Discussion:
Transcript: Why are dangerous men still being housed in women's prisons?
(too old to reply)
Pretending perversion
2023-09-07 04:56:27 UTC
Permalink
Beat the male perverts until they act like men. If they refuse, strip
them naked, throw them in with the male queers and let them get raped
to death.
In recent years, prisons across the Western world have been allowing men
who identify as women to be housed alongside female inmates, leading to
sexual harassment, sexual assaults, pregnancies, and complaints from
women both in prison and among the general public. These complaints have
been mostly ignored by governments and those with the power to do
something. That said, the policy in the UK was changed in February in
response to one high profile case in particular, wherein a rapist name
Adam Graham renamed himself “Isla Bryson” and claimed to be a woman in
order to be reassigned to a women’s prison in Scotland. The new policy
prevents men who “retain male genitalia or have been convicted of a
violent or sexual offence” from being moved to women’s prisons.

The US and Canada, though, continue to lag on addressing this issue, and
dangerous men remain in women’s prisons across North America.

I spoke with two women who are taking action: Amanda Stulman is the USA
director of Keep Prisons Single Sex, and Jennifer Thomas is the founder
of Free Speech for Women and runs an action group called “Get Men Out.”

You can listen to this interview on the podcast. This transcript has
been edited lightly for clarity.

~~~

Meghan: I would love if you could tell our listeners a little bit about
the work that you do and how you came to be involved in this issue.

Amanda: Thanks for having us. I became involved in this issue in
particular because I have a background in administrative law and policy,
and because the issue of prisons is so distinct in so many different
jurisdictions. On top of the 50 states, there’s the federal system and
there are over 2000 separate municipal jails.. County… city… Each one
can have its own, unique policy or law which applies to it. So I thought
I could be useful in breaking down what those policies look like and how
they end up applying in the real world.

So I worked with Kate Coleman, who is the founder of Keep Prisons Single
Sex. She’s based in the UK and we opened a branch of Keep Prisons
Single Sex in the US over two years ago. The goal of Keep Prisons Single
Sex is obviously to advocate against mixed sex prisons, and we do that
by obtaining data, gathering research, lobbying lawmakers and
policymakers, and trying to bring public awareness to the issue.

Meghan: Great. I’m so glad that you’re doing this work. This issue of of
men being transferred into women’s prisons is so troubling, and I’ve
been extremely frustrated, as I’m sure you both have as well, over the
past few years that Governments in North America are really not paying
attention to this and really not addressing women’s concerns.

Jennifer, can you tell us a little bit about your work and background
and the activism that you are doing?

Jennifer: Well, I’m, I’m sort of an action group. So I focus on all the
issues with that affect women, girls, and gender. I love working with
Amanda because she’s so knowledgeable with the policies. And this last
protest, Get Men Out, that was an action group I started. The first
thing I wanted to do was aim at the prison situation because that is so
abhorrent, you know, and it’s so obvious that it’s wrong. But I also
diirect that towards the bathroom issue and other issues too — Get Men
Out, Save Our Spaces… It sort of covers everything. What I like to do is
read the temperature of what’s going on and try to anticipate where I
will get the most exposure.

So that’s what I do. I don’t solely focus on the prison issue, but as
with everything in this issue of the harms of gender ideology, you focus
on one and the prison issue will lead you to the ACLU because they’re
the ones that sued for that policy to get in there. So I’ll start there
and dig deeper just to try to see where I can get more action and more
attention focused on that issue. I’ve worked with Amanda a few times,
I’ve worked with Beth Steltzer from Save Women Sports, I’ve worked with
a Partners for Ethical Care…

When they have an action that I think will really hit the temperature,
of where I think America’s at, then I go full force. So that’s what
happened with this Get Men Out action. We worked with Amanda and Amy
Ichikawa and we had a sense that the population was starting to be
willing to see this. This issue is such a violation — we’re talking
about women in prison, we’re talking about really some of the most
vulnerable women in the country.

