This week in trans: extra prison time possible for misgendering

[laughing dog]

I also reject the implication that it is right and proper to enforce a State-mandated religion on prisoners. That it is somehow okay, as long as 'regular citizens' are not subject to it.

What is this mumbo-jumbo about State-mandated religion?
“using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour” .

I didn't ask that question nor did I imply that I would be punished as a non-prisoner by a prison system.

Why ask “So, the fact that the government can punish me (in Australia, in Canada, now the UK) for 'misgendering' somebody is not something I should fear? I should mutter the prayers of the State-mandated religion and be thankful for the opportunity?” in your OP about a prison rule. It is a reasonable inference,

How you could draw that conclusion from what I've written I'm sure I do not know.

I realize that logic is difficult. Prison is different that the free world. Crowd control is more difficult since the population is more prone to violence. Reducing such violence via a “a prison rule against “using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour” makes sense.

Do you have a problem with that specific rule or simply its use in this situation? Abstracting from the small-minded bigotry in the OP, can you not see that the prison might actually have a better handle of the situation there and how to deal with it than you do?

'Misgendering' as punishable offense in prison is simply another manifestation of exactly how widespread gender ideology has permeated culture and politics.

Maybe. Or maybe it is simply an attempt to deal with a specific problem within the prison.

There are no longer single-sex wards in the NHS in the UK, because trans women are women. I am not likely to be in a female-only hospital ward as a patient (unless somebody has made an egregious mistake, or I decide to masquerade as a woman and utter the words 'I am a woman'). That doesn't stop me from feeling concern for the women that are.

Too bad your concern does not extend to the transgender women prisoners.

 

[Metaphor]

“using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour” .

So, you believe that calling biological males 'he' is 'threatening, abusive, or insulting'?

Moreover, you see no problem with the State threatening you with further imprisonment as somehow NOT threatening?

Why ask “So, the fact that the government can punish me (in Australia, in Canada, now the UK) for 'misgendering' somebody is not something I should fear? I should mutter the prayers of the State-mandated religion and be thankful for the opportunity?” in your OP about a prison rule. It is a reasonable inference,

This rule reflects the pervasive influence of gender-dogma in wider society.

I realize that logic is difficult. Prison is different that the free world. Crowd control is more difficult since the population is more prone to violence. Reducing such violence via a “a prison rule against “using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour” makes sense.

So, you believe that calling biological males 'he' is 'threatening, abusive, or insulting', and that this behaviour will cause transwomen to become violent?

Do you have a problem with that specific rule or simply its use in this situation? Abstracting from the small-minded bigotry in the OP, can you not see that the prison might actually have a better handle of the situation there and how to deal with it than you do?

I have a problem with the State punishing people for calling biological males 'he'.

Prisons proved they have no grasp whatsoever on 'the situation' when they started housing male prisoners in the female estate.

Maybe. Or maybe it is simply an attempt to deal with a specific problem within the prison.

Yes. Trans ideologists have defined 'misgendering' as a problem, and they have influenced the culture enough that 'State punishment' is seen as 'a solution'.

Too bad your concern does not extend to the transgender women prisoners.

I am not concerned about people being "misgendered", no matter whether they are trans or not. I am concerned about single-sex spaces being overthrown to appease biological males who need validation as something they are not.

 

[Toni]

It is common in prison for prisoners to be punished for violating prison rules. These rules are vastly different than rules that apply to persons living outside of jail or prison settings: when you can eat, what you can eat, when you can shower, etc. Lots of things people not incarcerated take for granted are very, very closely controlled in a prison setting. Sometimes that punishment can include having time added onto your sentence.

Generally speaking, I'm not in favor of extending prison sentences for anything other than serious violent behavior.Caveat: I've never worked in a prison or jail setting.

Have you ever answered a question that I've asked you?

Do you think it is okay for the State to punish people for 'misgendering'?

Transgender prisoners in prison populations face an increased rate of assault, rape, etc. from other inmates and from prison personnel. Misgendering prisoners can be a way of harming transgender prisoners, isolating them and making them more vulnerable to such threats as well as increasing their risk for mental health crises.

Have you ever answered a question that I've asked you?

Do you think it is okay for the State to punish people for 'misgendering'?

See the above bolded part.

 

[laughing dog]

So, you believe that calling biological males 'he' is 'threatening, abusive, or insulting'?

