to do the searches have to submit their reasons in writing.
The transfer of 31-year-old Scott – formerly Andrew Burns – from HMP Low Moss, near Glasgow, to a women’s prison later this year was blocked after the Record revealed the Scottish Prison Service plans. The political storm, which brought huge criticism for Nicola Sturgeon, led to the halting of all trans prisoners with a history of violence against women being sent to women’s prisons. Now female officers from the Low Moss male prison have come forward to express their concerns over women having to carry out searches on Scott – who has to remove clothing for the procedure. One whistle-blower revealed that several female prison staff have repeatedly refused to do searches on Scott, who still has male genitalia.

Scottish Daily Record

Damn Scots! They ruined Scotland.
Tom

 

[Oleg]

Progressive stack challenge. Trans vs. Muslim. Who wins?

 

[TomC]

Progressive stack challenge. Trans vs. Muslim. Who wins?

I don't see the question as difficult.

Don't go back to that place. If your religion makes you uncomfortable under certain circumstances, avoid those circumstances. Don't expect the rest of us to change to suit you and your religious stuff.

You don't have an entitlement to go wherever you went and expect everyone else to do as you wish.
Tom

 

[Toni]

They were not claiming trans identity at the time of the offense.

Hannah Tubbs is a male woman who sexually assaulted a female in the women's restroom of a family restaurant.

I don't care what she was wearing at the time.
Tom

Which shows you do not understand the issue.

At the time of their actions they were male presenting and not declared trans. Thus they should be treated as a male, not as a transwoman. This case is a strawman and shows how weak the anti-trans case actually is. Why don't they present a case of a female-presenting rapist in a women's room? Somehow I think the lack of presenting such a case means none exist.

Okay. Let's pretend what you're saying makes some sort of sense. There are many men in prison who have "discovered" their transgender identities while incarcerated, many of them quite recently. It seems that most of them have come to this realization only after learning of changes to the prison system that the ACLU pushed, which requires that prisons house inmates according to their claimed gender identity rather than their sex.

Would you be willing to take the stance that any male who was "male presenting" and had not previously "declared" a transgender identity at the time they committed their crimes be disallowed transfer to a women's prison? Would you consider their "apparent" gender identity to disqualify them from a transfer?

I could see how the many confusing issues with being trans, even and maybe especially before you realized that was what the issue was, might lead one to do a lot of things that are not well accepted and even criminal. I am not willing to totally write off the possibility of people truly coming to the realization or finally being in a place (and time) where this is recognized and they can get necessary treatment to address it. I'm not willing to totally discount the possibility of genuine realization while imprisoned. A lot of people do come out/transition in their middle years, after all.

But then, I haven't done a lot of reading about the issue of transwomen in prison.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Question for the class

Should a post op, top and bottom, trans woman be considered a woman who should be allow in women-only spaces?

Provided they behave, I have no objection.

The question I have is... how do we tell? And that's the problem. Short of asking any male-looking person to drop trou and prove they haven't got a willy, there's no way to tell.

And if I end up in a position of having to allow in any male who says they're trans, or allowing in no males at all, I'm going to have to land on none at all.

It's not my preference, but the good will of women has been abused and exploited, and I'm not standing for it any longer.

And what do you do with a male-looking woman?? It's been a problem for my SIL. She's cis-female but has on several occasions been thought to be a man trying to sneak into the women's room.

Do a double take and ask questions.

Seriously, I get that some women are "masculine". In my experience, however, it's more often men who mistake them for men that it is women. Women have been supportive and accepting of butch women pretty much forever. It's almost always been men who give butch women a hard time.

The response has been to try to keep her out. (Note, this is in China, not the US.) And it's women giving her a hard time.

And when my MIL needed assistance from my FIL they weren't accepted in either bathroom.

 

[Jarhyn]

They were not claiming trans identity at the time of the offense.

Hannah Tubbs is a male woman who sexually assaulted a female in the women's restroom of a family restaurant.

I don't care what she was wearing at the time.
Tom

Which shows you do not understand the issue.

At the time of their actions they were male presenting and not declared trans. Thus they should be treated as a male, not as a transwoman. This case is a strawman and shows how weak the anti-trans case actually is. Why don't they present a case of a female-presenting rapist in a women's room? Somehow I think the lack of presenting such a case means none exist.

