Woman

GagaJo, no, it's not about people being forced to 'pass' or die in the attempt, as I am sure you know. If someone is either transitioned, or if they do not use single sex facilities they would be able to live as they wished.

As people have said 7832 times on these threads, this is not about hurting transpeople or limiting their lives other than to ask them not to use single sex spaces. By not using such spaces (which is not difficult) they would be allowing (eg) muslim women to use them. They would be allowing women who have PTSD after rape or sexual assault to use them, and would be making mothers of small children feel able to choose to use 'mother and toddler' swimming groups and change in a female changing room without men in swimming costumes sharing their space and frightening their children. Or any woman to use them who doesn't want her body to be subject to a male gaze that might make her feel uncomfortable for whatever reason.

What's wrong with any of that? Please answer without deflecting the conversation?

I seem to have forgotten to insert punctuation into the above post ?. Sorry - I hope it still makes sense.

Doodledogthe people you want to ban from what you call "single sex spaces" have been using them for years. I am rarely seen naked in a changing room and nor iIthink are most people so if someone has male or female parts you wouldn't know. Jan Morris who died aged 94 in 2020 transitioned in 1972, do you imagine she used male facilities for the next 40 years? Do you imagine she is the only transgender person who has been in these spaces? Why apart from a few highly publicised recent incidents are you so het up about it now? Have these transwomen in any way limited your rights as a woman in the last 50 years? Or have in fact women's rights improved and moved on?
I don't like anyone looking at my body male or female.
This argument is so reminiscent of what homosexuality used to be condemned for- men who like men might get aroused by looking at other men in showers and not be able to control themselves.

My friend did not need to control herself when she saw a man in a wig and swimsuit with barely concealed tackle in the female changing room. Her three year old was under no illusion either.

Please stop imposing your ideas onto mine. I have never felt that gay people are any more predatory than straight ones, and I have never imagined Jan Morris doing anything.

As far as I am concerned, people can live as they wish, so long as they do not impinge on the rights of others. Clearly there are times when one set of rights collides with another, but in the case of single sex spaces I feel that sex is the relevant thing, so those of a different sex (and here I do not include men who have transitioned to transwomen) should stay away from those spaces for all the reasons I have already mentioned.

men who like men might get aroused by looking at other men in showers and not be able to control themselves.

That's a straw man argument trisher and you know it. A heterosexual man is statistically more capable of protecting himself from the unwanted advances of a homosexual man, than a child of 10 is able to protect herself from the unwanted sexual advances of a predatory male, dressed as a woman. Ditto vulnerable women in prisons, safe houses for abused women and single sex changing rooms. I'm pretty certain that you know this but choose to ignore it.

Chewbacca I didn't say it was a valid argument I said it was one used by people to condemn homosexuality, and comparitively recently as far as the armed forces are concerned.
The fact still remains that transgender people have used these spaces for years without incidents. Now you seem to be equating the activities of predatory men with them. It is nothing to do with transgender issues and everything to do with abusive people who can and will use any way to access victims. Stop blaming transpeople for their crimes.

The problem with citing examples of trans who have no evil intents is that most people have no problem with that. Those transpeople who feel no need to make a big thing of being trans and who do not go out if their way to make it obvious, any more than most heterosexual people flaunt their heterosexuality are not an issue.
They are the ones who need protection and acceptance in the same way that gays and lesbians did and still do in some cases.
Those transpeople who use their transID for unacceptable purposes are the ones who cause the problems.
Unacceptable purposes include causing physical or mental harm to natal women; being placed in places where natal women should feel safe, especially if, like Karen White, they are incarcerated for offences against natal women; taking natal women’s places unfairly by using their male structure advantages, and claiming that their rights take precedence over those of natal women, and that those who don’t agree, e.g. lesbians who reject sexual relationships with transwomen, are homophobic, TERF, bigots etc.

grannygranby
re woman
What do I think?, highly in fact definitely unlikely that GN
would put into print.

