[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by JoshBB

We are talking gender here. The UK officially recognises two, and so we are not having a 'one prison per person' type situation here. That is quite an exaggeration.

Not really. He "says" he's woman but his legal status is that of a man.

If they were serious you'd think they'd have taken steps to be recognised as their chosen gender? No.

If it was a case of wanting a different name, you wouldn't expect to be officially recognised by your chosen nickname in any court/prison/legal matter unless you'd taken steps to officially change the name on your records?

In a perfect world we could take people at face value, but then that opens up a can of worms that's difficult to close.

[JoshBB]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Not really. He "says" he's woman but his legal status is that of a man.

If they were serious you'd think they'd have taken steps to be recognised as their chosen gender? No.

If it was a case of wanting a different name, you wouldn't expect to be officially recognised by your chosen nickname in any court/prison/legal matter unless you'd taken steps to officially change the name on your records?

In a perfect world we could take people at face value, but then that opens up a can of worms that's difficult to close.

She says she is a woman, and the legal status clearly needs changing. We can't just stick our heads in the sand and ignore their clear gender identity for the sake of what's written on paper. You seem to care more for the logistics of things than the people actually involved. I recognise that we cannot assume a gender and that we must seek their legal recognition. But when it has been brought up that said document is wrong, we must correct it before putting someone into an environment where they will not be comfortable.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by JoshBB

She says she is a woman, and the legal status clearly needs changing. We can't just stick our heads in the sand and ignore their clear gender identity for the sake of what's written on paper. You seem to care more for the logistics of things than the people actually involved. I recognise that we cannot assume a gender and that we must seek their legal recognition. But when it has been brought up that said document is wrong, we must correct it before putting someone into an environment where they will not be comfortable.

Well when it comes to a person stating outright they're one thing and their legal status is another it begs the question why they didn't care enough to have it changed? If they feel so strongly that when it comes to being placed into a situation where people are grouped by gender, why not help themselves by changing it and stop them being grouped with the wrong people?

Then if they decide they will allow cases like this through and transfer them you open a can of worms for other people (who won't all be genuine) contradicting their legal information and "saying" it's different without it having been changed.

A line needs to be drawn.

You then have the other problem of people who feel they identify as both or neither genders or an entirely different gender entirely (You know because male and female isn't enough?)? Are we opening a third prison for them? As Kizzy said earlier, is it one rule for one and another for the rest?

[JoshBB]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Well when it comes to a person stating outright they're one thing and their legal status is another it begs the question why they didn't care enough to have it changed? If they feel so strongly that when it comes to being placed into a situation where people are grouped by gender, why not help themselves by changing it and stop them being grouped with the wrong people?

Then if they decide they will allow cases like this through and transfer them you open a can of worms for other people (who won't all be genuine) contradicting their legal information and "saying" it's different without it having been changed.

A line needs to be drawn.

You then have the other problem of people who feel they identify as both or neither genders or an entirely different gender entirely (You know because male and female isn't enough?)? Are we opening a third prison for them? As Kizzy said earlier, is it one rule for one and another for the rest?

To your first post, I will simply refer to my previous points because I feel I've explained my view enough here. Their legal status is incorrect, and during the court they should have looked into correcting it before sending them to a male prison where they will face harassment and suicidal thoughts. It may also be worth noting that changing one's legal documents is a process that takes time, and how long this person has been 'out' as transgender is unknown from this article. I am making the assumption that they have not managed to have their legal status changed and there is no malicious intent here, along with the 'innocent until proven guilty' principle embodied within the law. We cannot draw assumptions like this without proper evidence to suggest as such.

In regards to your 'can of worms' comment, I just simply disagree. People can claim a different legal gender if they really want, but what is the result? A cisgender woman gets to go into a male prison? So what? Stupid them for attempting to exploit the system, they will be removed from the prison with time and probably convicted of fraud in said scenario.

For those outside the two gender 'norms', male and female, it would depend on the person's wishes and how the court feels appropriate. It may be wise to look into designating a few prisons (only a few) to those who identify as gender-neutral, genderqueer, or anything else not legally recognised. I'm not sure on this, but I believe a person can specify their gender as 'other' in many countries, and that could work here I think. There would not need to be many of these, since assuming 5% of the population commits a crime.. we could make an assumption that 5% of the non-binary population also commit crimes. And given the very small minority that they are, it would be very little people, if any. LGBT+ do tend to have lower crime rates anyway.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by JoshBB

To your first post, I will simply refer to my previous points because I feel I've explained my view enough here. Their legal status is incorrect, and during the court they should have looked into correcting it before sending them to a male prison where they will face harassment and suicidal thoughts. It may also be worth noting that changing one's legal documents is a process that takes time, and how long this person has been 'out' as transgender is unknown from this article. I am making the assumption that they have not managed to have their legal status changed and there is no malicious intent here, along with the 'innocent until proven guilty' principle embodied within the law. We cannot draw assumptions like this without proper evidence to suggest as such.

Yes, it takes time. However, if they were in the process of this there would be a record and a very good case for them being moved to the prison of their choice even if the paperwork hadn't been finalised.

Originally Posted by JoshBB

We cannot draw assumptions like this without proper evidence to suggest as such.

Which is the exact basis of my point. We can't simply take people at face value. Fantastic if we could. But the world doesn't work that way.

Originally Posted by JoshBB

In regards to your 'can of worms' comment, I just simply disagree. People can claim a different legal gender if they really want, but what is the result? A cisgender woman gets to go into a male prison? So what? Stupid them for attempting to exploit the system, they will be removed from the prison with time and probably convicted of fraud in said scenario.

Well, you've actually just provided an example of a can of worms.

Never mind the prisoner themselves, what about the the entire wing full of women who don't want to share facilities with a man? They don't get their wish but this person claiming to be a woman in a man's body does?

Also, convicted of fraud on what grounds? If you've given people the right to say "My documents are wrong, I'm actually [insert whatever here]" and that's it then there are no grounds for fraud in this bizarre case. We're not talking about proving someone lied about a qualification on their CV, we're talking about someone's feelings and state of mind.

Originally Posted by JoshBB

For those outside the two gender 'norms', male and female, it would depend on the person's wishes and how the court feels appropriate. It may be wise to look into designating a few prisons (only a few) to those who identify as gender-neutral, genderqueer, or anything else not legally recognised. I'm not sure on this, but I believe a person can specify their gender as 'other' in many countries, and that could work here I think. There would not need to be many of these, since assuming 5% of the population commits a crime.. we could make an assumption that 5% of the non-binary population also commit crimes. And given the very small minority that they are, it would be very little people, if any. LGBT+ do tend to have lower crime rates anyway.

And to this, I have the same reaction I had to them adding about 150 new genders to the list on Facebook.......