[throwaway667555]

>no reason

You’re stating a conclusion here, but you’re skipping the argument. People who disagree with you have perfectly valid concerns. Your conclusion might be correct (for the sake of argument) but you provided 0 support for your conclusion. So I think your comment is content-free, or at the very least contributes 0 to the conversation.

[akvadrako]

It's hard to begin an argument with the position of there is no reason to do something. The only way to do it would be erect a straw man, then tear it down.

[DanBC]

Trans women are subjected to sexual violence from men in the same way that cis women are. They need to be protected from male violence.

All women in prison are at risk of sexual violence. That comes from other prisoners (including cis women), and from officers.

Focussing attention on the small number of trans prisoners, and ignoring the risk from cis prisoners and from staff, means that women will continue to be at risk of sexual violence.

[nailer]

> Trans women are subjected to sexual violence from men in the same way that cis women are.

Yes but females are also subjected to sexual violence from males.

[xboxnolifes]

Then, how about this. I understand the view of no segregation at all. That's just one big group, no additional work of separation. But how separation by biological sex more meaningful than separation by gender identity?

[akvadrako]

I'm not sure what the main reasons for segregating by bio sex were, but I can think of a few and none apply to gender identity.

Maybe the most important is you don't want prisoners getting pregnant.

[endori97]

Men in prison are also massively stronger and build shanks out of everything. If you do have a fight break out, hopefully its segregated by sex, otherwise the woman has no chance in the supermajority case.