So she was transferred to a men's facility from a women's, denied any opportunity to appeal, and thrown in solitary for not going willingly. I wonder, are they going to keep her in solitary for the rest of her imprisonment, or are they going to release her and put a woman in with the men at the prison? Either seems like a completely fucked up option.
Suffering is the point...
Maybe in the US. Civilized nations treat their prisoners with decency.
It's Definitely not just a US thing, although the scale of incarceration in the US is immense. it's just a handful of European countries that actually treat prisoners ok.
Yeah, lots of European nations also have to be more civil with their prisoners, doesn't mean it's okay that they aren't.
Oh come on!
Some places use prison as an actual way to reform, not profit. Lick them boots amirite?
Do most countries have slavery written into their constitutions?
Care to elaborate?
The 14th amendment of the United States allows for slavery as a punishment.
13th
Rationally; she did break a rule. Logically; that should've seen her placed in the 'Female Solitary Unit'; as she was already classified as female.
Unfortunately, the prison also made a large mistake, and she should not have been 'transferred' to a Men's Facility.
She wasn't placed in solitary for breaking the rule, that's a fairly common rule to break. She was placed in solitary for resisting the transfer.
This is really sad all around. Sex isn't supposed to happen in prison, but it happens in men's and women's facilities. The fact that this person was only vilified and transferred to a men's facility after someone at the DOC leaked the investigation documents and an article was run dead naming her and implying she was a predator is so wrong.
I might not be understanding something, but if she's being placed in solitary, I'm not really sure what difference it makes what type of facility she's put into. My understanding is that you don't get to interact with anybody in solitary, regardless of gender. I can't imagine there's too many gender-specific accommodations that are made in these situations.
Maybe actually read the article? This is right at the top:
When Kim realized she was being removed, she asked to speak with her lawyer and see paperwork authorizing the transfer, which was denied. Kim then refused to walk as commanded, at which point she was allegedly thrown to the ground by guards, who tied her ankles and wrists together and put her in the back of an SUV, she said. At Monroe Correctional Complex, Kim was put into solitary confinement, for allegedly “refusing transfer.”
She wouldn't be in solitary confinement if they hadn't moved her.
Maybe the title of this post or the article needs to be updated if solitary confinement itself wasn't the real issue, but rather that it was a transgender woman being transferred from a women's prison to a men's prison?
Or, you know, this person could have just read the fucking article (or even just skimmed the first quarter of it) before making a comment making it clear they didn't, then getting their back up when they get called out?
I read the article. I missed two lines from it on my first go around. Maybe I was multitasking while I was reading it. Maybe I was on mobile and there were ads distracting my ADHD-riddled brain. Maybe I just forgot that part. Who knows, all that matters it that I misunderstood. That was it. A misunderstanding, which were literally the first fucking words in my comment in the first place you absolute clown.
I won't apologize for misunderstanding and asking for help, and fuck you for insinuating that I should, and for trying to gaslight me into thinking I've done anything wrong by asking for a fucking explanation. You're so eager to find your "gotcha" moment that you're willing to cannibalize your own team to get it.
Maybe read the rest of the comments before replying? I already addressed that I misunderstood the timeline.
You said
I’m not really sure what difference it makes what type of facility she’s put into. My understanding is that you don’t get to interact with anybody in solitary, regardless of gender.
You also said
I might not be understanding something
But no mention of timeline. 🤔
Though even if you had mentioned the timeline, the quote I pasted from the top of the article is pretty clear about that.
But no, you were clearly "misunderstanding" why it matters if she's in male-prison solitary or female-prison solitary, while deliberately ignoring the key fact that she shouldn't be in solitary in the first place. Or you simply just didn't read the article.
Either way, putting your hand up to say "my bad" isn't hard to do, and it makes you look a lot less like you're here in bad faith than doubling down like you are now does.
Bruh, I already said I misunderstood, and explained exactly what and how I misunderstood it. The mistake has already been corrected be somebody else before you. If that isn't enough for you, then kindly fuck off because you already got more than you were owed, o mighty arbiter of comprehension.
When you realize your initial comment is wrong, edit it.
What was wrong? I was asking for clarification on something I didn't understand. I got it. What needs to be edited?
She was put into solitary because she refused to be transferred.
Ahh, gotcha. I see now, I originally thought she was being put straight into solitary from the start. That definitely changes things then.
