ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 15th September 2018, 07:37 AM   #1
Grizzly Adams
Graduate Poster
 
Grizzly Adams's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,146
Cross-sex strip searches and "gender fluidity"

Muslim Male Inmate Objects to Strip Search by Apparently Anatomically Female Transgender Guard

Quote:
According to the plaintiff, when it was his turn to be strip searched, defendant Buhle, a female correctional officer, approached him and ordered him to strip. The plaintiff states that he asked defendant Buhle how she was able to do that and she responded, "I'm a dude." The plaintiff says he looked at the other correctional officers, "to see if this was a prank," but that they avoided eye contact with him. He alleges that at this point, he "started to panic because he knew that Officer Buhle was a female based on her female features (breasts, face, voice and demeanor) and that exposing his nakedness to her would be in violation of his Islamic beliefs ….

The plaintiff indicates that "[i]t was later brought to [his] attention that Officer Buhle is a female claiming to be a male and therefore is afforded all of the duties that the male officers perform without discrimination."

The plaintiff alleges that in anticipation of another encounter with defendant Buhle, he wrote defendants [GBCI Security Director John Kind and GBCI Warden Scott Eckstein] and requested an "[e]xemption from exposing my nakedness to the opposite sex ... because it is against Islam." On July 12, 2016, defendant Eckstein allegedly denied the plaintiff's request: "I have reviewed your correspondence and have also discussed your concerns with our Security Director. I have reviewed the situation and the officer in question is a male and is qualified to complete these duties. If in the future you are directed to submit to a strip search by this individual or any other male staff member it is my expectation that you will comply."
The Muslim part is apparently included because the lawsuit is based on the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, but I find it pretty much irrelevant. The lawsuit could have been easily brought under the auspices of the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 because the conduct appears to violate 28 CFR 115.15 (regulations implementing the Act) on its face. So, while this particular lawsuit is based on the inmate's religion, I would like this conversation to ignore it because there are other (more convincing, in my opinion) grounds for the lawsuit.

Thoughts? Should prison inmates be forced to take their clothes off in front of someone who is the opposite sex simply because they claim to "identify" with the other sex? What about people who have only been arrested and not convicted? Should a female arrestee be forced to take off her clothes at the county jail in front of a male officer who says, gruffly, "don't worry, I identify as a woman"?
Grizzly Adams is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2018, 08:22 AM   #2
Strawberry
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,686
I hope the plaintiff wins his claim. A prison officer should have to do a little more than declare they're a new gender before prisoners are forced to strip off in front of them.
Strawberry is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2018, 08:22 AM   #3
DragonLady
Illuminator
 
DragonLady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,845
Quote:
Thoughts? Should prison inmates be forced to take their clothes off in front of someone who is the opposite sex simply because they claim to "identify" with the other sex? What about people who have only been arrested and not convicted? Should a female arrestee be forced to take off her clothes at the county jail in front of a male officer who says, gruffly, "don't worry, I identify as a woman"?
Yep.

As we've learned, those who identify as another gender are, in fact, that gender.

If a male-appearing officer orders a female-appearing inmate to strip, s/he must strip.

If s/he claims s/he raped them, we know s/he's lying because we all know two women can't possibly rape each other.

If a child should be borne of the union, relax -everything is rainbows.
__________________
http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=2499

“She would be half a planet away, floating in a turquoise sea, dancing by moonlight to flamenco guitar.” ~ Janet Fitch

The Gweat and Tewwible Winged One
DragonLady is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2018, 08:33 AM   #4
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 4,086
From the POV of the inmate's rights, it doesn't matter what the other officer identifies as. It matters what they are objectively identified as. Does Islam acknowledge gender choice? I don't think it does. The inmates rights should prevail.

Then again, a lot of people would call strip searches a form of sexusl assault, which many would also object to. How about if the inmates are given their choice of officers of varying genders to perform the search? If it is not sexual in nature, as officers claim, the inmate choosing for their own sense of integrity should be no issue.
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2018, 08:55 AM   #5
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14,693
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
From the POV of the inmate's rights, it doesn't matter what the other officer identifies as. It matters what they are objectively identified as. Does Islam acknowledge gender choice? I don't think it does. The inmates rights should prevail.

