> which strengthens their allegation that the underlying sex might be an important factor to consider in these scenarios. "Underlying sex" isn't a particularly

> which strengthens their allegation that the underlying sex might be an important factor to consider in these scenarios. "Underlying sex" isn't a particularly coherent concept to begin with. By what potential mechanism could "underlying sex" influence behaviour, other than hormonally? Lacking an answer to this question doesn't mean we should rule out the possibility while investigating, but we shouldn't take too much heed of the possibility until we have a reason to believe it. «"Excess male violence in prisons" problem is a consequence of the patriarchy» is a concise explanation, introducing no additional entities or mechanisms, consistent with the observations mentioned in this thread, and… well, as far as I'm aware, it's the mainstream feminist position on this matter. > Come to think of it, that seems almost obvious in retrospect. I've had thoughts like that, on occasion. Unfortunately, segregationist policies are a much more politically feasible approach than anything like what you're proposing, and I don't think that will change any time soon. How to segregate is the question: whether to segregate is a pretty radical question to be asking. I don't think your proposal is quite perfect, but it's a start.