Schroedinger's rapist and pre-op trans women

[Guest Erika_1984]

On another forum, a poster has convinced me, mad me see the light, that just like cis men, pre-op trans women must be considered as Schroedinger's rapist, meaning that we should be placed in men's facilities, isolated if need be. Our dignity is not as important as the safety of others, so we should not try to override arguments for safety with arguments for dignity.

When I was thrice hospitalized after going full-time as a woman and placed with the men, but given my own room, the administrators made the right decision. Dignity < safety. There were no issues of safety that I encountered during my placement with the men (except being repeatedly harassed by a gay guy during the second and third hospitalizations who thought I was just another really really gay guy, but I was able to handle it).

[Guest Erika_1984]

When I was living with a blind woman back in April of last year to try to save money, I kept asking myself, "If I were dangerous, would this woman be safe in this space with me?" The answer kept being no, which filled me with tension and anxiety. I also saw the presence of a non-relative in the place that was my home (even though it was the non-relative that owned it) as being intrusive, so I am back to living on my own.

[Flint]

You're right in a way, when you add in the fact women rape too, so if it's the case that men are 'schroedinger's rapists' so are women, and so are trans men and so are trans women. So yes you're right in a way that even as a trans woman you could be classed also as 'schroedinger's rapists' because everyone is. So you're right and your wrong because you say "pre-op trans women" when it doesn't matter where one is surgery wise, because everyone is.

[Guest Erika_1984]

I don't know. The risk may be higher with pre-op trans woman, because I have been reading a disproportionate number of stories on that (considering our population size).

That Twitter exec certainly comes to mind.

[Guest Nicodeme]

Perhaps because people willing to acknowledge rape are usually more willing to acknowledge it when someone with a penis [i'm not sure what the language filter will do to that word, if anything, but I hope that statement's still intelligible] does it and until recently most legal definitions of rape exclusively acknowledged people being raped by male-assigned people who had that particular body part.

And really if you're a hazard to people, you're a hazard because you're a hazard, not because of the groups you fall into.

[Drea]

I am sure there are some advocates out there who believes, regardless of surgery status, that trans women are functionally incapable of rape and laws should be altered to prevent such a discriminatory accusation against trans women. Only makes sense given the often expressed assertion that such things never happen.

I suspect that trans women, at lest among those who are transitioning, been on hormones an extended period are probably less likely to commit a sexual assault.

However, folks transitioning only make a small part of all who identify as transgender, and with the legal standard as pushed by advocates for gender recognition, that they simply identify as female, it seems things are bound to get muddy.

Now what should be the standard for a trans woman to be held in a women's facility? Simply the claimed self identification? Why house men and women separately in the first place?