People who menstruate

Feminism is for women trisher I am sorry people have convinced you otherwise. In the same way that gay rights are for people who are gay.
So by your arguement we have no need to segregate by sex at all. Many many people in refuges are raising concerns about this as did those running the prison services.
Safeguarding involves judging people by the acts of a few, it is why we have DBS checks for people who work with children.

Re the homophobia of the TRAs - it has caused a bitter split in the LGBT community. And guess who have been the main recipients of this hatred? Yep - lesbians ie biological women. The TRAs argued that lesbians should be happy to have sex with transwomen - yep that’s right, have sex with a person with a penis who identified as a woman. If they refused, they were transphobic. TRAs hate women and want them erased. Full stop.

Safeguarding is about preventing harm, abuse, bullying and neglect. Being safe is a basic right so safeguarding is in place to protect the vulnerable.

A DBS is indeed safeguarding as it looks into the individuals history, judging them by their actions, no one else's.

Ive never read anywhere it called judging the many by the actions of a few and I literally have safeguarding in my diploma.

Judging the many by the actions of a few also puts lives at risk and causes a lot of discrimination. That is not safeguarding. Safeguarding protects from discrimination. The Equality Act as one example.

No one on this thread that I am aware of has asked that any one be put at risk. There are many safeguarding measures that can be put in place to prevent risk and organisations like prisons have a duty to do that.

Most people who work with children dont harm them but some do therefore everyone who works with children has to have a Dbs. Men as a whole are more likely to commit violent crime and in particular violent sexual crime. It is one of the reasons we segregate by sex, not the only reason but one of them. This does not mean all men are a risk but as we cant tell which ones are so we put safeguards in place. Sex segregation is by its nature discriminatory.

It is similar to screening people at airports most people arent terrorists but as we cant tell who is a terrorist we screen everybody, we therefore have to judge that everyone might be a potential terrorist because of the actions of a few.

No we don't Galaxy that is a reasonable safeguarding measure which we can have without judging the many by the actions of the few.

Everyone going through the same security measures is equality. It prevents random security checks being discriminatory. It safeguards people from discrimination.

I think it was trisher who said, we can't ask to check if everyone has a penis before they enter a bathroom or changing room. Reasonable safeguarding would be seperate secure facilities for everyone. No discrimination or judging involved, risk awareness, not judgement.

Sex segregation is protected under the equality act. Are you saying men are currently being judged because they arent permitted in a womans changing room for example.

OK, that's not fair and it's not what I am saying at all.

But sex segregation is discriminatory by its nature. It prevents a particular group going where another group can go. I am not trying to be unfair to you, that's just what sex segregation is, it discriminates for want of a better word between two groups of people.

Galaxy, I am asking for something that suits the individual. So that if I want to share a space with someone I feel comfortable with I can but I can also have a private space.

That may not be possible.for all current building designs etc but putting it in place for the future is reasonable

When a sacred caste is created, nobody wants to question that caste for fear of insulting or upsetting them. Or people are scared of an accusation of transphobia. Or of being accused of trans exclusionary behaviour.
Problems arise then, when SOME, not all, of that caste behave badly and abuse women and children.
A sacred caste has been created, a homophobic rhetoric that has the institutions in its grasp. The trans ideology is one of the most sickening ideologies that this country has ever seen.
There's has been a 4000% increase in girls wanting to transition to boys. Anybody ever thought that the extreme pornography that's freely available online may have had an impact on this figure.
Those with genuine gender dysphoria must be horrified at the grip that trans ideology has in this country.
The sacred caste must be dismantled. I'm hoping that the case against the Tavistock clinic is successful.

Maybe I would like to take my husband in the changing cubicle for me as an example

Now I think there is an argument that we should do away with sex segregation altogether, I dont agree with that argument but at least there is some honesty to it, saying that some men should enter womens spaces whilst others cant is nonsense.

Are you still talking to me galaxy because it should be noted that I haven't suggested that.

Sex segregation is a complex issue that does not need to be in the examples I have provided.

Sex segregation went against equality in some historic examples so I expect the fact that the subject can be revisited with the umbrella of safeguarding and the equality act protecting different groups is a good one.

I dont think whatever happens they are going to let men and women into a locked cubicle together as a rule.

No I didnt say you has suggested it, I just said it is a more honest approach than saying some men can enter womens spaces.

I can and do take him in when in a shop with unisex cubicles.... Ooer

galaxy can you see that there are ways of doing things that don't make trans people feel discriminated against and still safeguard all individuals?

Can I ask why you dont take him in when in a single sex space?

You first galaxy it's only fair

Not really starblaze, it's a clash of rights, and they are pretty impossible to fix, so no I dont think you can safeguard women if men are in prison with them, I dont think you can safeguard women in sports if men take part in those sports. As I have said sex segregation by its nature is discriminatory.

Cross post

I think you can solve toilets in a heartbeat. You provide unisex and single sex. It's easy.

Starblaze are you aware that the government is considering changes to the Gender Recognition Act? If it is passed, it will make it very difficult to refuse any man, including those who self identify as a woman, to refuse to accept them in women's spaces. This will include Women's Refuges, where women who have been brutalized, raped and psychologically tortured by males, go to as a place of safety. They don't want biological males near them because they are afraid of them. But if a biological man, complete with his penis, decides to identify himself as a woman, those refuges cannot refuse to allow him access, even under the Equality Act exemptions.

The Women’s Aid motto is “Until Women and Children are Safe”. We do not feel safe having males in our spaces. If my rapist follows me you will ring 999. You will get the police to do safety checks on my welfare. If he comes near the refuge you will force me to leave there for my own safety and the safety of other women, yet if he puts on
a dress and calls himself a woman you could welcome him into the refuge and call women bigots for objecting. Under the new law you may be forced to do this.

I find it unbelievable that anyone who would profess to have empathy and understanding for people in need of support and empathy, cannot empathise or understand why having men, in women's spaces, is a violation of our rights and is causing very real alarm and fear for thousands of women.

Why would we need both?

If they are next door to each other anyway....

In reality I refuse to use shared changing rooms now. But again the rights of the individual are paramount so individual changing rooms is the answer for me