can we discuss feminism please

MBHP1 as far as toilets and changing rooms go I think there is no way anyone can prevent any men, disguised as women or not from accessing them if they intend to harm women. The law cannot police every public toilet. Which is why your suggestion of toilets for women and seperate ones for transpeople won't work either. Transwomen believe they are women so some would use the women's loo. It is actually putting women at risk not to warn them that public toilets may not be safe spaces.
As for changing rooms how do you suggest we distinguish between the people using them? Do you intend to have someone on the door challenging anyone who doesn't look sufficiently female to gain admission? Will you have genital inspections? Wouldn't this mean women have to look certain ways?
The worse sort of laws are those which cannot be enforced.

The discussion about men and paedophilia is interesting. But if we apply the same arguments as those being used against transwomen to the situation -ie some transwomen are dangerous to women so all transwomen must be banned - logically if some men are dangerous to children all men must be banned from working with them.

As for the wages for housework yes I know about it and it was resurrected in the 1970s. It is a great suggestion for an alternative economy. It would of course now need to be paid to a partner who didn't work outside the home.

But as to the danger posed by all men, while some men are a serious danger to children, most are not. But before a man is allowed to undertake any role with children, he must undergo a DBS check, (as do women). We do not take his word for it that he's a lovely man and good with children and vulnerable people and has a twinkly smile. This removes a good many dubious individuals accessing children. By allowing anyone into women's spaces without question, the good, the bad and the downright dangerous will go there and all they need to say is “I'm a woman”.

This doesn't feel like the years of struggle for women have got anywhere if even the place they should expect privacy and dignity has men in it.

But no one is saying that really protected spaces like women's refuges should be open to everyone without proper regulation petunia just that proper risk assessment should continue and just as DBS does rule out anyone who is a risk to women.
The other places like loos and changing rooms really can't be regulated like that.

Regarding Toilets and gender exclusive spaces new facilities are being built Unisex and individual, you queue with the men and other genders and have your own private facility.

I have visited several and it works better than expected, even our local leisure center has unisex changing, it’s going to take time for existing facilities to get changed.

Our local baths ended ‘unisex’ changing rooms because of the number of occasions when women and children were sexually harassed or assaulted there.
What’s the problem with single sex facilities alongside facilities for trans people

Many women wont be able to access those facilities David. Some shops etc, have quietly changed back from unisex due to the number of sexual assaults.

I had told myself I wouldnt get into this toilet discussion yet again, the issue is far greater than that, but here we are again. The needs of women have been overlooked and dismissed time after time, toilets are just one example.

I find it quite difficult to get my head around a feminist point of view that has moved on from fighting for and protecting the rights of women and now regards trans women as women, no ifs, no buts. So by ignoring biology and ignoring and dismissing genuine concerns of women the situation, women are disadvantaged. So in essence, the rights and protections, safety and dignity of the majority must be minimised and trivialised for the very very few.

In the news this weekend-a great example

In Sydney, a women and children only open air swimming pool has recently been in hot water because it was following the guidance of the 1995 equalities act. Transwomen wanted access to this space and initially the authorities stated that only fully transitioned transwomen were allowed in the pool i.e. following removal of the penis. Uproar ensued and the authorities caved in. So essentially, the women's pool has become a mixed pool. A complaint was made pointing out that women may object due to religious or other reasons to sharing such a space with male bodied people. The complaint was quashed and disgruntled women were told to educate themselves.

Are the real disadvantages and needs of half the population ( women), due to their biology, now so sorted that we need and must to focus on the desires of a very tiny number of men?

I agree completely petunia, toilets are the least of our worries in a way, but are a symptom of how the needs of women are put to the bottom of the pile.

Once again the assumption is that there are no transwomen. There are.
David0205 is quite right single person secure toilets would solve any problems. They are already provided for disbled people. Why not for everyone?
As for the swimming pool are you really saying that someone was employed to look and see if someone still had a penis? Or is the truth that actually this was a real example of how a rule is absolutely incapable of being applied?

I dont know what you mean, who is assuming there are no transwomen? I agree secure individual toilets with a sink would meet everyone's needs but no one is doing that are they? They are just making womens toilets unisex.

The argument Galaxy is always "Women are women and that cannot be changed" well there are women who don't want to be women but want to be men. are you saying they can't be? Because that seems to me to be discriminating against some women. Or are you saying they can be men, but transwomen can't be women? Because either way you are discriminating against someone.

They can be whoever they want to be, I couldnt give a monkey's, but facilities are segregated by sex and I am really sorry but you cant change sex. The exemptions are in the equality act so it's not discrimination. In the same way not being allowed to take a 15 year old to a playgroup is not discrimination.

Galaxy

I dont know what you mean, who is assuming there are no transwomen? I agree secure individual toilets with a sink would meet everyone's needs but no one is doing that are they? They are just making womens toilets unisex.

The facilities I used did have a sink, mirror and about double the size of a normal cubicle, because you wouldn’t have the lobby or hand washing areas, they would take up very little if any extra space, it did feel strange queuing with the ladies but in practice worked well.

Galaxy

They can be whoever they want to be, I couldnt give a monkey's, but facilities are segregated by sex and I am really sorry but you cant change sex. The exemptions are in the equality act so it's not discrimination. In the same way not being allowed to take a 15 year old to a playgroup is not discrimination.

So what you are saying is you are prepared to share facilities with a woman who is a transman, who may have undergone surgery and have a penis, but you are not prepared to share facilities with a transwomen at all. Beause you believe they remain the gender they were born.
Doesn't that mean people who look like men can access women's facilities just by claiming they are transmen? How would you know the difference?