This is one of those tough stories that really challenges your morals. Part of me wants to take her side, because no woman should be forced into a men's prison, trans or not. But then there's another part of me which feels a bit indifferent to the suffering of a murderer. Part of me thinks "just put her in solitary back in the women's prison", but then another part of me thinks "actually we shouldn't have solitary confinement in any prisons in the first place". It's just an awful situation from every angle.
We live in a society where the law is decided as much by precedent as by policy. Whatever punishment we as a society can be inflicted upon the worst scum of society, will be inflicted upon the innocent. Upon the wrongly convicted, those whose crimes harmed nobody, and those who were right to do what they did. If we don't fight injustices against the deserving, that will be used to justify injustice against the undeserving.
They refused to respect her legal rights in three different ways. We have to believe this is an injustice when it is committed against anyone. There's no ambiguity here.
a murderer
Motive matters. She killed her abusive parents. It's highly likely she was a victim of society failing her. That doesn't excuse what she did, it just means she's not the same as someone who killed for money or fun.
She was raping another prisoner. That’s why she being moved. There is no consensual sex in prison.
Solitary confinement is needed in some situations. This isn’t one of them. It is overused but should never be used as a punishment. It should be used to keep people safe.
It’s a blurb of an article and I don’t know the backstory to know what the right answer is.
To me it doesn’t matter if she murdered someone or not. The prison system is supposed to be dispassionate about the crime.
The sex was not officially allowed, but there absolutely could be consensual sex in prison. The reason they don’t allow it is because in many (but not all) cases it is coerced.
There is no consensual sex in prison.
Lolwut? Inmates can consent with each other. Not everything in prison is a scene from Oz.
It’s in the article. It isn’t allowed.
Having sex as an inmate, even consensually, is considered a “504 infraction.”
Being against prison rules does not make it rape.
Non-consensual sex is rape. You can’t consent to sex as an inmate.
That said, we don’t know if that’s the reason or not. We will have to wait till further information comes out
Being an inmate doesn’t mean you lose your ability to consent. They could have very well been in a relationship. Just because it was against the prison rules does not mean it was non consensual.
You are the only one calling it rape - there is nothing else implying it was non consensual.
There is no consensual sex in prison.
Between guards and inmates. Inmates are on a level playing field and can have consensual sex. Unless of course you're talking about legal technicalities in which case, the suffering is the point.
No inmates cannot have sex in prison with other inmates. It is prohibited.
So the suffering is the point. Got it.
Too much of a power dynamic. It causes to many issues in the facility for the staff and other inmates.
Typically it’s ignored in most cases but when it’s an issue they move inmates to other facilities.
And they couldn't move her to another women's facility? or another unit in the same facility? They had to go straight to men's genpop? I also don't buy that sex among peers causes too many issues. Unless it's criminal, in which case you'd deal with it on that front. Because if that was true we'd have to make sex among peers a crime in normal society too.
I have no clue why they moved her to a male facility. It’s not in the article. Until more comes out on the case, it’s a mystery.
I suspect this is a maximum security and I have no clue how many they have for women in Washington.
In Nevada where my girlfriend worked in the prison system, they only have one for women. They’d move them to another section of the prison if possible or send them out of state.
Overall though they led it slide as long as there were no issues.
Overall though they led it slide as long as there were no issues.
Overall they let rape slide? Or is it not rape now?
So we're not aware of any issues, just the ridiculous rule, and cruel transfer. Have I got that right?
No it does not appear that you have it right.
The rule isn’t ridiculous at all and we don’t know why the person was transferred.
She assumes that is the reason and it’s a fair assumption.
Prison isn’t summer camp. It’s there to keep the communities safe by removing bad elements.
An anonymous Washington DOC employee told National Review that there is “technically” no consensual sex among incarcerated individuals, but that “Washington has been mitigating the sanctions on offenders involved” if both parties claim the intercourse is consensual, resulting in “less trouble” for the offenders.
Rape is non-consenual sex. DOC employee said there is no consensual rape among inmates.
You guys are just totally insane or incredibly stupid slightly misinformed if you're spending any energy defending this monster. Perhaps go read up on what the person did.
You're also playing right into the hands of the people who are fighting against equal rights by doing this. Pick your fights better! There are decent trans people who need and deserve your support.
People can support both trans rights and prisoner rights.
She killed her abusive parents when she was 18. I wouldn't condone that, but I also wouldn't call her a monster. People in extreme circumstances do extreme things
If they were abusive, they had it coming.
Just because someone is a "monster" doesn't mean that the Constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment does not apply to them.
The thing about fighting for human rights and ethical treatment is that it doesn't change if the person receiving the treatment is someone you don't like.