Okay. Let's pretend what you're saying makes some sort of sense. There are many men in prison who have "discovered" their transgender identities while incarcerated, many of them quite recently. It seems that most of them have come to this realization only after learning of changes to the prison system that the ACLU pushed, which requires that prisons house inmates according to their claimed gender identity rather than their sex.

Would you be willing to take the stance that any male who was "male presenting" and had not previously "declared" a transgender identity at the time they committed their crimes be disallowed transfer to a women's prison? Would you consider their "apparent" gender identity to disqualify them from a transfer?

I could see how the many confusing issues with being trans, even and maybe especially before you realized that was what the issue was, might lead one to do a lot of things that are not well accepted and even criminal. I am not willing to totally write off the possibility of people truly coming to the realization or finally being in a place (and time) where this is recognized and they can get necessary treatment to address it. I'm not willing to totally discount the possibility of genuine realization while imprisoned. A lot of people do come out/transition in their middle years, after all.

But then, I haven't done a lot of reading about the issue of transwomen in prison.

The whole issue is a non-starter because as has been repeatedly brought up, there are perfectly functional solutions and the only reason Emily does not stand behind those solutions is that she apparently only brings up the problem as an opportunity to cast doubt on trans people, not to actually solve what she sees as problems.

The solution is to campaign against continuing to separate prisons by gender OR sex and instead separating prisons specifically on hormones and/or sperms.

If someone is either affected by testosterone (behaviorally modifying steroids) or produces sperms (which creates pregnancy risk, at that point there is NO legal argument at all relating to how someone feels, and the actual concerns are being directly addressed.

Someone is a "woman" after abusing women and getting put in prison?

That's nice, but let's see if they are willing to lose their testicles to leverage that claim.

Bad Faith will have a very hard time stepping past that boundary, whereas good faith will generally see no trouble yeeting the sperm factory.

You can likewise generally tell the difference between a bad faith transphobe and anyone who actually cares about the issue by asking them whether they would accept a compromise.

The readiness of most trans women I have met to get their testicles off is surprising.

The problem is caused by the law having been developed with a prescientific view of gender and sex.

And yet again none of this addresses the fact that women who rape women are blithely cast in with women.

This creates a barrier which social transition cannot cross, which is perfectly reasonable to emplace given current understanding and technology.

And rather than making declarations about what is or is not legally a "woman" it abstains entirely by not naming things in either side of the barrier in terms of "male" or "female", "man" or "woman". It just says "on one side of this barrier are people that can make someone capable of it pregnant and those who take a performance enhancing steroid by some mechanism, and on the other side are those who do neither of those things." It is real, scientific, and clear, sterile and immune to mere declarations or the ACLU saying "you can't call people that".

It's a categorization with real, physical basis, and it doesn't require being transphobic to implement.

Which is why the right is bringing up stories of problems rather than picking up the ready solutions that have been presented for over a decade: they don't want a solution they want an ENEMY to attack.

 

[Toni]

They were not claiming trans identity at the time of the offense.

Hannah Tubbs is a male woman who sexually assaulted a female in the women's restroom of a family restaurant.

I don't care what she was wearing at the time.
Tom

Which shows you do not understand the issue.

At the time of their actions they were male presenting and not declared trans. Thus they should be treated as a male, not as a transwoman. This case is a strawman and shows how weak the anti-trans case actually is. Why don't they present a case of a female-presenting rapist in a women's room? Somehow I think the lack of presenting such a case means none exist.

Okay. Let's pretend what you're saying makes some sort of sense. There are many men in prison who have "discovered" their transgender identities while incarcerated, many of them quite recently. It seems that most of them have come to this realization only after learning of changes to the prison system that the ACLU pushed, which requires that prisons house inmates according to their claimed gender identity rather than their sex.

Would you be willing to take the stance that any male who was "male presenting" and had not previously "declared" a transgender identity at the time they committed their crimes be disallowed transfer to a women's prison? Would you consider their "apparent" gender identity to disqualify them from a transfer?

I could see how the many confusing issues with being trans, even and maybe especially before you realized that was what the issue was, might lead one to do a lot of things that are not well accepted and even criminal. I am not willing to totally write off the possibility of people truly coming to the realization or finally being in a place (and time) where this is recognized and they can get necessary treatment to address it. I'm not willing to totally discount the possibility of genuine realization while imprisoned. A lot of people do come out/transition in their middle years, after all.