Meghan: Same thing in Canada. I interviewed Heather Mason a while back,
who’s a really brave advocate and an ex inmate herself. She’s been one
of the only ones speaking out in Canada about this issue. We’re talking
about women who already have almost no rights, have no voice because
they’re in prison, and they’re being housed with not just men, but the
worst men — violent offenders, rapists, child molesters, and so on.

Jennifer, you mentioned that the ACLU was heavily involved in pushing
for this policy allowing men to be transferred into women’s prisons.
Amanda, maybe you can speak to that a little bit — how did that happen?

Amanda: Sure. On top of the usual ire one should feel for the ACLU and
their complete betrayal of what their mission is supposed to be and what
they’re supposed to stand for, I have some extra ire for it. I, as a
young adult in the early 90s, I interned at the ACLU in the exact same
program that is now their LGBTQ++AI when it was the Lesbian and Gay
Rights and HIV project. And to see them stray so far afield, not just
from the substance of this issue in particular in terms of protecting
women, but even on some of the ancillary issues. For example, they were
the main drivers behind preventing a woman from requesting public
records in Washington State. She was trying to learn how many men were
in women’s prisons, how recently they’d been moved… People were starting
to get wind of the policy change in Washington several years ago, and it
was the A C L U who worked with several inmates representing them to
fight the disclosure by Washington State Department of Corrections for a
public records request.

The enormous irony of this is that this woman learned how to make her
public records request from the ACLU’s own website. The ACLU’s mission
is transparency, public awareness, obtaining data from the government,
you know, the government works for you, etc. And they actively worked to
suppress access to data that would allow the public to learn the impact
of these policies, and they were so successful.

That they managed to work with the Washington State legislature and
actually passed a law modifying their public records law to exclude
disclosure of issues related to gender identity and prisoners. So unless
you get information directly from women housed there, which you know, is
incredibly dangerous and risky for them, there’s no way to do it on
paper, publicly, directly because of the ACLU.

But getting back to the primary issue of pushing for this policy, the
New York Civil Liberties Union, which is kinda a local version of the
ACLU, I believe it originated with them. I haven’t been able to track it
back any further, but they’re the ones who have developed the model
transgender inmate policy that was enacted in California, that
legislatures tried to enact in Maryland. They’re actively trying to
enact a version of it in New York state right now, which is even more
extreme than the version in California. So, they’re not only
rhetorically pushing this issue, they are actively developing model
laws. They’re actively pushing for those laws and actively working to
prevent the public from learning about this issue.

Meghan: This is so appalling. I mean, for these kinds of organizations
to be fighting against the rights of incredibly marginalized people.
It’s really mindblowing that this is happening.

Jennifer: They’re acting as a legal agent of the gender industry. We
have to expose and fight the ACLU because they are basically a legal
firm that is pushing their policy.

It’s not just as simple as just saying, ok only men and women’s prisons.
You have to dig deeper. I’m planning a protest in August against the
ACLU in Washington DC because, you know, we can at least go after their
donors — all the people that think the ACLU is so great because they
protected the Nazis and Skokie and they believe in free speech and all
that.

The whole narrative behind them that they’ve managed to hide—the new
narrative—is still believed by a lot of Democrats. And I think if the
Democrats knew what the ACLU have been doing with our civil liberties,
they would stop donating.

Would that stop the ACLU? No, because the gender industry would just
make up for that money. But you could see then a shift with the
populace, you know, a shift of awareness.

Meghan: I’m glad that you brought that up, in terms of the donors,
because one of the major obstacles to fighting gender identity ideology
is that it’s infiltrated almost every single institution. Certainly
every single civil rights organization, reproductive rights
organization, LG now BTQ etc organizations. I mean, the reason that
they’re doing this is because they’re getting all this funding to do it.
Alternatively, you could look at it as they risk losing funding if they
don’t push this.

Let’s talk about that. Where do we go to advocate against these policies
when we’re dealing with these massive organizations and institutions?
And clearly this ideology has infiltrated the Democratic Party. It feels
so big and I know that people are getting really angry about it thanks
to activism, like what you two are doing, but it feels like a big hill
to climb. Have you had any successes? Or do you have suggestions in
terms of who might be a productive target?