It doesn't matter what I or you think - it matters what the prisoners think and how they react. Apparently, it seems they do think it "threatening, abusive or insulting".

Moreover, you see no problem with the State threatening you with further imprisonment as somehow NOT threatening?

I am not in prison, so that threat is non-existent.

This rule reflects the pervasive influence of gender-dogma in wider society.

Maybe, or as I pointed out, it does not.

So, you believe that calling biological males 'he' is 'threatening, abusive, or insulting', and that this behaviour will cause transwomen to become violent?

See my answer above.

I have a problem with the State punishing people for calling biological males 'he'.

So, you have no problem with the rule in general, just in this specific case?

Prisons proved they have no grasp whatsoever on 'the situation' when they started housing male prisoners in the female estate.

When did you become an expert on prisons?

Yes. Trans ideologists have defined 'misgendering' as a problem, and they have influenced the culture enough that 'State punishment' is seen as 'a solution'.

That is a reactionary explanation. A less reactionary explanation is that it is possible that inmates are deliberately baiting transwomen by calling them "he" in order to provoke violence.

I am not concerned about people being "misgendered", no matter whether they are trans or not. I am concerned about single-sex spaces being overthrown to appease biological males who need validation as something they are not.

I truly feel sorry for anyone who seriously expresses such hateful nonsense.

 

[Metaphor]

Have you ever answered a question that I've asked you?

Do you think it is okay for the State to punish people for 'misgendering'?




Have you ever answered a question that I've asked you?

Do you think it is okay for the State to punish people for 'misgendering'?

See the above bolded part.

You did not answer my question. I did not ask "should prison sentences be extended for anything other than serious violent behaviour"? I asked:

Do you think it is okay for the State to punish people for 'misgendering'?

If you want to answer that question, please do so. If you do not, at least have the courtesy of not pretending you have.

 

[Metaphor]

It doesn't matter what I or you think - it matters what the prisoners in think and how they react. Apparently, it seems they do think it "threatening, abusive or insulting".

First, I do not know that any prisoner was consulted about whether such a thing is 'threatening, abusive or insulting'. But somebody somewhere having the opinion that a behaviour 'threatening, abusive or insulting' does not mean it is reasonable thing to say that the behaviour is actually any of those things.

I am not in prison, so that threat is non-existent.

So....you are confident that you will never be imprisoned, and you are saying you do not care what happens to imprisoned people?

So, you have no problem with the rule in general, just in this specific case?

I do not necessarily have a problem with a proscription on 'threatening, abusive or insulting' words. I categorically rule out that calling a biological male 'he' is threatening, abusive, or insulting.

When did you become an expert on prisons?

I didn't.

That is a reactionary explanation. A less reactionary explanation is that it is possible that inmates are deliberately baiting transwomen by calling them "he" in order to provoke violence.

Violent people are responsible for their own violence.

I truly feel sorry for anyone who seriously expresses such hateful nonsense.

It is not hate to acknowledge reality, though it is certainly unsavoury to attempt to gaslight people who do.

 

[laughing dog]

First, I do not know that any prisoner was consulted about whether such a thing is 'threatening, abusive or insulting' But somebody somewhere having the opinion that a behaviour 'threatening, abusive or insulting' does not mean it is reasonable thing to say that the behaviour is actually any of those things.

You have no idea whether there is a problem. But if there is a problem, then you think it is not a problem in the abstract. Do you have any disinterested evidence that the prison authorities are just making this stuff up?

So....you are confident that you will never be imprisoned, and you are saying you do not care what happens to imprisoned people?

The answer to the first part is no and the answer to the second part is no.

I do not necessarily have a problem with a proscription on 'threatening, abusive or insulting' words. I categorically rule out that calling a biological male 'he' is threatening, abusive, or insulting.

And for some reason, you are incapable of understanding that someone else might find it insulting or abusive?

I didn't.

Since you acknowledge you are not expert on prisons, you might understand why some readers might conclude your opinions are risible?

Violent people are responsible for their own violence.

I am sure that is a comforting thought to those harmed by such violence.

It is not hate to acknowledge reality, though it is certainly unsavoury to attempt to gaslight people who do.

That assumes you actually acknowledged reality. But the manner in which one acknowledges reality can be hateful.

