“Supposedly modelled on the conflict resolution practices of certain indigenous cultures” – Oh dear. I expect those cultures weren’t the ones who came out on top in the long run.
I’m reminded of the case of the Moriori people of the Chatham Islands, who shared common ancestry with New Zealand Māori. The Moriori practiced a pacifist culture known as “nunuku” (named after a 16th century leader, Nunuku-whenua), which might be seen as an extreme version of Attic Greek Xenia, or hospitality. All very commendable, but when the considerably more warlike Māori arrived from the mainland, equipped with newly-acquired muskets, any Moriori who weren’t slaughtered were carted off and enslaved.
Singing cum-by-yah didn’t help much then and it still doesn’t. If self identified “progressives” don’t have the stomach to admit that given actions deserve given consequences, it is past time for them to cede the room to the grown-ups.
It’s telling that “forgive and forget”, in such circles, means forgive the perp and forget the victim. Now that really is unforgivable.

“Anti-rape feminists are probably responsible for more black men being incarcerated than anyone else in modern-day America” …when I see statements like this, from well-meaning, well-educated and supposedly intelligent people, I really feel close to despair. Where to begin? “Anti-rape feminists” – as opposed to those pro-rape feminists I guess!? And no acknowledgement that maybe, you know, the perpetrators (whatever their skin colour) are kind of responsible for their actions and should be accountable for them? If you break that link between actions and consequences, where do we end up? Nowhere good, I would suggest.
I doubt anyone is pretending that “lock ’em up and throw away the key” is the perfect answer, or would deny that people who have committed crimes also need help and be given every chance to turn their lives around (to the extent they are willing to accept such help). Nor that the cycle of abuse and deprivation that too many people are born into is not a tragedy that blights whole generations, and we need to do all we can to address that. But never at the expense of justice, never in a way that fails to protect the vulnerable and the victims.
All too often, fine-sounding but mis-used concepts like RJ are advocated by those (yes, very often white) who are acting out of guilt on the one hand, but also from a position where they are unlikely to bear the full consequences of the failures of such policies. It’s the poorer people, disproportionately people of colour and most likely to be both the victims and the perpetrators of violent and sexual crime, who will always suffer the most from any refusal of the criminal justice system to do its job properly.

Didn’t indigenous cultures engage in “healing circles” or what have you because they did not have the wherewithal to build prisons and the alternative was blood feuding? I don’t think it was just the romanticized “indigenous cultures” didn’t Saxons, etc, pay weregeld for a killing? Honestly, trying to pretend that you’re implementing some kind of “wisdom” from pre-modern societies in which such practices are used because otherwise somebody is putting an axe through your skull is just bonkers. Also maybe that is the missing piece, you, Mr. Rapist, will be proper sorry and not ever do it again or I or my clan will stab you to death at a time and place of our choosing. Prison might be the option they’d prefer then.

Nobody on the left, currently shrieking about gun control, will draw any causal link between the state’s withdrawal from its duty to protect its citizens, and the individual’s desire to have some means of self protection.

“Like most on the Left, I believe that only the most dangerous criminals should be locked up. I have criticised the fact that the most vulnerable and disenfranchised are most likely to be in jail. But the campaign to end male violence is my life’s work.”.
So what you say, is that “not locking people up” is right in the abstract, but for this issue you know about, it’s a bad idea. Have you no thought that for other victims, of other crimes, not punishing the perpetrators of their crimes may also be highly inappropriate?
In reality, people who do bad things must be treated in a way that benefits society, not them. They have lost the right to be specially considered by hurting others. What must be most importance is the good of society. Whatever the ethnic makeup of the perpetrator.

We have heard repeated calls from feminists that young men to be re-educated regarding their attitudes toward women. The Office on Violence against Women has responded by requesting $25 million toward that end.

A lesser known side of this story that took 5 minutes to find for any one who is interested. The ‘white male’ lawyer be more right than he knows.

Perhaps a little uncomfortable for the dominant narrative and one Julie I think will not be exploring on Unherd on any where else any time soon.

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780203016091/child-abuse-gender-society-jackie-turton

“One of the most significant concerns regarding the long-term harm that may be inflicted by female sexual abusers was highlighted in some research projects concerning male sexual offenders. Groth (1979) found that sixty-six percent of the rapists in his study reported child victimisation by female perpetrators. Petrovich and Templar (1984) found that fifty-nine percent of rapists in their study had been sexually abused by a female. Briere and Smiljanich’s (1993) data from a self-report survey found,

‘among the sexually abused men who reported sexual aggression against women, 80% had been sexually abused during childhood by a female perpetrator. In other words, sexual activity during childhood with an older female strongly predicted later sexual aggression against adult women . . . childhood sexual victimisation by females is a particular risk factor for later assault directed at adult female victims. (sum-marised in Mendel 1995, 62)’

Cavanagh Johnson (1989) also noted in her literature review a number of studies that concur with Mendel’s observation and suggested that it was important to note ‘the high percentage of the most aggressive male sexual perpetrators who were molested by women’ (p. 572).

It is important to recognise that sexual offences committed by women should not just be viewed as ‘male-like’ behaviour (Renzetti 1999); these offences need to be considered in context, taking into account power differentials and the restrictions of gendered structures, alongside an analysis of the rationale of the offenders. Nevertheless, the sexual abuse of children by women is hardly an insignificant matter, and it can(not) be denied, excused, and minimised.”