Laws are made to protect us from bad people not good people. Therefore if the law is changed to allow and self ID males to enter female-only spaces we have to stop that because it can become a loophole for paedophiles and sexually aggressive men to gain access. Men now legally do not even have to attempt at feminizing themselves to gain access...just say they are women. That is not good enough for any of us. Their crimes against women and children are now registered as being committed by women. So everything is getting false. The word gender is being used as a euphemism for sex because it is seen as a more poilte word. This must be properly debated and discussed. For instance I was recently asked by a manager of a bookshop on twitter what we were reading and comments. I said I was reading Material Girls by Kathleen Stock (UK university Philsophy professor) and found it fair rigorous and clear on the gender/sex debate. This was answered by a statement saying their bookshop was trans-friendly and would not allow debate. Helen Joyce's new book 'Trans' which is in the top ten of new non fiction books is not being stocked by Waterstones for example, so hard to get copies on the High Street. They profess not to have heard of it...there are no copies available can order one in etc...when it is on its third printing having only been released in July. Such censorship. Helen Joyce is Britain Editor of The Economist who has been interested in gender ideology for many years and has bravely published this book. It feels like Orwell's dystopian vision of silencing is coming true. And it is the silencing of women.

Helen Joyce has been widely criticised for her biased reporting and unfounded claims. GLAAD a media watch organistion founded to make sure factual information about AIDs and HIV was presented in the press have criticised her
The media watchdog group called Joyce’s statements “alarming,” claiming they have “no place in a newsroom.”

“Journalists have an ethical responsibility to hold an unbiased and fact-based opinion on all issues, but especially on sensitive issues, like the health and safety of the transgender community,” claimed GLAAD chief programs officer Zeke Stokes in a statement to the Daily Dot.

Stokes added that journalists and editors must “maintain a standard that’s open-minded and accepting of all facts, even if it goes against a personal opinion.”
Of course debate should be allowed but just as you should not make racist remarks when debating race issues you shouldn't make transphobic remarks when debating trans issues.
And implying or suggesting transpeople can be linked with abuse is transphobic.
You wouldn't accuse all men of being paedophiles but a much higher percentage of them are probably involved in child abuse than any transpeople.

And implying or suggesting transpeople can be linked with abuse is transphobic.

What is the term for implying or suggesting that people who question why intact men are in female changing rooms are homophobic?

inews.co.uk/news/long-reads/ian-duncan-deputy-speaker-house-lords-interview-brother-died-ovarian-cancer-1125221

ovarian cancer apparently "predominantly affects females" (!)

the article talks about the fault of health care providers for not understanding the needs of trans people, rather than focusing on the confusion that might arise from someone registering with a GP as 'male' who then doesn't get smear test notifications.

Another layer to the debate about trans should be to consider the facts that bodies do not lie.
A man dies of Ovarian Cancer because he is registered as a male, but was born into a female body .

Transwomen will be vulnerable to both Breast Cancer and Prostrate Cancer.

This entire topic is far from resolved.
I am sorry I do not know how to make the top link work as a link

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/inews.co.uk/news/long-reads/ian-duncan-deputy-speaker-house-lords-interview-brother-died-ovarian-cancer-1125221/amp

There you go, pinkquartz.

Maggiemaybe

Thank you

Transwomen (man to woman) can get prostate cancer because the prostate is not usually removed even during reconstructive surgery. Transmen (woman to man ) may have cancer of Skene’s glands but it is very rare. Transwomen going for surgical transition can opt to retain the ovaries , even when the uterus and Fallopian tubes are removed.
Anyone with ovaries can get ovarian cancer. It’s a danger of being a woman even if you’ve transitioned.
Taking hormones to aid transition male to female gives an increased risk of developing breast cancer.
This is all explained in great detail when you start to ask for help with transition. If you simply self ID, you keep the risks related to your birth sex.

Most trangender people do not see self ID as just deciding to be a particular gender one day. They simply want an inexpensive non-medical process which is easily accessible.So swearing in front of a magistrate, being issued with a certificate, or some legal process. So help could be tied in to that.

Help could be tied into that. Those who self ID could certainly expect or ask for the same checks that their birth sex entitles them to, e.g. cervical screening, breast screening, but self ID means you keep the risks pertinent to your birth sex.

My copy came from Waterstones !!!

My copy came from DD who bought it in Waterstones when we were in Glasgow.