 

[Metaphor]

You have no idea whether there is a problem. But if there is a problem, then you think it is not a problem in the abstract. Do you have any disinterested evidence that the prison authorities are just making this stuff up?

Making what up? The OP quotes the article in full. As to whether there was some kind of 'problem' of transwomen being 'bullied' by being called 'he', the article is silent. It does not cite any 'triggering' incidents, but rather it seems to be related to legislation.

The punishment warning was sounded by Justice Minister Lord Wolfson of Tredegar QC, who said: “Incidents where a prisoner uses incorrect pronouns for another prisoner will be considered on a case-by-case basis, in line with the Prisoner Discipline Procedures policy and the Prison Rules.
“Prisoners may sometimes make an honest mistake in relation to pronouns and disciplinary action would not usually be appropriate in those circumstances. However, if an officer deems it appropriate to place a prisoner on report, the rule against ‘using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour’ – Prison Rule 51(20) – may apply.
“The adjudicator will weigh each incident on its own merits. The policy stipulates that an offence motivated by another person’s protected characteristic(s) under the Equality Act 2010 is an aggravating factor and may merit referral to an Independent Adjudicator.”

The answer to the first part is no and the answer to the second part is no.

Good. I care what happens to imprisoned people, and that includes imprisoned women who refuse to participate in State-mandated religion.

And for some reason, you are incapable of understanding that someone else might find it insulting or abusive?

I believe that someone else might find it so, but I find that somebody thinking calling a biological male 'he' to be 'threatening, abusive, or insulting' is not a reasonable thing to respect.

Since you acknowledge you are not expert on prisons, you might understand why some readers might conclude your opinions are risible?

I'm 'not an expert' in countless things, as are you. But I do not automatically accept or reject an argument based on the perceived 'expertise' of the person who puts forward that argument. To do so would be fallacious.

But if this is your roundabout way of saying "I find non-experts talking about things risible", then okay. You find it risible.

I am sure that is a comforting thought to those harmed by such violence.

It is not meant to be a comforting thought.

That assumes you actually acknowledged reality. But the manner in which one acknowledges reality can be hateful.

So... "acknowledging reality in a way laughing dog considers hateful should be a punishable by the State"?

 

[Arctish]

Metaphor, please define 'gender' as you're using it in this thread.

 

[Metaphor]

Metaphor, please define 'gender' as you're using it in this thread.

"Gender identity" is a thought in a person's head. The thought is about their sex, or the conflict between their sex and their desired sex (which can include states that are not sexes a mammal can have).

Some people have gender identities. Some people believe "gender identity" should replace (or have primacy over) the category "sex", for all legal, social, and sexual purposes.

 

[DrZoidberg]

https://insidetime.org/women-face-punishment-for-using-wrong-pronouns/

Women prisoners who call transgender prisoners by the wrong pronoun could be punished with time added on to their sentence, the Government has warned.

Deliberately referring to a trans woman as “he” or “him” may be treated as breaching a prison rule against “using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour” and could be brought before an Independent Adjudicator – a visiting judge – who has the power to award added days.

The threat will fuel a debate over the policy of holding male-to-female transgender prisoners in women’s jails. In 2019 there were 34 transgender women who were still legally male detained at the 12 women’s prisons in England and Wales.

The punishment warning was sounded by Justice Minister Lord Wolfson of Tredegar QC, who said: “Incidents where a prisoner uses incorrect pronouns for another prisoner will be considered on a case-by-case basis, in line with the Prisoner Discipline Procedures policy and the Prison Rules.
“Prisoners may sometimes make an honest mistake in relation to pronouns and disciplinary action would not usually be appropriate in those circumstances. However, if an officer deems it appropriate to place a prisoner on report, the rule against ‘using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour’ – Prison Rule 51(20) – may apply.
“The adjudicator will weigh each incident on its own merits. The policy stipulates that an offence motivated by another person’s protected characteristic(s) under the Equality Act 2010 is an aggravating factor and may merit referral to an Independent Adjudicator.”
Official guidelines state that disciplinary cases are normally heard by a prison governor, and are only referred to an Independent Adjudicator where there is the possibility of days being added on to the sentence – which is the most severe punishment available.