Amanda: I have found that to be among the most depressing part of
working in this area, which is that there is not a single legacy civil
rights organization or women’s rights group that understands this issue,
or at least, pretends to. Every single one of them has been absolutely
ideologically captured. So it really does seem as though either these
organizations have to be built anew from the ground up — some other
version of them. Or it’s going to take what Jennifer does an enormous
amount of, which is on the street campaigning to bring awareness to
force media to pay attention to the issue and to bring it to the public.
We don’t have the numbers in North America of people advocating on this
issue. We certainly don’t have the dollars. The reason that the ACLU
changed the name of the program that addresses this is because they
received a $15 million gift from John Stryker. That is what led to the
change of the name and to their absolute commitment to the “T” all the
time and none of the LGB. So I don’t think there’s a good answer to how
we deal with the established organizations. I think people and
especially women like Jennifer are the ones sort of creating a public
groundswell.

Meghan: Right. I mean I’m, I’m verging towards thinking all these
organizations need to be defunded and taken apart and started over again
so that they’re not so tied up with this money that’s corrupted them so
deeply.

Jennifer: The only real solution is the public against this, right? When
we see thousands of people in the streets, fighting against this, that’s
when we’ll see some change. People have to get mad enough to get out on
the streets and this complacency that they’re under.

But inevitably I do think we will see a ground swell and that’s when
we’ll regain our power. We won’t feel so helpless because we’ll look
around and instead of seeing 20 or 30 people standing next to us, it’s
thousands.

That’s how we know about Martin Luther King — because he went to the
street. So it’s going to take that and it’s going to take an awareness
level where we just have to keep plugging along and hitting these
stories.

Now there’s this new media that is hungry for these stories. Tucker just
got fired. James O’Keefe got fired. They’re looking for stories, right?
Because they’re going to build their own thing. So we do have this
interesting time right now where there’s new media that we can tap into
that will tell our story. It’s getting out more and more, but it’s going
to take work.

Meghan: So I wanna talk a bit about the law. I know that Joe Biden’s
administration pushed through a policy allowing men to be transferred
into women’s prisons. But I also am under the impression that things
differ from state to state.

I know that New York lawmakers are pushing or trying to push through
this bill called the Gender Identity Respect, Dignity and Safety Act,
which would automatically place male prisoners in women’s facilities if
they identify as women. I’m curious to know, first, if you know what’s
happening with this bill, and second, if this is something that we
actually need to be fighting on a state to state basis or that we can
fight on a federal level.

Amanda: So the New York State Bill, as you say, presumptively houses
people according to their self-declared gender identity. And there is
such an insanely high burden and such a quick turnaround time required
to deny that to someone that the bill was clearly drafted in New York
with the intent to never, ever, ever deny someone. There are also
mechanisms built in for the state to be sued if someone is denied, and
to have attorney’s fees and damages paid. So it is so unidirectional a
law, it’s a little frightening that that came about after all we’ve
heard coming out of California and New Jersey and Canada, to the extent
that people hear about it, um, the, the answer more broadly is yes, for
right now, this is having to be fought on a state by state basis.

When this administration — the Biden administration — came in on its
first day in office, it issued an executive order directing federal
agencies to interpret the laws and regulations that they have some
control over and that they manage in the various agencies to interpret
sex to include gender identity. So with one pen stroke on his first day
in office, he directed every federal agency to work through that process
for the Bureau of Prisons, which is the only direct mechanism the
federal government has. There are some indirect ones, which I’ll
mention, but it’s the only direct prison system that the federal
government controls, putting aside military.

During the Obama administration’s last month in office, they created a
transgender offender manual and literally chucked it in the air and
walked out the door and left that for the Trump administration to deal
with. It was a very aggressive policy. Again, not a federal law, not a
regulation, didn’t go through any voting process, didn’t go through any
public comment process.