But then, I haven't done a lot of reading about the issue of transwomen in prison.

The whole issue is a non-starter because as has been repeatedly brought up, there are perfectly functional solutions and the only reason Emily does not stand behind those solutions is that she apparently only brings up the problem as an opportunity to cast doubt on trans people, not to actually solve what she sees as problems.

The solution is to campaign against continuing to separate prisons by gender OR sex and instead separating prisons specifically on hormones and/or sperms.

If someone is either affected by testosterone (behaviorally modifying steroids) or produces sperms (which creates pregnancy risk, at that point there is NO legal argument at all relating to how someone feels, and the actual concerns are being directly addressed.

Someone is a "woman" after abusing women and getting put in prison?

That's nice, but let's see if they are willing to lose their testicles to leverage that claim.

Bad Faith will have a very hard time stepping past that boundary, whereas good faith will generally see no trouble yeeting the sperm factory.

You can likewise generally tell the difference between a bad faith transphobe and anyone who actually cares about the issue by asking them whether they would accept a compromise.

The readiness of most trans women I have met to get their testicles off is surprising.

The problem is caused by the law having been developed with a prescientific view of gender and sex.

And yet again none of this addresses the fact that women who rape women are blithely cast in with women.

This creates a barrier which social transition cannot cross, which is perfectly reasonable to emplace given current understanding and technology.

And rather than making declarations about what is or is not legally a "woman" it abstains entirely by not naming things in either side of the barrier in terms of "male" or "female", "man" or "woman". It just says "on one side of this barrier are people that can make someone capable of it pregnant and those who take a performance enhancing steroid by some mechanism, and on the other side are those who do neither of those things." It is real, scientific, and clear, sterile and immune to mere declarations or the ACLU saying "you can't call people that".

It's a categorization with real, physical basis, and it doesn't require being transphobic to implement.

Which is why the right is bringing up stories of problems rather than picking up the ready solutions that have been presented for over a decade: they don't want a solution they want an ENEMY to attack.

I don't think that Emily is trying to cast doubt on transwomen. I have no idea how difficult a decision it is for a transwoman to give up testicles. I can only imagine that in a certain way, it's a bit like a woman needing to give up their breasts because of breast cancer or because they fear breast cancer. Some women like Angelina Jolie will pre-emptively give up their breasts because they have a strong and deadly family history of breast cancer and they know they carry certain genes. Some women will refuse a mastectomy, even if they've been told that a lumpectomy which would preserve the breast and/or chemo will not be sufficient. Some women will choose to die rather than undergo a mastectomy. So, I get it.

I agree that it is probably not too difficult to determine someone who is truly trans and someone who is faking it, over time. I am not sufficiently informed about the cases of individuals claiming to be trans after being convicted of crimes so I do not know the procedures in place for determining the sincerity of the person. Frankly, I don't know what, if any, precautions they take for the safety of other male prisoners if someone is in prison for raping a man or if a woman is convicted of raping a woman. The only transwoman I'm aware of who did time in prison is Chelsea Manning and was imprisoned when she received the surgery. I've briefly read the Wikipedia article on Manning and my biggest question is how the Army accepted her and why she was not discharged given her obvious unsuitability for military life and the non-stop harassment she endured. But given the Iraq war, I suppose that explains it. I'm sorry for the digression.

While I agree that given enough time, it is probably not impossible to determine whether or not someone is sincere about being trans, I also know that some people end up in prison because they are sociopaths who are extremely good at deceiving others.

In any case, in a locker room situation, the average woman or perhaps nearly any person would have a difficult--impossible! time ascertaining whether or not the individual they saw who had the physical appearance of a man was really trans and no threat. In fact, the appearance of an apparent male person in the women's locker room would be evidence that they did intend harm, in the minds of most women.

This would be disconcerting for almost any woman and could be extremely traumatizing for the victim of sexual assault--which would be at least 25% of the female population. The reaction of a ciswoman to an apparent male person in the women's locker room would also likely be traumatizing for the tranwoman, unless they were also a sociopath who intended to upset or frighten someone. I think that scenario would be extremely to vanishingly rare.