Then again, a lot of people would call strip searches a form of sexusl assault, which many would also object to. How about if the inmates are given their choice of officers of varying genders to perform the search? If it is not sexual in nature, as officers claim, the inmate choosing for their own sense of integrity should be no issue.
I am with you in terms of the highlight. If an inmate objects to one particular guard doing something as invasive as a strip search I believe that the prison system should reasonably try to accommodate their request for another correction officer to do it. It should be no big deal. But I do not think it matters what the guard "objectively identified as." What is "objective" - their genitals now? Their genitals when they were born? Their karyotype? What if the guard identified as and was male by all biological criteria, but was gay and unprofessional enough to get off sexually from strip searching other males? Would that be acceptable? I'

But I also think religion should not be involved when judging the legitimacy of the request. I do not like the idea that some inmates can play a religion card that allows them, but not others, a particular right. The right should be available to all.

For me it comes down to your last sentence, with which I fully agree: "The inmate choosing for their own sense of integrity should be no issue."
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2018, 09:12 AM   #6
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 4,086
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
I am with you in terms of the highlight. If an inmate objects to one particular guard doing something as invasive as a strip search I believe that the prison system should reasonably try to accommodate their request for another correction officer to do it. It should be no big deal. But I do not think it matters what the guard "objectively identified as." What is "objective" - their genitals now? Their genitals when they were born? Their karyotype? What if the guard identified as and was male by all biological criteria, but was gay and unprofessional enough to get off sexually from strip searching other males? Would that be acceptable? I'

But I also think religion should not be involved when judging the legitimacy of the request. I do not like the idea that some inmates can play a religion card that allows them, but not others, a particular right. The right should be available to all.

For me it comes down to your last sentence, with which I fully agree: "The inmate choosing for their own sense of integrity should be no issue."
I would think a religious objection should be legitimate, with the caveat of demonstrating sincere conviction, which is a tricky one to prove. There is room for abuse under any conceivable system, so I would think the inmates choice should be given weight against perceived abuses. Obviously, the problem arises with male inmates disproportionally demanding female officers, so its kind of a no-win all around in terms of abuse-proof procedure.

Eta: victimizing institutionalized people should be given higher consideration on balance
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907

Last edited by Thermal; 15th September 2018 at 09:14 AM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2018, 09:54 AM   #7
casebro
Penultimate Amazing
 
casebro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 15,606
Wouldn't strip searches fall under sodomy? So Christians are eligible for protection too.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas.
Medium minds discuss events.
Small minds spend all their time on U-Tube and Facebook.
casebro is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2018, 09:58 AM   #8
casebro
Penultimate Amazing
 
casebro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 15,606
hmm, another thought- Felons lose some rights. Should they lose the right to un-infringed religious expression too?

"Welcome to prison. No Burkas, no Kosher anything. No overt symbols of religion- no crucifixes, yarmulkes, voo-doo dolls, ......"
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas.
Medium minds discuss events.
Small minds spend all their time on U-Tube and Facebook.
casebro is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2018, 10:06 AM   #9
p0lka
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 871
what if all the male inmates decide to identify as female?
p0lka is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2018, 10:17 AM   #10
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 4,086
Originally Posted by p0lka View Post
what if all the male inmates decide to identify as female?
Would their cycles synchronize?
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2018, 11:07 AM   #11
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14,693
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
I would think a religious objection should be legitimate, with the caveat of demonstrating sincere conviction, which is a tricky one to prove. There is room for abuse under any conceivable system, so I would think the inmates choice should be given weight against perceived abuses. Obviously, the problem arises with male inmates disproportionally demanding female officers, so its kind of a no-win all around in terms of abuse-proof procedure.

Eta: victimizing institutionalized people should be given higher consideration on balance
I still disagree with the concept of elevating a religious-based objective (or an objection that is claimed to be religious based) to a level above that of any other sincere conviction. If a convict is sincerely and deeply repulsed by a particular action by the prison, no matter if it is religious based or not, I believe the prison should try to determine if a easy, reasonable accommodation can be made. A very shy atheist prisoner freaked out by the notion of having a strip search by the opposite gender has as legitimate an objection as does a religion prisoner. And most religions accept that something done against the will of the believer does not result in damnation: the "sin" sticks to the heathen making the believer violate their faith.

Ironically given the OP, male prisoners disproportionally requesting they be strip searched by female officers might indeed become a problem. But what of male prisoners, gay or situationally pan-sexual, who currently may find some odd thrills from strip searches even when given by male officers? But in a sense - what the hell, why not if it doesn't bother the officers. Strip-searches are not particularly erotic situations, although the bar for "erotic" is undoubtably low in prison. Undoubtably the prisoner would not be allowed to indulge in the situation.

