Earlier quoted context omitted.
But why draw the boundary there ? Men are a problem because of the society that lets them do what they want. Society doesn't treat trans women like men – and, largely, it does treat trans men like men. Isn't it dangerous to have trans men – many of whom will have testosterone running through their systems – in vulnerable women's spaces? Treating someone who seems like a woman, acts like a woman, is at risk from the g…
> Isn't it dangerous to have trans men – many of whom will have testosterone running through their systems – in vulnerable women's spaces? To be fair to the OP, I don't think there exists a history of abuse of females from trans men, which strengthens their allegation that the underlying sex might be an important factor to consider in these scenarios. The sex hormones alone maybe just aren't a factor. It's likely not…
Male-on-male violence is a problem for the male prison estate to solve within its walls. It doesn't make any sense to put women at increased risk of male violence to protect men from male violence. Women don't exist as some sort of violence shield to protect men from each other.
Men's prisons already have safeguards in place for vulnerable male prisoners, such as paedophiles, ex-police officers, ex-gang members and so on - putting them on separate wings of the prison, moving them to a different category of male prison (which is in practice similar to your suggestion of violent/non-violent separation). If men who call themselves women are at elevated risk from other men, the same safeguards can be applied to them. There is no reason whatsoever to house them in a women's prison.