Transgender Woman Sent Back To Male Prison Despite Appeal
- Thread starter Monxstaa
- Start date
Women carry two sets of x chromosome and no prostate - a transsexual who has undergone complete change will still carry his Y chromosome and prostate even after the " full transformation" and would need life long hormone therapy + they still might need to get checked up for other medical problems related with their previous ***. e.g. Prostate still may need checking and transmen still need a gynecologist. Most physical changes are only outside appearances...
There was a reason I asked how much of a transgender this transgender is. As I see it-Transgender is an umbrella term and many of these guys have gone through zero or only partial surgeries. They may not be identifying with the other *** at all and just maybe limited to cross dressing and so on. And I don't know what had caused the female Jail staff send him to male one to begin with- news didn't cover if they gave any explanation. Anyway since they sent him back so I guess this case is resolved for now.
PS: where do the transmen go- in the male prison and they just choose to stay in women's?
Last edited:
ComplexCity
Banned
Sir Francis Drake
Active member
This is a good question and a complicated situation, because on one hand we don't have to worry about difficult situations like this one, but on the other, large, private prison companies would now have a new demographic to make even more money off of.
This of course may lead to harsh laws that afflict transgender people and may get them more prison time than one normally would recieve as the government has to pay for the inmates these companies house.
Sir Francis Drake
Active member
ComplexCity
Banned
Who's doing this, bar people that troll. I'm just giving my opinion on a forum site. Which you seem to heavily dislike , which is ok. Please tell me though, what is it that I am saying that you dislike?
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
Oh so we're going by chromosomes? I suppose people with Down's Syndrome shouldn't be considered human because humans have 26 chromosomes and they have 27. I mean, as long as we're being so technical and strict about it.
Made in Heaven
Active member
Awards
Sir Francis Drake
Active member
Made in Heaven
Active member
Awards
I see.
Well, I think he should go to the male jail. since he is a male. Doesn't really matter what his gender is.
27 y chromosome or 27 X? We just may have a new species.
JK Seriously though, you are stretching Riker and you know it. You asked the difference and being a woman in biological terms means a lot more than just the presence of ovaries but it's one of the main parts and transgender lack more than just ovaries unless you think it's just outside appearance that counts.
Not sure about other south Asian countries but currently India, Nepal and Bangladesh recognize such transgenders as the third ***- legally. At least one state in India has started a separate block of their own for transgender prisoners. :shrug:
Last edited:
ComplexCity
Banned
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
No I didn't. I know the difference between a biological man and a biological woman. Hence why a transsexual male-to-female is a different category from the latter. If you use the difference of chromosomes to justify treating a biological female and transsexual female differently in legal matters, then I'm offering this syllogism/analogy to you: If we go strictly by conventional chromosome standards, should we then start treating people different for any chromosome states that differ from the norm of the category?27 y chromosome or 27 X? We just may have a new species.
Seriously though, you are stretching Riker and you know it. You asked the difference and being a woman in biological terms means a lot more than just the presence of ovaries but it's one of the main parts and transgender lack more than just ovaries unless you think it's just outside appearance that counts.
In this case, the category is: Females and legal treatment. If your chromosomes are different from that which conventionally and normally indicates female, you shouldn't be treated as a female. The counter-case I'm projecting is the category of human beings in general. Going by the principle established in the formerly mentioned case, if you don't have the conventional and normal arrangement of chromosomes that indicate a human being, you shouldn't be legally treated as such, which would include people Down's Syndrome because of the extra 21st chromosome, and therefore having 27 rather than the normal or conventional 26. If the principle is faulty here, then it can be asserted it's faulty in use of the transsexual case.
Yes, we get it, your brain can't tell what analogies and syllogism are. Oh, the post you were quoting also stretches into diasyrmus, which is a rhetorical device that creates argument through a ridiculous comparison to emphasize how ridiculous or flawed the original point(Ira's chromosome argument) is.Bruh....
Sir Francis Drake
Active member
ComplexCity
Banned
Ok well. It was fun, never had a laugh that hard in a while. Debating with a bias feminist is always entertaining
Punk Hazard
Active member
Awards
Made in Heaven
Active member
Awards
well... obviously I wouldnt want that to happen to him, so he could have his own cell or something. On second thought, it wouldnt really matter which jail he's put in, as long as he's left in his own cell, since if he goes to a male jail, he'll get abused and if he goes to a female jail, he'll most likely do the abusing
ComplexCity
Banned
Speak for yourself buddy. When it is biologically possible for him to become a she, then holler at me and I'll say he deserves a place in a woman's prison. Leave out your bias. Let me just entertain your folly
How can you compare being a parent biological or not to someone who needs to be put in a *** based facility?