Biological men in woman only spaces

Sorry welbeck, is there a bit of your post missing? Can you repost?

But the law is quie clear on that*Doodledog*if there is a chance that women would not use a facility or space because transwomen were present, transwomen even those with a GRC can be banned. The appropriate question might be why isn't that law being applied. I think it is because it suits those with the authority to ensure the law is enforced to have women split into factions with one section of them blaming everything on transwomen. Some seem to think it is all the fault of Stonewall. I still fail to see how any single organisation no matter how influential can exercise power over so many disparate sections of society.

VioletSky's comment at 13:55 makes sense. I don't think the problem is trans women, I think the problem is men, masquerading as trans women. It is the same old, same old. Cis men acting as a threat to women.
I agree. The trouble is that when men who say they identify as women can enter women's spaces and no-one can stop them, they pose a threat to women. Whether that is the fault of transwomen or not (and clearly it's not) is not the point for the women being attacked, and there is no point in pretending that it doesn't happen.

I (and others) have said all along that we are not transphobic, and that we are not setting out to be difficult towards transwomen who just want to live their lives, just that as feminists, where there is a clash of interest we would always put women's rights above those of transwomen.

As for the 'personal insults' thing, I won't comment?

I still fail to see how any single organisation no matter how influential can exercise power over so many disparate sections of society.

I think that Stonewall set out as a laudable organisation that succeeded in its aim to get rights for gay men and lesbians, but when they had achieved that they realised that they were victims of their own success and were no longer necessary, so attached themselves to the trans cause.

Their Diversity Champion kitemark is desirable for places like universities and local councils as it suggests that as large employers serving diverse client bases they are inclusive and fair to all. The threat of having that kite mark removed has been resisted, as the PR would be bad, and Stonewall knows it.

There is also a lot of misunderstanding on the lines of the things that were said about racism in the 80s and 90s (you 'aren't allowed' to say black coffee, etc) and budgets for Equal Opps staff have been cut.

Consequently, Stonewall has a lot more 'influence' than it would have, as in the absence of qualified Equal Opps staff, decisions about how to deal with accusations and incidents falls to the PR teams (themselves strapped for cash) or others with little specific diversity training, and they agree to Stonewall's demands, which include 'No Debate' and a zero tolerance attitude to expressing any view that is not in favour of putting trans rights first.

there was a bit missing from my previous post and link. sorry.
can't find it now.
some of these issues are being discussed over on our junior colleagues' site.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3489313-School-girls-gaslit-en-masse-after-encountering-naked-man-in-swimming-pool-shower

I wonder how is it gaslighting if the person was in the process of transitioning?

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it’s a duck.
If the person in transition is still showing he’s a male, he shouldn’t be in there. Why would a man who genuinely wants to be a different gender want to demonstrate that he is still in fact a man.
A person who really wants to portray as a different gender would make sure that they appear as the gender they aspire to be. A man in a women’s space who demonstrates his manhood is a flasher.

trisher

I wonder how is it gaslighting if the person was in the process of transitioning?

Perhaps you can explain the change that happens to a male penis when its owner transitions but is going to keep their penis as the vast majority of transwomen do? Otherwise to anybody not in the know they are being presented with a bog standard biological male. I wonder how many transmen insist on communal showering naked with the other men, which if it's normal behaviour must surely happen?

Mollygo exactly Why would a man who genuinely wants to be a different gender want to demonstrate that he is still in fact a man.

The point is though, the occurence of stuff like the event being referred to is miniscule. While the vast, vast majority of assaults on women are perpetrated by people already know. And the huge majority of the stranger-danger attacks on women are by cis men.

And yet, here we are, going around the track yet again hashing out the same old argument, focusing on a number of trans women who probably amount to no more than 20 world wide.

So GJ, As long as it’s only a small number of women who are damaged by trans-women it’s okay then.
diversion alert
By the same token if Peter Sutcliffe had only murdered one woman . . .

But most of us are not saying that transwomen are the danger, but men who are pretending to be.
The same applies though, one is too many.

This is such a non-argument. If someone wants to be seen as a sex they were not born into why do people immediately assume they are up to know good. We used to label gays in the same way and have been proved to be wrong.

As for safe spaces; all spaces should be safe for everyone. If they are not, they are not safe for anyone.

Nobody is assuming that transwomen are up to no good. People are concerned that as long as there are no female-only spaces, men can access areas that were once reserved for women only, and where women may be vulnerable (eg inhospitable or in DV hostels) or in a state of undress (eg toilets or changing rooms).

The fact that gay people were historically seen as a threat is a false equivalence.

PippaZ nice idea about all spaces being safe for everyone.
How would you go about setting that up and ensuring that it works?

