Eddie Izzard

Rosie51
more transwomen would have the moral fibre of Fionne Orlander, a transwoman who would easily 'pass' but still uses the men's toilets out of respect for women

But that’s the whole point, they don’t have any respect for females and neither do the transfans.

I'm not really expecting an answer, but it would be good to know the reasoning behind the idea that women have to come up with solutions so that men can do what they want, and if we don't we are 'irresponsible'.

In some public buildings your bag has to be searched before you enter. and why is that? For security purposes, the safety of all as far as possible. It will be an infinitesimally small percentage of people that pose any risk, and yet we all have to be screened. You will not accept that all men, even those who adopt an interpretation of 'woman' should be excluded from women's toilets. That's aside from the transwomen who don't even bother to shave their beards, and others who are only transwomen part time, being men on the other days. Didn't Eddie Izzard used to have 'girl days' and 'boy days'? It's not for me or anyone else on here to work out how that exclusion is achieved. I do wish that more transwomen would have the moral fibre of Fionne Orlander, a transwoman who would easily 'pass' but still uses the men's toilets out of respect for women.

Doodledog

No. Of course not. But we've been over this over and over.

Can you please tell me why I am 'irresponsible' for not coming up with a solution to something that a small number of men want to do?

(NB I'm not responsible for transmen either, but they are unlikely to pose a risk to men if they use their loos, so please don't divert the thread into a discussion of them.)

Over and over and over.
If it was a punishable offence in law, then it would take the onus off females having to face TIM and publicity seekers like EI, declaring they are ‘women’.
If males were seen in female toilets and reported and punished, then the only TIM who would use female toilets are those we are assured have been doing so unnoticed for so long.
Shame Glorianny can’t see how much damage she and the visible TIM etc who use female spaces are doing not just to females but to the previously unnoticed trans.
I hope you’re not expecting an answer Doodledog.

Glorianny doesn’t answer questions she finds too difficult and VS doesn’t answer questions unless they’re written in a form she likes.

No. Of course not. But we've been over this over and over.

Can you please tell me why I am 'irresponsible' for not coming up with a solution to something that a small number of men want to do?

(NB I'm not responsible for transmen either, but they are unlikely to pose a risk to men if they use their loos, so please don't divert the thread into a discussion of them.)

Doodledog

No-one 'polices' the fact that it is illegal to take a gun into a bank, but we all know that there will be consequences if we do, and people don't do it. Most people wouldn't want to, and I can't think of many good reasons to take a gun to a bank (popping in to cash a cheque on the way to a grouse shoot?) but the point stands.

Nobody 'polices' all sorts of things in the way you describe it , but society relies on people respecting the rules, social consequences if they are broken (eg queue jumping) and ultimately sanctions if you are caught, however unlikely that might seem.

Given his high-profile status as (for want of a better word) a man in women's clothing, why do you think that EI used the Ladies on that day and in those circumstances, Glorianny?

Actually people do police you in a bank. Most banks have CCTV and security staff watching. Of course you could carry the gun in a basket and no one would know unless you produced it. Much as no one would be able to tell if a woman was a trans or cis woman in many cases. In some public buildings your bag has to be searched before you enter. Are you suggesting women will have to be checked as they enter a public toilet and produce proof they are not transwomen?

If she's allowed to castigate them I don't see why I can't speculate about them.

She castigated them for something they did, with photographic evidence to support it.

You've just made stuff up. There's a difference.

It's almost as if you can't distinguish between reality and invention.

I'd still like to know why I am 'irresponsible' for not doing something that is not my responsibility?

daddies = saddoes.

As Brendan O'Neill says, decent men don't invade women's private space. It's only the dodgy disrespectful ones who do.

And it’s because of the dodgy, disrespectful men that we need female safe spaces. Several posters have said that you can’t police it. It’s true, but if there was sufficiently strong punishment for those dodgy disrespectful males who make it quite obvious that they are are male, instead of allowing the TIM or daddies like IE the “I’m a woman” travesty of an excuse, it would be a start.

MargotLedbetter

Glorianny

GrannyGravy13

Glorianny I disagree the only thing being chucked under a bus is the bloody hard won rights of natal born women.