Perhaps more broadly, just randomize it. Many people, including me, go to both female and male doctors and it is no big deal. Being seen naked or even probed by someone of the opposite gender hasn't killed any one.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2018, 04:34 PM   #12
CaptainHowdy
Muse
 
CaptainHowdy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 822
Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams View Post
Muslim Male Inmate Objects to Strip Search by Apparently Anatomically Female Transgender Guard


The Muslim part is apparently included because the lawsuit is based on the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, but I find it pretty much irrelevant. The lawsuit could have been easily brought under the auspices of the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 because the conduct appears to violate 28 CFR 115.15 (regulations implementing the Act) on its face. So, while this particular lawsuit is based on the inmate's religion, I would like this conversation to ignore it because there are other (more convincing, in my opinion) grounds for the lawsuit.

Thoughts? Should prison inmates be forced to take their clothes off in front of someone who is the opposite sex simply because they claim to "identify" with the other sex? What about people who have only been arrested and not convicted? Should a female arrestee be forced to take off her clothes at the county jail in front of a male officer who says, gruffly, "don't worry, I identify as a woman"?
What a prisoner's imaginary friend tells him is right and wrong shouldn't be given consideration in prison. Attempts should be made to accommodate basic tenants of Christianity but any other religions should be ignored. You're in prison. Sorry but you don't get to do everything you used to do before you broke the law.

But in this particular instance, the prisoner should've told the heshe officer that he identifies as a woman so, no, he is not going to disrobe in front a man.
CaptainHowdy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2018, 04:42 PM   #13
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,835
Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy View Post
What a prisoner's imaginary friend tells him is right and wrong shouldn't be given consideration in prison. Attempts should be made to accommodate basic tenants of Christianity but any other religions should be ignored. You're in prison. Sorry but you don't get to do everything you used to do before you broke the law.

But in this particular instance, the prisoner should've told the heshe officer that he identifies as a woman so, no, he is not going to disrobe in front a man.
Except then instead of one woman identifying as a bloke, he would have 2 or 3 women brought in (depending on how many people do a strip search)
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2018, 04:52 PM   #14
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 17,981
Originally Posted by casebro View Post
hmm, another thought- Felons lose some rights. Should they lose the right to un-infringed religious expression too?

"Welcome to prison. No Burkas, no Kosher anything. No overt symbols of religion- no crucifixes, yarmulkes, voo-doo dolls, ......"
Courts have already ruled on this. I don't remember the exact wording of the ruling. The gist of it was that they do indeed lose the right to un-infringed religious expression, but prison officials can't be arbitrary about it. If there is a prison rule to which prisoners object on religious grounds, the prison can say that's just too darned bad for you, but we do this for security reasons, so you'll just have to take it up with God on your own time. However, if there is no particular reason for prison officials to demand a particular rule, but the rule is objectionable on religious grounds, the prisoner can't be forced to follow the rule.

The case in question involved a Muslim who wanted to keep a beard, but the prison had a no facial hair policy. I don't remember the specifics, but when it was all said and done, the guy got to have some facial hair.


It's really the same as any other case, prison or no prison. If the government wants to impinge on someone's religious freedom, they must demonstrate that they have a compelling interest in doing so. When it comes to prisoners, it's a lot easier to show a compelling interest in restricting their behavior.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th September 2018, 06:02 PM   #15
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 7,711
Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams View Post
I have never been literally strip searched but I've been patted down in my underwear. Some of the patters were probably lesbians, so I'm not sure I'd mind being patted down by a guy. But, thinking about it, yeah, it would make me a bit uncomfortable.

I don't remember, but there might have been 2 officers in the room anyway ... it would make sense. I've had a doctor call in an observer while he did a Pap smear.

In this case they should have called in a non-trans man. IMO.

I haven't read the whole thread, maybe these points have already been brought up. But it's peripherally related to the TERF thing. Certain lesbians did not like being called bigoted if they categorically refused to have sex with someone with a penis. I don't know how big of a deal that actually is, because who they sleep with is still their own choice, of course, but they felt the need to make a statement.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:54 AM   #16
pharphis
Graduate Poster
 
pharphis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,699
Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy View Post
What a prisoner's imaginary friend tells him is right and wrong shouldn't be given consideration in prison. Attempts should be made to accommodate basic tenants of Christianity but any other religions should be ignored. You're in prison. Sorry but you don't get to do everything you used to do before you broke the law.

But in this particular instance, the prisoner should've told the heshe officer that he identifies as a woman so, no, he is not going to disrobe in front a man.
Why and Why?

What justification do you have for one religion and no others?
pharphis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:43 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.