Under Prison Service policy, any prisoner who has legally changed their gender, and been granted a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) to prove it, will automatically be sent to a jail appropriate to their new gender. A prisoner who identifies as the opposite sex but does not have a GRC will initially go a prison for their old, legally-recognised gender, but may later move between the male and female estates following a case-by-case assessment. This summer the High Court upheld the policy, dismissing a claim from a female prisoner that it placed her at risk to be detained with fellow prisoners who were still biologically male.

Lord Wolfson added: “The Ministry of Justice and Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service are committed to advancing equality, eliminating discrimination, harassment and victimisation (including based on someone’s religion or belief, or gender reassignment status, as defined in sections 7 and 10 of the Equality Act 2010) … As part of this, we ensure that all prisoners are treated fairly and in a way that respects their rights, and encourage them to act in a way that is respectful and considerate of others.”

Wow. That's forcing liberal values onto people in a democratic country. That's pretty fucked.

 

[Metaphor]

https://insidetime.org/women-face-punishment-for-using-wrong-pronouns/

Women prisoners who call transgender prisoners by the wrong pronoun could be punished with time added on to their sentence, the Government has warned.

Deliberately referring to a trans woman as “he” or “him” may be treated as breaching a prison rule against “using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour” and could be brought before an Independent Adjudicator – a visiting judge – who has the power to award added days.

The threat will fuel a debate over the policy of holding male-to-female transgender prisoners in women’s jails. In 2019 there were 34 transgender women who were still legally male detained at the 12 women’s prisons in England and Wales.

The punishment warning was sounded by Justice Minister Lord Wolfson of Tredegar QC, who said: “Incidents where a prisoner uses incorrect pronouns for another prisoner will be considered on a case-by-case basis, in line with the Prisoner Discipline Procedures policy and the Prison Rules.
“Prisoners may sometimes make an honest mistake in relation to pronouns and disciplinary action would not usually be appropriate in those circumstances. However, if an officer deems it appropriate to place a prisoner on report, the rule against ‘using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour’ – Prison Rule 51(20) – may apply.
“The adjudicator will weigh each incident on its own merits. The policy stipulates that an offence motivated by another person’s protected characteristic(s) under the Equality Act 2010 is an aggravating factor and may merit referral to an Independent Adjudicator.”
Official guidelines state that disciplinary cases are normally heard by a prison governor, and are only referred to an Independent Adjudicator where there is the possibility of days being added on to the sentence – which is the most severe punishment available.

Under Prison Service policy, any prisoner who has legally changed their gender, and been granted a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) to prove it, will automatically be sent to a jail appropriate to their new gender. A prisoner who identifies as the opposite sex but does not have a GRC will initially go a prison for their old, legally-recognised gender, but may later move between the male and female estates following a case-by-case assessment. This summer the High Court upheld the policy, dismissing a claim from a female prisoner that it placed her at risk to be detained with fellow prisoners who were still biologically male.

Lord Wolfson added: “The Ministry of Justice and Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service are committed to advancing equality, eliminating discrimination, harassment and victimisation (including based on someone’s religion or belief, or gender reassignment status, as defined in sections 7 and 10 of the Equality Act 2010) … As part of this, we ensure that all prisoners are treated fairly and in a way that respects their rights, and encourage them to act in a way that is respectful and considerate of others.”

Wow. That's forcing liberal values onto people in a democratic country. That's pretty fucked.

I think it depends on what you think 'liberal' is.

Forcing people to practise the State-mandated religion is not 'liberal' to me.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Wow. That's forcing liberal values onto people in a democratic country. That's pretty fucked.

I think it depends on what you think 'liberal' is.

Forcing people to practise the State-mandated religion is not 'liberal' to me.

Me neither. But words change meaning depending on usage. It's the same deal with "progressive". That's taken on a distinctive political meaning quite devoid from the original meaning.

But I can't see how this church of woke can keep going. It's now swerved into "people's court" territory. Buckle up for the next step, book burning. I'm looking forward to the next edition of the complete works of Shakespeare written in gender neutral language and with racial diversity. Why not a Chinese Shylock?

 

[Metaphor]

Wow. That's forcing liberal values onto people in a democratic country. That's pretty fucked.

I think it depends on what you think 'liberal' is.

Forcing people to practise the State-mandated religion is not 'liberal' to me.

Me neither. But words change meaning depending on usage. It's the same deal with "progressive". That's taken on a distinctive political meaning quite devoid from the original meaning.

