If we're going to divide prison populations up by their ability to inflict physical harm, surely that should be the standard?
Currently we divide prison populations by biological gender and judgment on harm. The question put forth is should the biological gender factor be removed from that equation???
In general policy I would say no, on a individual request for transfer I would think the judgment of harm could be a standard. I assume here that harm is not limited to only physical harm but all its nuances in which case biology - ability, strength, mental... - biological factors that are not dependent on biological gender (having a penis or not).
What is required then is not a All or Nothing policy but one in which those chosen to deal with the individual request are skilled at discernment.
The issue which I think Pete points out is that dialog when biology and biological gender is needed for such discernment is silenced out of the gate as being labeled transphobic and therefore not allowed.
This demand of silence comes from a small but loud segment on the left to which the leaders of the left don't confront for a verity of reasons. Most people seen to 'know' this but are pretending not to know it to protect the tribe (of course the same thing is happening on the right if differently).
Instead of our leaders sitting down and working on the skills of discernment handling such issues need, they are pretending not to know what they know instead focused on this new social virtual world, that few understand and overly dependent on algorithms mistaken for thinking/reasoning, where the voices of a minority have a greater influence then they should be given.
Have I followed the arguments?
Show Posts
of course 'Not asleep' is also a metaphor