You don't seem to have considered the possibility that those "trans" prisoners may not actually be "trans" (which I won't attempt to define here). They may not sincerely believe they are women, they may merely see a chance of relocation to a women's prison which will a) reduce the likelihood and severity of physical assault by other pris…
You don't seem to have considered the possibility that those "trans" prisoners may not actually be "trans" (which I won't attempt to define here). They may not sincerely believe they are women, they may merely see a chance of relocation to a women's prison which will a) reduce the likelihood and severity of physical assault by other prisoners and b) provide opportunities for further sexual offending.
It's a crazy thought, I know, but people capable of social transgressions serious enough for imprisonment may also be dedicated liars. And being in prison is usually the culmination of a series of offences, so many prisoners are fairly clued up about gaming the system and probably have few scruples about doing so. It's not even as if dressing up as a woman as a way to get out of being somewhere you don't want to be is a novel idea: Corporal Klinger was trying it on in MASH when I was at school.
May I finally humbly suggest that the easiest way for prison authorities to determine sincere trans women from fakes is to offer prompt castration as surely all that testosterone interferes with the inner female?
I'm confused, was this comment directed to me? Because I explicitly wrote: "the idea that someone accused of a sex offense is more likely to identify as trans once in prison solely for the purposes of better accommodations makes a lot of sense to me"
Yes, you did sorry. I phrased it wrong: you don't seem to have considered it *enough.* I think it's obvious that a lot of offenders (not all of them sexual) are gaming the system. Why is it particularly sex offenders? Because they seem to be the ones happiest transgressing against certain moral norms. (I think not stealing is a moral norm too, but a less strong one than sexual assault; I'd consider stealing if I were hungry enough.)
Anyway, my shorter point is that they're (nearly) all liars, and you can learn nothing about the trans population from the prison population. I was serious about the castration thing: making entry to women's facilities dependent on losing one's balls would sort out who was sincere and who not, and the numbers should drop by 99% (at least).
It's plausible, but your thesis doesn't come across as obvious to me. I have to follow my own advice: when faced with insufficient evidence, I have to temper my conclusions accordingly.
You don't seem to have considered the possibility that those "trans" prisoners may not actually be "trans" (which I won't attempt to define here). They may not sincerely believe they are women, they may merely see a chance of relocation to a women's prison which will a) reduce the likelihood and severity of physical assault by other prisoners and b) provide opportunities for further sexual offending.
It's a crazy thought, I know, but people capable of social transgressions serious enough for imprisonment may also be dedicated liars. And being in prison is usually the culmination of a series of offences, so many prisoners are fairly clued up about gaming the system and probably have few scruples about doing so. It's not even as if dressing up as a woman as a way to get out of being somewhere you don't want to be is a novel idea: Corporal Klinger was trying it on in MASH when I was at school.
May I finally humbly suggest that the easiest way for prison authorities to determine sincere trans women from fakes is to offer prompt castration as surely all that testosterone interferes with the inner female?
I'm confused, was this comment directed to me? Because I explicitly wrote: "the idea that someone accused of a sex offense is more likely to identify as trans once in prison solely for the purposes of better accommodations makes a lot of sense to me"
Yes, you did sorry. I phrased it wrong: you don't seem to have considered it *enough.* I think it's obvious that a lot of offenders (not all of them sexual) are gaming the system. Why is it particularly sex offenders? Because they seem to be the ones happiest transgressing against certain moral norms. (I think not stealing is a moral norm too, but a less strong one than sexual assault; I'd consider stealing if I were hungry enough.)
Anyway, my shorter point is that they're (nearly) all liars, and you can learn nothing about the trans population from the prison population. I was serious about the castration thing: making entry to women's facilities dependent on losing one's balls would sort out who was sincere and who not, and the numbers should drop by 99% (at least).
It's plausible, but your thesis doesn't come across as obvious to me. I have to follow my own advice: when faced with insufficient evidence, I have to temper my conclusions accordingly.
There's nothing surprising about those findings