I'm not interested in seeing anybody victimized, traumatized, frightened, upset, excluded or shamed, much less attacked.

AFAIK, schools who would accommodate trans girls or trans boys would do a thorough screening process to determine whether it would be a safe and appropriate space for transindividuals to use facilities of their gender rather than their apparent sex at birth. Additionally, locker rooms, etc. are generally somewhat monitored, at least they were when I was a girl. There might be sufficient security that no one would be harmed. Then, too, it is almost certain that everyone will already know everyone and have known each other for some years so it would probably not be upsetting in the same way for most people. As a parent, I would still have some concerns for EVERYONE's safety and I'd investigate to ensure that it was indeed a safe and secure situation for EVERYBODY. Quietly, respectfully, inquire of the school to ensure that they were aware and had done whatever is appropriate to ensure everybody's safety.

However, women's locker rooms in gyms, etc. do not conduct such screening or investigation into the private lives of their clients. Moreover, women who use such facilities would be reacting in a moment, not quietly considering the possibilities or the probability that this individual was a trans woman. They would be reacting: fight/flight in the moment.

I think that universal stalls in all locker rooms, restrooms, etc. would eliminate most of this concern. But most women would be upset to see an apparent male person in the women's facilities as an immediate reaction.

I'm not sure how to avoid this. But I do know for certain that the solution is not telling women to just get over it or calling them names and making some pretty awful accusations against them.

 

[Jarhyn]

it's a bit like a woman needing to give up their breasts because of breast cancer or because they fear breast cancer

Not at all, really. Just, it's not "man" or "woman". It's not "has a penis".

It's "has the capability to make someone pregnant; has the automatic administration of hormonal anabolic steroids of a particular class."

Some solutions may have to be recognized for those who are on such steroids, but not capable of making people pregnant? It's a small group.

For people who can make people pregnant but are not men? Again a small group with a very low individual crime rate.

It says "this is a reality of the machine you are, and this is a consequence of that reality, so as to prevent the realization of physical or reproductive leverage."

That is reality and that is a real boundary on which to observe.

That's what this is about. People want to protect folks from people who have physical advantages in settings with high populations of violent people, and to protect them from being forcibly impregnated.

Everything else past that is pretty clearly just sexism. Nobody seems to want to look straight at it but there it is.

Those are the actual realities, the things that can be protected or should.

At the end of the day I don't give a fuck what is in someone's brainpan. That doesn't take away the power to make someone pregnant. We already agree that nobody anywhere deserves power over someone else's pregnancy. But decisions about maintaining the power to make someone else pregnant in the presence of a reality where you are asking to be housed with such people in a captive environment is unacceptable.

I don't need to call anyone a woman or man in that recognition.

The same goes for steroid use. Someone taking a steroid in an environment where the only viable recreation is lifting weights and being social with people who often irrationally hate or abuse others is also a pretty big thing.

Again, I don't need to call people men or women to recognize that reality.

Only one of these things is an issue in sports, and again, I don't think what is going on with someone's brain ought to define that.

It starts with recognizing that the boundaries are not "man" or "woman", but against bad faith attempts at breaking beyond the recognition of sperms, and hormonal competitive advantage.

I expect people to compete whose competition is equally capable of and forgiving of some level of violent contact. this is the thing I wish as a consumer of sports to see. Nothing less interests me but fair and equal competition. I don't give a shit about how men represent men or women represent women. I care about who represents their own individual body best, when caring about sports at all.

I care not for the fear of a penis but the reality and chemical behavior of sperms, and of steroids in all near-human biology.

My tell on Emily is that she screams bloody murder when I bring this up and says I deny science. "Chemical behavior of sperms and of steroids in near-human biology".

Does that sound like a denial to you, or anyone, of science?

We all recognize the chemical effect of sperms.

We all recognize the chemical effects of steroids.

We can measure both and do for a great many people, although some things are more assured than others to prevent their function.

It is something that cannot and would not generally be done except by someone sincere in their self-direction and identity, but it doesn't judge the sincerity of that identity, only the material reality of the power they wield. It is one that does not ask for trust or offer betrayal of trust in that way, and it can and should be done as such.

The only outcome otherwise is showing or declaring betrayal of trust, in people's transitions and identities.

This is something that I as a gender-nonconformist would demand of other gender non-conformists. I think it's reasonable, a place where peace can be found.