Mollygo

PippaZ nice idea about all spaces being safe for everyone.
How would you go about setting that up and ensuring that it works?

Isn't that what governments are paid to do?

I have heard the mention of prisons - I really wouldn't think many think of that as a safe space. Women attack women and men attack men don't they?

GN has already come up with a way of making public toilets safe for all. They may have other ideas but I suspect it is often to do with the design of the buildings.

Is this government doing anything about unsafe housing, prisons, toilets, etc? I'm selfish. I want my environment to be safe too.

Doodledog

Nobody is assuming that transwomen are up to no good. People are concerned that as long as there are no female-only spaces, men can access areas that were once reserved for women only, and where women may be vulnerable (eg inhospitable or in DV hostels) or in a state of undress (eg toilets or changing rooms).

The fact that gay people were historically seen as a threat is a false equivalence.

Doodledog if nobody is assuming transwomen are up to no good, what is the problem.

Why should women expect female-only spaces? It sounds very Talibanistic to me. Can we only be safe if we are in a special place? Next, we will not be allowed out of that space. We will not be allowed to mix or compete with men (something many have fought for). We will not be allowed to be educated with the opposite sex, something that was still frowned on by some when I was growing up.

As with hospitals, if you gave people a little more dignity and privacy in general, it would not be a problem. Toilets were sorted out up-thread and changing room could also be individual.

You do not explain why the comparison with how gay people (assumed at that time to be mainly men) were treated is what you term a false equivalence. Perhaps you could tell us?

The worry I have is being alone in a small intimate space like many toilets are especially the hand washing section with a man I don't know who ,if he intended mischief , could easily do so, ie nick my handbag or worse . I also frequently have my young grand children with me and I feel vulnerable.

Why should women expect female-only spaces? It sounds very Talibanistic to me. Can we only be safe if we are in a special place? Next, we will not be allowed out of that space. We will not be allowed to mix or compete with men (something many have fought for). We will not be allowed to be educated with the opposite sex, something that was still frowned on by some when I was growing up.

Are you serious? This is the second time you have accused me of thinking like the Taliban - the first was for having a different point of view from yours on pensions!

No, having a single sex space to change after swimming, or having a female doctor to examine women who have just been raped does not lead to single-sex education or women not being allowed out without male guardians. Similarly, not wanting to be left with lights out in a locked cell with a biological male does not equate to separatist thinking.

Nobody is saying that we can 'only be safe in a special place', just that there are times when women feel safer amongst other women, particularly when vulnerable or naked.

Either you are deliberately finding fault with what I am saying or you are losing the plot.

PZ I didn’t ask about the government having ideas ? I asked what you would do.

What on earth is wrong with having female only spaces, please can anyone tell me as I just do not get it?

(A man with a penis and testicles can wear a dress and a full face of make-up, unfortunately that does not make him a woman. It is impossible to change the chromosomes with which you were born)

Doodledog if nobody is assuming transwomen are up to no good, what is the problem.

As explained, the problem is that men can say they are identifying as female and access female spaces. Transitioned transwomen are not the ones being assumed to be up to no good. Nor are the vast majority of men, whosoever they identify. What is concerning people is the fact that attackers may use the fact that there are no safe spaces to gain access to vulnerable women. Those attackers may or may not be trans - but they are very likely to be men, who, until now, have been unable to invade female-only spaces.

As long as there are cubicles, I don’t mind about loos or changing rooms. I’d never use a communal changing room anyway.
As for sports, people who have grown to adulthood as men, and subsequently identify as women would seem to have a very unfair physical advantage over biological women. But trans rights do now seem to trump fairness.

What does really anger me is the ridiculous insistence by a small, very vociferous minority that traditional words like ‘woman’, breast-feeding, etc., can no longer be used, and that to do so is trans-phobic.

If Labour and the LDs don’t alter their stance on this nonsense, IMO they will lose an awful lot of women’s votes at the next GE.

If Labour and the LDs don’t alter their stance on this nonsense, IMO they will lose an awful lot of women’s votes at the next GE.

I agree, and that is worrying, too. We could be stuck with the Tories for longer, as another side-effect of the TRA lobby. I personally know a number of women who don't feel able to vote Labour as a result of this (and they wouldn't vote Lib Dem anyway) so are feeling disenfranchised.

There are some really good points being made about why the battle should be creating a society where safe spaces aren't needed.

Trans women in general are being made scapegoats for the crimes of others.

This would be like being afraid of our own sons and treating them like they could attack someone at any moment.

VioletSky

There are some really good points being made about why the battle should be creating a society where safe spaces aren't needed.

Trans women in general are being made scapegoats for the crimes of others.

This would be like being afraid of our own sons and treating them like they could attack someone at any moment.

Absolutely not

I also think that there should be male only spaces for those who wish to use them.