Evan Urquhart

I'm not the one in error and I'm not under any moral obligation to give up my personal boundaries to accommodate men's feelings. Ever. Please get that idea out of your head right now. Women are not obliged to pander to men as a condition of entry to "not a bigot" status.

You've lost me.

You're lost where, exactly? This is the same argument I had with the chap whose thread I linked earlier. "Accept any man who claims trans identity, whatever the risk to yourself if you do, and shut up about boundaries." No. And I'm not a bad person for saying no.

That's where I got lost- I don't recall saying anything like that? I asked- or meant to ask- how acceptance leads to rape, and whether you'd agree that rape, harassment, assault, etc are crimes regardless of the sex (or gender) of the rapist.

Ah, sorry. Right, acceptance led to the Karen White and Illinous rape cases. In both instances the women who complained were called transphobic for complaining. Why did it happen? Because they were both accepted without exception as women rather than the rapist men they are.

Safeguarding demands that men are kept separate from women. This was not done. I accept that trans prisoners need protection. The answer is a wing of their own, away from potential victims.

The idea that gender isn't an issue here is a red herring. Men should never be locked up or confined in any way with vulnerable women, however they identify.

You know that cis women sexually assault other cis women in prison, in much larger numbers, I assume? And that lesbians sexually assault their partners at a similar rate to men in heterosexual couples?