The new MoJ data on transgender prisoners are released today. These show that the trend in increasing numbers of transgenders prisoners, including those of the male sex, is continuing: there has been an increase of over 20% since 2019 when data were last collected. 1/?
Although after R (FDJ) v SSJ, the MoJ are now reporting on the numbers of prisoners with GRCs, the data do not give a breakdown by sex or by estate. 23 prisoners have a GRC. Who are they? Where are they? 2/?
Lord Wolfson states that 2 males with GRC are in the male estate: up to 21 could therefore be held with women. It is STILL impossible to state how many prisoners of the male sex are held with women. This is unsatisfactory and we call for complete transparency on this. 3/?
MoJ are now recording numbers of nonbinary prisoners and reporting numbers of gender fluid prisoners, cross-dressers and 'intersex' (continuing the appropriation of medical diagnoses in the furtherance of gender identity ideology). 4/?
So much for leaving the Stonewall Diversity Champions Scheme. This latest report demonstrates an ever more entrenched commitment to gender identity ideology: was leaving Stonewall simply a PR exercise devoid of real impact? 5/?
How will these other gender identities be accommodated under the MoJ policies? Where are they allocated? How are they risk ax? Who will search them? Will the risk to women in prison increase? This all needs clarity. 6/?
Report lands at 9.30 this morning. In the meantime:…
@threadreaderapp please unroll

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Keep Prisons Single Sex

Keep Prisons Single Sex Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @NoXYinXXprisons

16 Nov
Final part for tonight, Lord Falconer:
I disagree - many do not have the slightest problem if all prisoners of the male sex are 'consigned to the male estate'. Many believe that to be the correct course of action. 1/?
As before - the description of the 'current arrangements' as predicated on a case-by-case ax of each prisoner is incorrect, at least in respect of GRC holder. 2/?
(Even if it were true what the heck are these processes doing allowing serious sexual offenders with intact male genitalia into the general population of the female estate?) 3/3
Read 4 tweets
16 Nov
Brian Paddick:
Firstly, I would never criticise him for not being a woman.
Secondly, I do not hold my views because I am ignorant and haven't had enough experience of the variety of life. 1/?
Yet again, he conflates 2 separate Qs:
How to keep vulnerable prisoners who may be at risk in the male estate safe?
Who is legitimately entitled to be housed in the female estate?
(They really do need to get on board with keeping these separate...) 2/?
He emphasises high rates of mental health problems and high risk of self-harm and suicide. It is implied that this is a reason for allocation to the female estate. Aside from the fact that women have rates of vulnerability that are shockingly high, this again conflates 2 Qs: 3/?
Read 9 tweets
16 Nov
And now to Chakrabarti:
Whilst I am sure that Blencathra is relieved to be viewed as a better prospect than a female white supremacist, women are not just as bad as men. Nor do they pose the same risks either by degree or in kind. The data are consistent on this. 1/?
The state does indeed have a duty of care towards all prisoners, but that duty of care cannot be executed whilst we pretend that sex is not a fundamental factor in risk ax & safeguarding. 2/?
She also conflates the same 2 Qs as did Pannick: how to keep vulnerable prisoners in the male estate safe; who is legitimately entitled to be housed in the female estate. Amendment 214 addressed the 2nd of those Qs, yet peers attempt to use the 1st Q as a rebuttal. 3/?
Read 8 tweets
16 Nov
Thoughts on Lord Pannick:
Pannick assumes that 'many' GRC holders have had hormone tx and that 'some' have had 'reconstructive surgery'. Is this assumption warranted? The GRA does not require this & reports from female offenders state that the v large majority retain 1/?
intact male genitalia. Regardless, surely the argument that because 'some may' have had optional tx that may result in vulnerability in the male estate we should not prevent even those who have not had this tx from being housed in the female estate is a bad one? 2/?
Why is the known increased vulnerability of women in prison an acceptable price to pay to circumvent the problem of male violence? 3/?
Read 5 tweets
16 Nov
Thoughts on Baroness Brinton's speech:
"The actual facts of what is happening with TW in prisons does not match the opening speech by the noble Lord, Lord Blencathra."
Brinton is mistaken. 1/?
She quotes from the guidance that applies to prisoners with no GRC and falsely extends this to cover prisoners with a GRC. Thus she speaks of full risk ax, transgender case boards, decisions made on an individual basis, etc. However, this is for non-GRC holder only. 2/?
A male prisoner with a GRC is NOT subject to any case board ax. There is automatic allocation to gen pop of female estate regardless of risk, conviction, offending history, anatomy. This gives instant access to GRC holders and is a reason why Amendment 214 focussed on GRC. 3/?
Read 14 tweets
7 Nov
Please consider becoming a constituency contact and helping us build on the work we have already achieved in parliament. Template letters are here & we can support and advise should your MP or MSP express interest:
Here is a thread about what we have done in parliament. This week (date TBC) our work will see 'sex-specific incarceration' discussed in the Lords. This is a first.
More details about our achievements in Parliament here:

Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!