It is not that transwomen are predators, but predators are overwhelmingly male. And that does not change when someone 'identifies' as a woman. Most males are nice, but since we can't tell who, women must be protected from all. Even if that hurts their feelings. Respectful males, including trans ones, understand this.
When you create a loophole, and when you raise any group of males out of the normal safeguarding policies abusers see and exploit.
Women and girls have the legal right to single-sex facilities, for privacy, dignity and safety, regardless of who the male is, and without any need for justifying it. That's supported by the Equality Act 2010.
The wholescale removal of our rights is abusive, and it's propped up by institutional threats, shaming and gaslighting. This is not being done for women's benefit, and women were not consulted. That is misogyny.

The wholescale removal of our rights is abusive, and it's propped up by institutional threats, shaming and gaslighting. This is not being done for women's benefit, and women were not consulted. That is misogyny.
So what rights have been removed grannygranby? The Equality Act 2010 remains in place. The proposed Self ID bill was dropped. Women as far as I know still have the vote so can choose the policies they support, lobby parliament and form action groups.
There are a lot of women's groups about if you want to change things, or form your own.
Most of the women's groups I know would absolutely disagree with you though.

I think your 'women's groups' sound very specific and 'of a type', trisher. Many women absolutely agree with grannygranby, and none of that matters in the grand scheme of things, as it is parliament that changes things, not women's groups; and legislators are running scared of Stonewall, and the 'no debate' approach to what would be discussion if there were any. It seems as though politicians are (understandably) reluctant to give opinions on trans issues, as they have seen what happens when anyone voices dissent.

The rights that have been removed are the rights of women to go to single sex spaces and expect to find that only female people are there. The right to take your three year old to a swimming session designed for toddlers and find an intact man in the women's changing room. The right to feel as safe as it's possible to feel in a jail. The right to know that the person in the hospital bed next to yours is not able to rape you in the night, and that if you have to go to a hostel for victims of domestic abuse which has always been strictly women-only, you will not find that the word 'women' has been expanded to include men, so is now meaningless. The right to adhere to your religious principles without having to limit your life because men are in both male and female spaces. The right to compete against other women in a sport that relies on strength for success, and not to find that your competitors are men.

For many women, what would be a great start would be the right to discuss all of this without being silenced by threats, or being called transphobic, told to read more, to have it implied that your disconcertion at men being in women's changing rooms is akin to homophobia and so on.

And implying or suggesting transpeople can be linked with abuse is transphobic.

What about the men identifying as women and sent to women's prisons who then sexually attack other female inmates?

I quote from a Times article. Transgender prisoners are five times more likely to carry out sex attacks on inmates at women’s jails than other prisoners are, official figures show.
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/seven-sex-attacks-in-womens-jails-by-transgender-convicts-cx9m8zqpg

Doodledog -possibly they are of a "type" possibly the women I know who celebrate things like International women's day or organise events are mostlly left wing and union people. But if so what difference does that make. If there are women who believe they are having their rights undermined are they not capable of organising themselves?
Are you saying the Equality act of 2010 isn't still in place or that self ID is legal?
As for the extremes and emotional cases you stated where is the evidence? Could a woman not complain to the swimming pool staff? or to the hospital authorities? or to the staff running a hostel (although they disagree with you about who is admitted to them)? Has someone suddenly silenced women? Is Stonewall standing watchdog over them all?
Or is it in fact just a few out of touch individuals who see the presence of transpeople as a threat? Individuals who are egged on by people like the journalist Helen Joyce who see in this issue a chance to make themselves a name and money. By using the methods always used by such people, fear and trepidation of the different. Isn't that what has always been used to divide people by gender, race, religion, abilities or any other feature which can be identified as marking them out? And hasn't such fear been proved in the end to be entirely imaginary? By all means let's discuss what can be done to help assimilate transpeople but let's do it from the standpoint that they are not predators and they do not threaten women.

The complicated situation in women's prisons as far as sexual matters is concerned needs far more investigation. Forrexample it is almost certain that there are women in prison who use implements to sexually attack other women but under English law this cannot be described as rape. There are other relationships where individuals are coerced or forced into sexual relationships (this is particularly true of younger prisoners). I would imagine as well that the social interaction in a women's prison makes reporting an attack by a transgender prisoner much more acceptable than reporting an attack by another women.