That people don't is because they don't really want peace.

To me "sex" and "gender" are religions, worshipping imaginary things and grasping at whole ideas that really just fall apart when you grip them too tight.

Government should treat it as such and not attempt to define religious concepts but to create concepts which actually reflect reality.

Yes, the massive sophistries that evolve around sex and gender are both ridiculous.

There are no real requirements about it and it's all quite silly for as strongly as people find themselves believing about it.

The realities are "sperms and steroids" as far as what people have any right to continue fearing.

That and I guess forcing particular body developments on young people.

 

[Toni]

Please note: I said: a bit, not completely analogous. Women who have mastectomies are also almost certainly undergoing a chemically induced menopause. Plus chemo. If young enough to still have children, then, yes, that's a huge concern: will the chemo render them unable to bear children? Will the increase and change in hormones to support a pregnancy risk their lives? And of course, the ability to breast feed is lost. For many/most women, having breasts is a physical display of their femininity, their sexuality, their sexiness, their attractiveness. Think of how many women get breast enhancements. Post mastectomy: reconstructive surgery.

A lot of women who have had mastectomies do not want to undress in front of anyone else, including women. They may avoid swimming, certain types of clothing, a lot of activities. For some, treatment for breast cancer removes their ability to enjoy sex, because of the damage done by chemo, and the change in hormones as many undergo various therapies to suppress estrogen.

And all of this is a matter of life and death.

I understand and respect that you have your own take on life and bodies and how people live together and that it is very different than mine or most people's.

I understand and respect your views with regards to gender and sex. I don't see it in the same way, so my take is somewhat different than yours.

Again, my position is that I want everyone to be able to feel safe and secure and to BE safe and secure. Everybody means everybody, although violent people should probably best be kept to themselves.

 

[Oleg]

For people who can make people pregnant but are not men?

Only males can impregnate. FFS.

 

[Emily Lake]

I don't see the question as difficult.

Don't go back to that place. If your religion makes you uncomfortable under certain circumstances, avoid those circumstances. Don't expect the rest of us to change to suit you and your religious stuff.

You don't have an entitlement to go wherever you went and expect everyone else to do as you wish.
Tom

Hold on a moment... Women are being asked to change to suit some males and their beliefs. Why should this woman be expected to not participate in public life at all because of some few males?

I mean... let's talk about an "entitlement to go wherever you want and expect everyone else to do as you wish" here. This is an orthodox religious woman who cannot now use female-only spaces because there might be a male in them.

 

[Emily Lake]

I could see how the many confusing issues with being trans, even and maybe especially before you realized that was what the issue was, might lead one to do a lot of things that are not well accepted and even criminal. I am not willing to totally write off the possibility of people truly coming to the realization or finally being in a place (and time) where this is recognized and they can get necessary treatment to address it. I'm not willing to totally discount the possibility of genuine realization while imprisoned. A lot of people do come out/transition in their middle years, after all.

But then, I haven't done a lot of reading about the issue of transwomen in prison.

Yeah, I'm about to be unpopular. That's okay.

First off, I don't think that being confused about one's gender identity would lead someone to commit rape or murder. I don't buy it, and I don't even feel a little bit bad about not buying it. FFS, people are all kinds of confused about their sexuality when they're younger... and somehow "I didn't realize I was a lesbian" has never been an acceptable excuse for murder. So no. Flat out No.

Secondly... the "lots of people" who come out as trans in their middle years are almost exclusively autogynephiles. It's a fairly well known escalation from cross-dressing for men who get sexual pleasure out of envisioning themselves as women. It remains a subcategory under the DSM-5 diagnosis of transvestic fetishism, and it's a sexual paraphilia.

Males who do NOT have a sexual fetish are almost entirely those who identified as the opposite sex from a very young age, almost always well before the onset of puberty.

 

[Emily Lake]

The response has been to try to keep her out. (Note, this is in China, not the US.) And it's women giving her a hard time.

And when my MIL needed assistance from my FIL they weren't accepted in either bathroom.

You've brought your SIL up multiple times... and all those times you've been glossing over that this is in China? You didn't think that might have a bearing on her treatment? China has VERY different social norms than the US. This isn't a reasonable comparison, Loren, and you ought to have known better.