Eddie Izzard using the female lavatory and all the associates publicity is the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

So it's OK to condemn two women you don't know who were perhaps simply doing a job they were paid for (and badly needed the money from), and acting under instruction, for not conforming with your personal views. Well that's clear then. In the gender critical utopia only women who conform to the accepted imposed norms will be considered. The rest can b..... off.

What evidence do you have that they were paid? What evidence do you have that they badly needed the money?

The usual hyperbolic TRA rant about irrelevancies, I see. Distract, deflect, blame.

By gender-critical utopia you mean normal life for women until around 2010. That was the point when more and more cross-dressing men started demanding access to women's spaces. We just want a return to the status quo before men's rights activists and autogynephiles started disrupting it. As Brendan O'Neill says, decent men don't invade women's private space. It's only the dodgy disrespectful ones who do.

I have no evidence but I'm prepared to consider the possibility. Unfortunately the two women concerned were condemned by the writer of that article with just as little knowledge. If she's allowed to castigate them I don't see why I can't speculate about them.
It isn't irrelevant when it is discussing something from the article in the OP.

Glorianny
If a man is prepared to break the law and assault a woman, a law telling him he couldn't enter a toilet would be unlikely to deter him.

Same old, same old.

The usual hyperbolic TRA rant about irrelevancies, I see. Distract, deflect, blame.

It’s a good point MargotLedbetter.

All legislation could do is make every woman's life more difficult and lull some women into a false sense of security.
How does it do that?
(Don’t worry, you don’t have to answer.)

Forgive me if I regard abdicating responsibility. . .
You appear to abdicate responsibility for everything that makes females feel safer, so no change there.

Incidentally people usually ask for forgiveness for doing or saying something wrong, with the intention of not repeating their actions.
Is that really what you’re asking? ???

Glorianny

GrannyGravy13

Glorianny I disagree the only thing being chucked under a bus is the bloody hard won rights of natal born women.

Eddie Izzard using the female lavatory and all the associates publicity is the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

So it's OK to condemn two women you don't know who were perhaps simply doing a job they were paid for (and badly needed the money from), and acting under instruction, for not conforming with your personal views. Well that's clear then. In the gender critical utopia only women who conform to the accepted imposed norms will be considered. The rest can b..... off.

What evidence do you have that they were paid? What evidence do you have that they badly needed the money?

The usual hyperbolic TRA rant about irrelevancies, I see. Distract, deflect, blame.

By gender-critical utopia you mean normal life for women until around 2010. That was the point when more and more cross-dressing men started demanding access to women's spaces. We just want a return to the status quo before men's rights activists and autogynephiles started disrupting it. As Brendan O'Neill says, decent men don't invade women's private space. It's only the dodgy disrespectful ones who do.

Oh, and why 'irresponsible'? It is not my responsibility to abdicate, which was a more important point than the absence of routine 'policing' of lavatories.

No-one 'polices' the fact that it is illegal to take a gun into a bank, but we all know that there will be consequences if we do, and people don't do it. Most people wouldn't want to, and I can't think of many good reasons to take a gun to a bank (popping in to cash a cheque on the way to a grouse shoot?) but the point stands.

Nobody 'polices' all sorts of things in the way you describe it , but society relies on people respecting the rules, social consequences if they are broken (eg queue jumping) and ultimately sanctions if you are caught, however unlikely that might seem.

Given his high-profile status as (for want of a better word) a man in women's clothing, why do you think that EI used the Ladies on that day and in those circumstances, Glorianny?

Doodledog

Izzard is a well known cross-dresser (let's leave whether he is a 'trannie', a 'transexual' 'non-binary' or whatever for now).

He was at a venue where everyone knew who he was, and in any case couldn't pass for a woman in a howling gale.

Had he used the Gents, his cover wasn't ever going to be blown, was it? This was a deliberate way to make some sort of point. not an awkward moment when someone trying to 'pass' has to decide between using the wrong loo and outing themselves.

I do have sympathy with transwomen who who are in that situation. Some are mentally fragile (not all, before I am pounced on) and would suffer if they had to 'expose' their real sex, however obvious it may be to everyone present. Spending ages on your make-up, choosing an outfit carefully, perfecting mannerisms etc then having to use the male loo can't be an easy situation. I get it. But that shouldn't be a problem for women to solve. The fact that a small number of people are in this position is unfortunate, but it is not my problem. It enrages me when people say ' if you don't like men in the Ladies, what would you do about it? Where do you think they should go?'

