Eddie Izzard

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.

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.

daddies = saddoes.

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

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.

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?

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. 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.

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.

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'.

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 think I've explained it many times and I think most people accept it. But I will do it again (but is the last time) for the benefit of those who perpetually post the same things pretending they have legitimate ideas which will work but which apparently they have no responsibility for. It's also as usual an attempt to question my commitment to women.
So here goes.
It is already illegal for a man to assault a woman this doesn't stop it happening. If a man is intent on assault he is unlikely to take any notice of a law banning him from entering a toilet.
If women are to be allowed to dress and present as they wish some women will suffer if access to toilets is regulated by appearance and there is no other way of applying such a law.
The false sense of security which saying something is illegal might create, will be dangerous for women, because there will still be some times and places when women will need to take care using a toilet

If you advocate a change in the law the very least you should do before doing so is research how it will work, and the side effects which might result.

That has not answered the question, but you have taken another opportunity to bang your drum.

I will repeat - why am I 'irresponsible' for not coming up with a way to allow men to do what they like? Why does it come down to women to do that, or to say nothing while their privacy, dignity and safety are compromised? Why don't men deal with it, as transwomen are male? If the law can't cope with the difficulties of having men in women's spaces, why allow it at all? Cut the nuances and, until someone does find a solution Just Say No.

trisher, this is really a typical transfan answer!
So in your opinion women are to blame for wanting single sex toilets!
If women are to be allowed to dress and present as they wish some women will suffer if access to toilets is regulated by appearance

What do you say about someone intent on causing harm is true, but if you were told that acting in a certain way would definitely get you arrested, would you still do that?
Oh well yes I suppose you would.

Do you think it’s right that if someone challenged you for your behaviour, you could get away with it by simply pretending to be a different sex, and demanding that the victims use the pronouns you prefer or find themselves in more trouble than you?

Evidently you do.

Your explanation is just your justification for saying that TIM (trans-identified-males) have rights that override those of females.
Oh dear, I’ve just realised I put trisher instead of Glorianny.
Never mind, calling someone by an incorrect name e.g. calling males ‘women’ is OK with you.

Doodledog

That has not answered the question, but you have taken another opportunity to bang your drum.

I will repeat - why am I 'irresponsible' for not coming up with a way to allow men to do what they like? Why does it come down to women to do that, or to say nothing while their privacy, dignity and safety are compromised? Why don't men deal with it, as transwomen are male? If the law can't cope with the difficulties of having men in women's spaces, why allow it at all? Cut the nuances and, until someone does find a solution Just Say No.

Regardless of sex or gender if you advocate a change in the law you should be aware of what will or could happen as a result of that legislation. And yours (as I have said many times) will not just impact on men. It will affect any woman who enters a public toilet.

This "Oh it's just men" is not only untrue it's ridiculous.
Discrimination often sets out claiming it will only affect a few, unfortunately it never stoops there. Once you begin judging it tends to escalate, and only those who absolutely conform to set restrictions are not discriminated against.

Discrimination often sets out claiming it will only affect a few, unfortunately it never stoops there.

Exactly!
Discrimination against females by trans and fans (TAF) started off affecting only a small number of females but the discrimination against females by TAF has spread across sport, swimming pools, changing rooms, refuges, hospitals, toilets etc.
In addition, the actions of some TAF has caused discrimination against harmless TIM.

Glorianny If you advocate a change in the law the very least you should do before doing so is research how it will work, and the side effects which might result. Oh yes if only the MPs had put their brains into gear before passing the GRA that would only affect a ' few hundred' people who could then enter into marriage with someone of the same sex, but it would be disguised as a heterosexual one......... If they'd simply OK'd same sex marriage we might not be in the LaLa land we're occupying now.

There is of course an easy answer, repeal the GRA. Bad laws have been repealed before.

Regardless of sex or gender if you advocate a change in the law you should be aware of what will or could happen as a result of that legislation. And yours (as I have said many times) will not just impact on men. It will affect any woman who enters a public toilet.
I am not advocating a change in the law. I am advocating a return to having single sex spaces which are respected by those of the opposite sex.

*This "Oh it's just men" is not only untrue it's ridiculous.
Discrimination often sets out claiming it will only affect a few, unfortunately it never stoops there. Once you begin judging it tends to escalate, and only those who absolutely conform to set restrictions are not discriminated against.*
And who has said 'Oh, it's just men'? Not me, and not anyone else, as far as I can remember. That seems to be in your head alone, I'm afraid.

Yes, Rosie, bad laws don't have to stay on the books.

Ah so the GRA is a "bad law". No transphobia on GN of course.

Haven't read the thread.

This is an interesting, and in my view good, Twitter thread on gender identity: twitter.com/davidspiersiii/status/1577263743234641920?s=21&t=qY9e6lJ6x_YMCBatr2VeVA

Baggs I love you to bits; but that’s a cracking (and long winded) bit of mansplaining

Glorianny

Ah so the GRA is a "bad law". No transphobia on GN of course.

Who has said 'Oh, it's just men', or anything approximating it?

And I'm still not clear why it should be my responsibility to come up with a way for transwomen to do exactly as they choose wherever they choose to do it. You are right that it is complicated, and that there are numerous interested parties, but women should be able to use women's facilities without men being in there (loos, changing rooms, prisons, whatever), and it should be the people who want to change that who come up with a way of making it acceptable to all, not the people who are being asked told to shove over and shut up.

Mollygo

*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.

With that in mind, I've read that Primark have decided to go back to women only changing areas apropos of several incidents where men have barged in on women, and those women didn't regard the invasion of their privacy as accidents. Brendan O'Neil is right imo, decent men would not want a mixed changing area anymore than most women do. Opportunists will always take advantage of a flawed set up.

Terribull Primark have confirmed the women only area welcomes anyone who 'identifies' as a woman, so still mixed sex. The men aren't given a dedicated area that will be gender neutral, so they could be sharing with women who decide to use that area.