Pretending we cant tell the difference is part of what has led us to this situation. I am not going to get into a discussion about peoples genitals but the situation for transmen is particularly difficult, the failure rate and complications if they do have surgery are very high, most dont because of that. It's very complex trisher which is why we should never have pretended that people can change sex. I have grave concerns about how safe transmen are in male toilets.

I believe that the toilet situation has been used to trivialise the issues faced by biological women and to distract from other issues. Discussing it keeps us busy while the world turns upside down.

The elephant in the room here is what is the definition of transwoman. How can the definition of woman be opened up to include men if we don't know exactly what sort of “woman” is to be included. Is it someone who has had a full surgical and medical transition one sort of “woman”. But the trans umbrella includes a wide and hugely populated group. From cross dressing to body dysphoria, autogynephilia to someone who isn't sure, someone who is a woman one day a week to the individual who just calls himself female because he can. Should the definition of woman include someone who wants to broaden the bandwidth of woman without shaving off his beard and who calls himself a “grrl”? Is Eddie Izzard a girl? Stonewall include everyone, should the word woman include everyone too
What about the transwomen who call themselves lesbians and screech transphobe to the female lesbians who don't want to have sex with someone who has a penis (pretty unreasonable of those pesky lesbians eh??)

I believe that JKRowlings statement about transwomen was an eloquent and accurate statement that many people would agree with. I personally don't wish transwomen harm. I'm not sure the reverse is true. But I don't think the definition woman should be opened up to include transwomen.

So who stands up for women against this many headed onslaught. Large organisations have caved in, the media are pushing the trans agenda, the law is clinging by a thread. And the modern feminist movement seems to have lost its way by all accounts.

I wish peope would stop bringing into this argument references to people who are insisting anyone should have to have sex with someone else. All sex should be consensual. No one should pressure or force anyone else to have sex with them.
I will stand beside anyone who actually supports feminist principles. That the patriachy suppresses any group of people that are different and only by standing together can we oppose that.
Galaxy people are not changing sex they are changing gender.

I know trisher and I am talking about facilities segregated by sex.
Actually trisher when men are claiming to be lesbians we are going to talk about it, I am not going to not challenge homophobia because it makes people uncomfortable.

Excellent post, petunia.

And well said, Galaxy.

Galaxy

I know trisher and I am talking about facilities segregated by sex.
Actually trisher when men are claiming to be lesbians we are going to talk about it, I am not going to not challenge homophobia because it makes people uncomfortable.

Sorry Galaxy who is being made uncomfortable or being homophobic?
I have tried to stick entirely to facts on this issue and not introduced transphobic arguments because I don't think it is helpful.
I do however find this discussion absolutely illogical.
The philosophy seems to be- we must define the word "woman" but even if that is done, how will that be applied in practical situations?
Will you insist that transmen use women's facilities ? If so isn't it possible that a man could claim to be a transman and access them? And if transmen are to use men's facilities then shouldn't transwomen use women's?
Galaxy worries about transmen in male toilets, but transwomen are in just as much danger and would be made to use them. Do they not deserve protection as well?

Can't believe still talking about toilets ?
since we are - let's not forget how violent women can be too - especially in a nightclub toilet after a drink!

Years ago I felt safer around the men than the bitchy women.

OOh Ro60 expect trouble! when I mentioned women who encouraged violence and talked about what used to go on in girls' toilets in schools I was accused of being mysoginistic, goodness knows what you will be seen as if you actually acknowledge there are violent women.

Trisher ?? ?

It seems what ever logical arguments that are made it will need a tragedy to happen and not just one before some people will be convinced that predatory men WILL pretend to be women if they see it will give them access to women and children’s spaces, of that I am in no doubt.
I do not feel safe in toilets or changing rooms anymore and many women feel the same but our FEELINGS we are told are not valid, are based on prejudice etc etc...heard it all before in relation to anything women have to say about anything. I hope I never find myself in prison where my voice matters even less because my safety will not be guaranteed from men who are pretending that they FEEL they are women.
In simple terms, it is as history shows, men’s feelings are accepted as more valid than women’s.
Not feeling very positive today and angry that all the sacrifices that women and some men have made to advance the equality and equity for women is being undone and for it all to come to this...
best hold back a bit...

Anyway, in a previous post I made reference to the following and found this eventually.

"There is an almost complete lack of statistical data on the relationship between gender-identity policies and incidents of sexual violence in bathrooms and change rooms.

Using Target stores as a case study, we analyzed 220 media-reported sexual offenses in Target stores from 2003 to August of 2017 to determine the association, if any, between their gender-identity access policy made public in April 2016 and reported sexual offenses in their stores.

Results: Sexual incidents increased over the course of the entire timeframe of the media reports. In particular, voyeurism-related offenses (Upskirt and Peeping Tom) increased significantly after the publication of Target’s gender-inclusion policy in April, 2016.

The three-season forced-category measurement found a 2.3x increase in the amount of upskirt incidents after the policy, and a 2.9x increase in peeping tom incidents after the policy.

In a Poisson regression, using trimesters to control for seasonal variations in offenses, the fold change in rate from the four year pre-policy period to the post-policy period was 3.03 for Upskirt and 3.14 for Peeping Tom.

Using a two year pre-policy period, the rate change was 2.16 times for Upskirt and 2.34 times for Peeping Tom.

Conclusion: While media-loss remains a limitation in the analysis, the present study supports the theory that sex predators may take opportunities afforded by gender-inclusion policies to perpetrate sexual violence against women in public spaces.

No other theory seems to account for the significant and precisely-timed increase seen in the Target reports. Further study would be helpful to compare police reports to media-reported crime and to geographically match Target with similar stores to investigate whether sexual offenses have increased elsewhere...."

From 2017 - still relevant.

womanmeanssomething.com/targetstudy/