You can be against this treatment without wanting to DeFeNd the individual in question.
So she was transferred to a men's facility from a women's, denied any opportunity to appeal, and thrown in solitary for not going willingly. I wonder, are they going to keep her in solitary for the rest of her imprisonment, or are they going to release her and put a woman in with the men at the prison? Either seems like a completely fucked up option.
Suffering is the point...
Maybe in the US. Civilized nations treat their prisoners with decency.
It's Definitely not just a US thing, although the scale of incarceration in the US is immense. it's just a handful of European countries that actually treat prisoners ok.
Yeah, lots of European nations also have to be more civil with their prisoners, doesn't mean it's okay that they aren't.
Oh come on!
Some places use prison as an actual way to reform, not profit. Lick them boots amirite?
Do most countries have slavery written into their constitutions?
Care to elaborate?
The 14th amendment of the United States allows for slavery as a punishment.
13th
Rationally; she did break a rule. Logically; that should've seen her placed in the 'Female Solitary Unit'; as she was already classified as female.
Unfortunately, the prison also made a large mistake, and she should not have been 'transferred' to a Men's Facility.
She wasn't placed in solitary for breaking the rule, that's a fairly common rule to break. She was placed in solitary for resisting the transfer.
Here's an additional article with significantly more background information: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/trans-rights-prison-amber-kim_n_6557ce06e4b0998d69a049d4
That’s not news, it’s just a common cruelty
This is really sad all around. Sex isn't supposed to happen in prison, but it happens in men's and women's facilities. The fact that this person was only vilified and transferred to a men's facility after someone at the DOC leaked the investigation documents and an article was run dead naming her and implying she was a predator is so wrong.
I might not be understanding something, but if she's being placed in solitary, I'm not really sure what difference it makes what type of facility she's put into. My understanding is that you don't get to interact with anybody in solitary, regardless of gender. I can't imagine there's too many gender-specific accommodations that are made in these situations.
Maybe actually read the article? This is right at the top:
She wouldn't be in solitary confinement if they hadn't moved her.
Maybe the title of this post or the article needs to be updated if solitary confinement itself wasn't the real issue, but rather that it was a transgender woman being transferred from a women's prison to a men's prison?
Or, you know, this person could have just read the fucking article (or even just skimmed the first quarter of it) before making a comment making it clear they didn't, then getting their back up when they get called out?
I read the article. I missed two lines from it on my first go around. Maybe I was multitasking while I was reading it. Maybe I was on mobile and there were ads distracting my ADHD-riddled brain. Maybe I just forgot that part. Who knows, all that matters it that I misunderstood. That was it. A misunderstanding, which were literally the first fucking words in my comment in the first place you absolute clown.
I won't apologize for misunderstanding and asking for help, and fuck you for insinuating that I should, and for trying to gaslight me into thinking I've done anything wrong by asking for a fucking explanation. You're so eager to find your "gotcha" moment that you're willing to cannibalize your own team to get it.
Maybe read the rest of the comments before replying? I already addressed that I misunderstood the timeline.
You said
You also said
But no mention of timeline. 🤔
Though even if you had mentioned the timeline, the quote I pasted from the top of the article is pretty clear about that.
But no, you were clearly "misunderstanding" why it matters if she's in male-prison solitary or female-prison solitary, while deliberately ignoring the key fact that she shouldn't be in solitary in the first place. Or you simply just didn't read the article.
Either way, putting your hand up to say "my bad" isn't hard to do, and it makes you look a lot less like you're here in bad faith than doubling down like you are now does.
Bruh, I already said I misunderstood, and explained exactly what and how I misunderstood it. The mistake has already been corrected be somebody else before you. If that isn't enough for you, then kindly fuck off because you already got more than you were owed, o mighty arbiter of comprehension.
When you realize your initial comment is wrong, edit it.
What was wrong? I was asking for clarification on something I didn't understand. I got it. What needs to be edited?
She was put into solitary because she refused to be transferred.
Ahh, gotcha. I see now, I originally thought she was being put straight into solitary from the start. That definitely changes things then.
This is one of those tough stories that really challenges your morals. Part of me wants to take her side, because no woman should be forced into a men's prison, trans or not. But then there's another part of me which feels a bit indifferent to the suffering of a murderer. Part of me thinks "just put her in solitary back in the women's prison", but then another part of me thinks "actually we shouldn't have solitary confinement in any prisons in the first place". It's just an awful situation from every angle.