But I can't see how this church of woke can keep going. It's now swerved into "people's court" territory. Buckle up for the next step, book burning. I'm looking forward to the next edition of the complete works of Shakespeare written in gender neutral language and with racial diversity. Why not a Chinese Shylock?

"Next" step? In 2019, Canada destroyed 4700 books in a 'flame purification ceremony'. https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/p...g/news-story/7f83c6b893908b7df9d1cb8fa4adb383

When you speculate that the Church of Woke can't keep going, I don't know what you are basing that on. I witness widespread and increasing cultural and political hegemony. I would have thought that Wokeness train had already well passed the "too ridiculous to continue" stop. Only it didn't stop there.

 

[Arctish]

Metaphor, please define 'gender' as you're using it in this thread.

"Gender identity" is a thought in a person's head. The thought is about their sex, or the conflict between their sex and their desired sex (which can include states that are not sexes a mammal can have).

Some people have gender identities. Some people believe "gender identity" should replace (or have primacy over) the category "sex", for all legal, social, and sexual purposes.

So when you misgender someone, you are denying their identity?

 

[Metaphor]

Metaphor, please define 'gender' as you're using it in this thread.

"Gender identity" is a thought in a person's head. The thought is about their sex, or the conflict between their sex and their desired sex (which can include states that are not sexes a mammal can have).

Some people have gender identities. Some people believe "gender identity" should replace (or have primacy over) the category "sex", for all legal, social, and sexual purposes.

So when you misgender someone, you are denying their identity?

No. I cannot "misgender" somebody, because I do not reference a person's gender (which I do not enquire about). When I use pronouns, it is a reference to a person's sex.

 

[Arctish]

But the offense described in the OP, the one you think shouldn't be an offense at all, is the act of denying someone's identity?

 

[Metaphor]

But the offense described in the OP, the one you think shouldn't be an offense at all, is the act of denying someone's identity?

Calling a biological male 'he' is not 'misgendering', nor is it 'abusive, threatening, or harassing'.

Pronouns do not refer to someone's identity. They have never done so. Many languages across many centuries have used pronouns and none of them depended on the 'gender identity' of anybody. They refer to the sex of that person. I have never enquired about somebody's gender before using pronouns for them, because their gender identity is entirely irrelevant. I do not enquire about their star sign, either.

But, even if, in this Brave New World, pronouns can be as infinite as 'gender identity', and pronouns are instead references to 'gender identity', 'misgendering' ought not be punished by the State.

 

[Jarhyn]

So they made it illegal to publicly out inmates in a setting well known for containing people who take violent tendencies too hard and also known for containing people who place irrational weight on racial, cultural, or gonadal minutae.

I wonder what's next, metaphor complaining that they made it illegal to reveal the identity of child victims of sexual assault? That's "outlawing the 'truth'" too. And maybe complaining on the legality of revealing the identity of someone in witness protection?

[Sarcasm]It's not like trans prisoners ever get murdered you know...[/Sarcasm]

 

[Metaphor]

So they made it illegal to publicly out inmates

They did not do that, but of course, we can't blame Jarhyn for getting it wrong. He has me on ignore but cannot resist commenting on every single thread I start.

Jarhyn also believes that noticing that transwomen are obviously men is 'outing' them. Nobody anywhere would know that a person who has gone through a male puberty and has a cock and balls wasn't born male unless somebody 'outs' him.

in a setting well known for containing people who take violent tendencies too hard

Most female prisoners in the women's estate are there for non-violent offenses.

We don't know what male prisoners in the women's estate are there for, since trans ideologists like Jarhyn do not approve of collecting data on such things.

and also known for containing people who place irrational weight on racial, cultural, or gonadal minutae.

Jarhyn once again forgetting how to human, and telling women that they aren't humaning right.

I wonder what's next, metaphor complaining that they made it illegal to reveal the identity of child victims of sexual assault? That's "outlawing the 'truth'" too. And maybe complaining on the legality of revealing the identity of someone in witness protection?

[Sarcasm]It's not like trans prisoners ever get murdered you know...[/Sarcasm]

This throwaway comment will be followed up with statistics on exactly how many transwomen were murdered while they were in the female estate, and how these murders were facilitated by women recognising the biological sex of the transwomen.