You're assuming male prisoners have a "right" to be housed with female prisoners, and that female prisoners have no right to sex-segregated facilities. Whether the former "right" exists is far from a settled question.

Assuming the former right does exist, then there is a conflict of rights (between the wishes of males who want to be housed with females, and females who want to be housed without males). Rights conflicts like this are not solved by simply telling one group (in this case, women) to shut up and stop complaining.

Where the ACLU comes in here I have no idea.

> Rights conflicts like this are not solved by simply telling one group (in this case, women) to shut up and stop complaining.

I'm pretty sure that's how conflicts with women have been historically resolved.

Caveat: We don't actually sex-segregate prisons. We segregate based off of primary and secondary sex characteristics.

This is nonsense that serves only to obfuscate. Normally this sort of stuff is put forward by people trying to confuse and befuddle the reader.

We segregate prisons by sex. Primary and secondary sex characteristics are observable characteristics that indicate one's sex.

Your argument is like saying "You don't buy a Mazda. You go to the Mazda dealership and buy a car that says Mazda on the back, interior, and on the manual. You don't actually know the car is a Mazda."

No, my argument is people mistake a used car lot for a licensed dealership. Just because the salesman says its a Mazda and it has a little logo in the front doesn't tell you much about its history, modifications, etc. Intersex people are in fact pretty common, so much so that there are more intersex olympic athletes than there are trans ones.

Using "males" and "females" here is irrelevant and actively seeking to confuse.

People typically consider that women (cis or trans) have a right to be housed together, and separately from cismen.

If anything, the biggest problem of policy are trans-men, who would likely feel much more concerned by being housed with cis-man prisoners, but who would also make women uncomfortable.

The desire of women not to be housed with men has nothing to do with the interior gender experience of the male in question.

Sure, but it also has nothing to do with their chromosome structure. It has a lot to do with their gender expression, in the end.

> A woman is, quite simply, an adult human female.

So an adult human female (XX phenotype) who is taking masculinizing hormones and thus has a beard, body hair, a heavy voice, and perhaps has had his breasts surgically removed, or even had penile reconstruction surgery, is, in your opinion, a woman?

If he is not naked and you do not have a genotypic test result, how would would you know? Do you think a woman seeing him in a women's locker or in a women's bathroom would feel comfortable? Or would she feel more comfortable with a male that has a female body and clothing presentation (say, Caitlyn Jenner)?

Also, your definitions of course leave no room for people with various biological conditions that leave them with an uncertain biological sex - hermaphrodytism, XXY genotype, chymerism (multiple genotypes in different tissues), testosterone resistance (natural female phenotype despite a male genotype) etc.

> So an adult human female (XX phenotype) who is taking masculinizing hormones and thus has a beard, body hair, a heavy voice, and perhaps has had his breasts surgically removed, or even had penile reconstruction surgery, is, in your opinion, a woman?

Yes. She's a woman who has taken masculinizing hormones, and had cosmetic surgery. She is not changing her sex. She remains female, and is therefore a woman.

Consider this: the women athletes who have doped with testosterone, did they become men? No, of course not. What if they got breast cancer and had to have a double mastectomy? Also no - they're still women.

It's so odd to me that liberals, who seem to care a lot about women's rights, just flat out dismiss women who are genuinely concerned about being raped in prison by males who were secretly transferred to female prisons.

>"But what about the children?" is never a good argument for taking the away the rights of others.

I also hope that you don't point to school shootings to argue against the second amendment then.

Why is that surprising? There is no proof that transwomen are any more likely to rape ciswomen than other ciswomen are.

On the other hand, it is well known that transwomen are much more often the victims of rape by cismen, if living in men's prisons.

If anything, I would think the biggest problem here is the fate of transmen. I doubt a ciswoman would feel very comfortable sharing a cell with a transman, but a transman also has much higher chances of being abused if sharing a cell with a cisman.

This is extremely un-PC, but cis women fear being raped by humans with penises much more than they do humans without them.

Do you think a cis woman would fear being raped more by Natalie Wynn[0] or by Buck Angel[1]? I would bet that its the latter.

To be clear: not accusing either of those above of being an actual rapist! Just asking which would be more likely to inspire this fear in someone who doesn't know them.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ContraPoints#/media/File%3AN...

[1] https://mobile.twitter.com/BuckAngel/photo

> There is no proof that transwomen are any more likely to rape ciswomen than other ciswomen are.

Are you just making this up, or do you have some statistics on female on female rape?

> Why is that surprising? There is no proof that transwomen are any more likely to rape ciswomen than other ciswomen are.

Here's an analysis of data from the Ministry of Justice in the UK, demonstrating that trans-identifying males have similar patterns of criminality to other males, including sexual assault: https://fairplayforwomen.com/transgender-male-criminality-se...

> There is no proof that transwomen are any more likely to rape ciswomen than other ciswomen are.

There is no proof males who identify as trans (transwomen) are any less likely to commit rape than males who do not identify as trans. The rape risk of being housed with a male is real regardless of how the male identifies with regards to gender. If you have data to the contrary (data indicating that trans identifying males are less likely to commit rape than other males) please share.

And yet, in the short time its been happening this has occurred https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/apr/14/two-inmates...

The article notes that the relationships were consensual. Like, do you think no one in prison would want to have sex? (The article could be misleading, but also there's presumably lots of consensual sex in prison, much as there is quite a bit of non-consensual sex).

>It's so odd to me that liberals, who seem to care a lot about women's rights, just flat out dismiss women who are genuinely concerned about being raped in prison by males who were secretly transferred to female prisons.

Really? Are there actual women who are genuinely concerned about this or is this a strawman invented by other people? You see this same issue with transwomen in sports. There is massive concern-trolling for women "who want a level playing field", but when you actually _ask_ women who compete with them (like in the case of Lia Thomas), they don't have a problem with it.

You are masking your transphobia in coddling for women who aren't even complaining about these issues. Women in prison are far more likely to be raped by law enforcement; but somehow the 3 or so transwomen who might sleep in the same cell as a woman is a bigger mark for the ACLU.

>I also hope that you don't point to school shootings to argue against the second amendment then.

That's actually pretty simple for me, I don't think gun rights are inalienable rights, no more than I think I have a right to own a playstation.