It was merely an in-house manual that the Federal Bureau of Prisons was
expected to follow. It took the Trump administration two years to
grapple with that policy and try to modify it, which they did, in kind
of half-hearted way.

And then following Biden’s executive order and a few other similar
executive orders, the Federal Bureau of Prisons again reissued the
transgender offender manual and again leaning much more heavily towards
a pathway for men to be moved into the women’s prisons based on self
declaration. So that’s what covers the federal prison.

The way that the federal government impacts the state prison system is
they have money and there’s a federal regulation called the PREA
regulations, and it derives from the Prison Rape Elimination Act. The
PREA regulations provide — and those did go through a public comment
period, but that was so long before this issue was in the public’s line
of vision.. You know, it was over a decade ago, nobody was paying
attention to this… Well, some rare people were paying attention, but
very few people were paying attention… And through the regulatory
process, the Obama Department of Justice issued regulations that
contemplated cross-sex housing. The act itself did not. And that’s the
first time in the federal legal system there was anything speaking to
even the concept of developing cross-sex housing. So what those
regulations provide is that in order to maintain full federal funding —
and every state receives some in order to maintain that — you get
massively dinged until you receive no money. Year after year, you get
successively more dinged if you do not adhere to those regulations. So
every state has to, at least on paper, consider housing people based on
their self-declared trans identity. So for a number of years, most
states were like, “okay.” And then went about their business. But some
of them took it really seriously.

So now a number of states have either laws or policies that not only
implement those regulations of contemplating cross-sex housing, but
presumptively housed according to self-declared gender identity.

Jennifer: And this is how the federal government influences states
throughout, like the federal government has the right — the president
can come in and put out an executive order.

That’s what he did. This crazy executive order that virtually anybody
would think was insane, you know, prioritizing gender identity above
sex-based rights. They can come in and do that, and then they have this
mechanism. The schools are funded federally, so they basically blackmail
them into adopting these policies by withholding money.

So you think, well, why would the states go along with this? Well, they
wouldn’t get their money. They even threatened the school lunch program
at one point with, you know, “if you don’t adopt these policies, your
school lunch program is going to be threatened.”

It’s a withholding of money if you don’t do this right. So like the
universities that are, there are some laws in there, but they’re just
not pursuing them. These executive orders have a lot of control even
with Title IX. Amanda could probably speak better to this, but that’s
why it’s being messed with, because it’s not, it’s not a law per se?

Amanda: Right. Just to clarify, Title IX is itself a law, but it’s the
regulations that they’re kind of messing with right now. And what
they’re trying to do is trying to apply what both Jennifer and I have
been talking about in terms of the executive orders — redefining sex to
mean sex or gender identity. The reason we’ve heard a lot about Title IX
is they are going through the formal rulemaking process and putting it
out for public comment. They received a record number of comments, which
is really heartening, about modifying the language of the regulations,
which is where you’ll find all the meaty stuff about what you have to do
to get money if you’re a state or a state entity.

Meghan: I want to talk about some specific cases. I believe that there
are 27 males currently being housed at Edna Mahan Correctional Facility
for women? Which was a central focus of the Get Men Out protest in New
Jersey last month. Is that normal throughout the states?

Amanda: Well, woohoo, now there’s only about 10. A number of them
managed to behave so poorly they got themselves moved out.

About two years ago, we worked with Women’s Declaration International to
do a statewide FOIA project of every state prison to try to see what the
numbers were in each location. Many were extremely uncooperative and we
were not able to get a completely exhaustive list. But there are states
that are in that range… admittedly not many two years ago. I think
there’s probably more now, if we were to circle back and do it again.
But even in states where you wouldn’t necessarily think of it, there’s a
handful.

Virginia had one for decades, even before this recent push. But a number
of states have several dozen. Obviously California does now. Washington
State is getting up there. Illinois’ numbers are growing and they have
neither a policy nor a law. A federal judge keeps putting men in women’s
prison in Illinois. So it’s everywhere, though the numbers change. But
we’re, we’re only seeing them go up. We’re not seeing them go down much.
