> This does not apply to the actual policies I assume you're complaining about. Please read the policies – or name them, if you have found some that work that way.

California, Washington, Ireland, for example. All places where prisoners are being incarcerated based on their claims of "gender identity" rather than sex.

> Nobody's disputing that (much as I'd love to live in a world where I could). You haven't demonstrated the risk that trans women pose to the women around them.

Sorry, but this isn't how this works. It is already well established that men present significant risk to women, particularly in spaces where women are vulnerable. If you want to claim that a subset of these men - that is, any man who calls himself a woman - poses a significantly lower risk to women, then you need to argue this based on evidence, rather than simply assuming it.

> I'll provide one: male-on-female prison violence is a well-established phenomenon. What do you think is going to happen when you put a handful of women in an all-male prison?

I entirely agree that women who call themselves men must not be placed in men's prisons, just as men who call themselves women must not be incarcerated with women. As I argued above, this is the whole point of sex-segregated prisons, safeguarding women from male sexual abuse and violence.