We live in a society where the law is decided as much by precedent as by policy. Whatever punishment we as a society can be inflicted upon the worst scum of society, will be inflicted upon the innocent. Upon the wrongly convicted, those whose crimes harmed nobody, and those who were right to do what they did. If we don't fight injustices against the deserving, that will be used to justify injustice against the undeserving.
They refused to respect her legal rights in three different ways. We have to believe this is an injustice when it is committed against anyone. There's no ambiguity here.
Motive matters. She killed her abusive parents. It's highly likely she was a victim of society failing her. That doesn't excuse what she did, it just means she's not the same as someone who killed for money or fun.
She was raping another prisoner. That’s why she being moved. There is no consensual sex in prison.
Solitary confinement is needed in some situations. This isn’t one of them. It is overused but should never be used as a punishment. It should be used to keep people safe.
It’s a blurb of an article and I don’t know the backstory to know what the right answer is.
To me it doesn’t matter if she murdered someone or not. The prison system is supposed to be dispassionate about the crime.
The sex was not officially allowed, but there absolutely could be consensual sex in prison. The reason they don’t allow it is because in many (but not all) cases it is coerced.
Lolwut? Inmates can consent with each other. Not everything in prison is a scene from Oz.
It’s in the article. It isn’t allowed.
Being against prison rules does not make it rape.
Non-consensual sex is rape. You can’t consent to sex as an inmate. That said, we don’t know if that’s the reason or not. We will have to wait till further information comes out
Being an inmate doesn’t mean you lose your ability to consent. They could have very well been in a relationship. Just because it was against the prison rules does not mean it was non consensual.
You are the only one calling it rape - there is nothing else implying it was non consensual.
Between guards and inmates. Inmates are on a level playing field and can have consensual sex. Unless of course you're talking about legal technicalities in which case, the suffering is the point.
No inmates cannot have sex in prison with other inmates. It is prohibited.
So the suffering is the point. Got it.
Too much of a power dynamic. It causes to many issues in the facility for the staff and other inmates.
Typically it’s ignored in most cases but when it’s an issue they move inmates to other facilities.
And they couldn't move her to another women's facility? or another unit in the same facility? They had to go straight to men's genpop? I also don't buy that sex among peers causes too many issues. Unless it's criminal, in which case you'd deal with it on that front. Because if that was true we'd have to make sex among peers a crime in normal society too.
I have no clue why they moved her to a male facility. It’s not in the article. Until more comes out on the case, it’s a mystery.
I suspect this is a maximum security and I have no clue how many they have for women in Washington.
In Nevada where my girlfriend worked in the prison system, they only have one for women. They’d move them to another section of the prison if possible or send them out of state.
Overall though they led it slide as long as there were no issues.
Overall they let rape slide? Or is it not rape now?
So we're not aware of any issues, just the ridiculous rule, and cruel transfer. Have I got that right?
No it does not appear that you have it right. The rule isn’t ridiculous at all and we don’t know why the person was transferred. She assumes that is the reason and it’s a fair assumption. Prison isn’t summer camp. It’s there to keep the communities safe by removing bad elements.
Doing drugs is prohibited. Doing drugs isn't rape.
Drugs have nothing to do with consent.
I agree, something being prohibited has nothing to do with consent.
Well go argue with the law, not sure why you are bothering me with what the news reports
The law doesn't call it non-consensual or rape either. Just says it's not allowed.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/trans-identifying-male-in-women-s-prison-found-having-sex-with-female-inmate-report/ar-BB1kq1cJ
An anonymous Washington DOC employee told National Review that there is “technically” no consensual sex among incarcerated individuals, but that “Washington has been mitigating the sanctions on offenders involved” if both parties claim the intercourse is consensual, resulting in “less trouble” for the offenders.
Rape is non-consenual sex. DOC employee said there is no consensual rape among inmates.
You guys are just
totally insane or incredibly stupidslightly misinformed if you're spending any energy defending this monster. Perhaps go read up on what the person did.You're also playing right into the hands of the people who are fighting against equal rights by doing this. Pick your fights better! There are decent trans people who need and deserve your support.
People can support both trans rights and prisoner rights.
She killed her abusive parents when she was 18. I wouldn't condone that, but I also wouldn't call her a monster. People in extreme circumstances do extreme things
If they were abusive, they had it coming.
Just because someone is a "monster" doesn't mean that the Constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment does not apply to them.
The thing about fighting for human rights and ethical treatment is that it doesn't change if the person receiving the treatment is someone you don't like.
You can be against this treatment without wanting to DeFeNd the individual in question.