New Jersey went down just because they had a kind of freak out placement
of men in there when they reached the settlement with the ACLU that
Jennifer referenced, and then they had another panic in the other
direction when it went so badly.

Meghan: And what are some of the cases — like what are we hearing about
what’s actually going on in these prisons? I know that when I talk about
this issue online, people will respond in these very blase ways. People
will say like, “Well, you know, women get raped in prison either way.”
Or they say, “If they’re in male prisons, then these males who identify
as women are going to get raped.” Or they say, “Well prison is really
bad.” And I don’t know, maybe they’re just not able to picture the
situation and what’s actually going down and what the danger is when
you’re putting men in women’s prisons. Can you talk to some specific
cases that have happened?

Jennifer: So when a woman gets convicted of a crime and the judge reads
out her sentence, he doesn’t say, “Okay, your sentence is possible rape,
possible forced childbirth or an abortion, and then possible abandonment
of your child.”

We don’t agree. We don’t have agreed upon laws to cover this. The public
is not in agreement on this. Otherwise, that would be the sentence. This
apathy around it just upsets me to no end. I also think people think it
can’t happen to them.

The fastest growing category of inmates is women. When women get
convicted, it’s harsher sentences for lesser crimes.

I think this sort of bleeds into that industrial complex. Like in New
Jersey they were making $61,000 per person off of their prisoners. And
women are easier to manage than men. Actually, prison reform is working
for men and not women. So men are getting shorter sentences for worse
crimes and getting out. They can add more to that prison population by
adding men. Right now, if Bundy applied, he would get into a woman’s
prisons. If Richard Speck, who killed eight nurses in Chicago, took
hormones and dressed like a woman when he was in jail he would be in
there with them. There’s no distinction of how bad the crime is.

Amanda: I think those are really good points, and I think a lot of it
speaks to, aside from the sort of disregard for prisoners in general,
it’s just treated as a kind of a throwaway population. But aside from
that, I think it is largely a misconception. This is a subset of, at
best, men they’re imagining are a particular kind of man or worse, they
think there’s some sort of version of a subset of women. But I think
most people imagine that it’s non-violent criminals, that it’s men who
have had genital surgery, that it’s men who are on hormones, that it’s
men who are tiny and pretty and vulnerable. All of those assumptions are
out there and obviously, even if somebody is those things and not a
violent criminal who is tiny and has had genital surgery and is on
hormones, if they’re a man, they still don’t belong in a woman’s prison.

But I think that is what most of the public imagines when they hear
these stories, which is one reason that it’s so important for the
stories and the names and the visuals and the crimes and all of that to
be made really right in people’s faces so they can see the criminal
history of these men. They can see what they look like, which I know
seems really superficial, That page on Keep Prisons’s Single-Sex’s
website that has a sample of men and their crimes who are in women’s
prisons, I mean, I’ve peaked people in 30 seconds by showing them that
page. Just the, the visual of is sometimes what people need. Like, oh,
still has a penis and is massive? That’s crazy.

Meghan: Yeah. And I guess, probably a lot of people — I’m gonna give
them the benefit of the doubt — are imagining these men who are
identifying as women or trans women as being men who “pass.” So men who
“look like women,” probably men who’ve gone through all the surgeries
and so on and so forth. So I imagine that what’s happening there when
you’re showing them that actually these are the men who are in these
women’s facilities: they just look like regular dudes. Like not even
trying to look like women.

Amanda: Or they look exactly like men who have literally put their hair
in pigtails, which is somehow even more alarming. You know, the
superficiality of it.

Jennifer: The women said in their letters at the protest that these men
dropped that act right when get into the facility then it’s a million
dollar baby game, you know, let’s make a baby.

They’re not acting vulnerable when that’s going on. It’s a complete
facade.

https://www.feministcurrent.com/2023/05/23/transcript-why-are-dangerous-m
en-still-being-housed-in-womens-prisons/
Bing Breep
2023-09-14 06:49:13 UTC
Permalink
All states should adopt Miami's boot camp program to adult prisons so the inmates will be too exausted to even think about sex.
Loading...