I have no real idea, but even if I had I have no power to put it into place. Why would I spend time and effort coming up with an answer to a difficult problem that is not of my making? It is a male problem - let men (or transwomen) solve it, or leave it to the politicians whose job it is to legislate, and who have think-tanks, access to experts and far more data at their disposal than I do.

If anyone wants to tell me that my attitude is 'unkind' or selfish, please think about whether you would feel the same if a man said similar. How many 'female problems' do most of them spend time solving (unless there is a monetary advantage or sales opportunity, that is)?

I don't think your view is unkind. I do think it is irresponsible to imagine that it would be possible to implement any act which stopped someone entering a public toilet. The clue is in the word "public". No one polices them, some have a little regulation in the form of CCTV cameras at entrances. Some have nothing. Even if it were possible to arrest and charge any transwoman with entering a woman's toilet how many cis women would have to be challenged in the process, and how would they prove their birth gender? Even then how would that make any woman safer. It is illegal to assault women, but as has been said many times men have accessed toilets and assaulted women. If a man is prepared to break the law and assault a woman, a law telling him he couldn't enter a toilet would be unlikely to deter him. All legislation could do is make every woman's life more difficult and lull some women into a false sense of security. Forgive me if I regard abdicating responsibility for that as unacceptable.

Eddie Izzard using the female lavatory and all the associates publicity
Didn't he used to be a comedian years ago?
Is this all self-publicity because his star was waning because he most certainly isn't doing transgender people any favours whatsoever.

Izzard is a well known cross-dresser (let's leave whether he is a 'trannie', a 'transexual' 'non-binary' or whatever for now).

He was at a venue where everyone knew who he was, and in any case couldn't pass for a woman in a howling gale.

Had he used the Gents, his cover wasn't ever going to be blown, was it? This was a deliberate way to make some sort of point. not an awkward moment when someone trying to 'pass' has to decide between using the wrong loo and outing themselves.

I do have sympathy with transwomen who who are in that situation. Some are mentally fragile (not all, before I am pounced on) and would suffer if they had to 'expose' their real sex, however obvious it may be to everyone present. Spending ages on your make-up, choosing an outfit carefully, perfecting mannerisms etc then having to use the male loo can't be an easy situation. I get it. But that shouldn't be a problem for women to solve. The fact that a small number of people are in this position is unfortunate, but it is not my problem. It enrages me when people say ' if you don't like men in the Ladies, what would you do about it? Where do you think they should go?'

I have no real idea, but even if I had I have no power to put it into place. Why would I spend time and effort coming up with an answer to a difficult problem that is not of my making? It is a male problem - let men (or transwomen) solve it, or leave it to the politicians whose job it is to legislate, and who have think-tanks, access to experts and far more data at their disposal than I do.

If anyone wants to tell me that my attitude is 'unkind' or selfish, please think about whether you would feel the same if a man said similar. How many 'female problems' do most of them spend time solving (unless there is a monetary advantage or sales opportunity, that is)?

-safe

Glorianny

And all this using the gents in an emergency will have to stop. When toilets are policed you will just have to wet yourself.

A price worth paying to keep my daughter, daughters-in-law, granddaughters and any other natal born woman.

Glorianny it was Eddie Izzard’s fault 100% for asking the two women to escort him into the Female Lavatories.

I would be grateful if you wouldn’t put words into my posts that I haven’t, as nowhere have I condemned his two escorts

Glorianny

And all this using the gents in an emergency will have to stop. When toilets are policed you will just have to wet yourself.

Fair enough, a small price to pay to keep women and children safe.

And all this using the gents in an emergency will have to stop. When toilets are policed you will just have to wet yourself.

GrannyGravy13

Glorianny I disagree the only thing being chucked under a bus is the bloody hard won rights of natal born women.

Eddie Izzard using the female lavatory and all the associates publicity is the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

So it's OK to condemn two women you don't know who were perhaps simply doing a job they were paid for (and badly needed the money from), and acting under instruction, for not conforming with your personal views. Well that's clear then. In the gender critical utopia only women who conform to the accepted imposed norms will be considered. The rest can b..... off.

Glorianny I disagree the only thing being chucked under a bus is the bloody hard won rights of natal born women.

Eddie Izzard using the female lavatory and all the associates publicity is the tip of the proverbial iceberg.