Scarf in Suffragette colours not allowed in Scottish Parliament.

And (if my POV counts for anything) the fact that 48 women have succeeded in having their distress result in a conviction makes one wonder how many weren't believed, didn't report it, or (probably more likely) have no idea that it even happened.

But yay! It was successful, apparently.

Of course we legislate for the possibility that someone might do something disturbing. That is why there is an extra penalty for carrying a knife, or for stealing mobile phones. Or for hate crimes.

I have suggested before that there could be an additional penalty for any male bodied person committing a crime in a women's space, but was ridiculed. I don't know why that wouldn't work, though. Whatever the penalty for the crime, there could be an extra one if the perpetrator had used disguise to carry it out. So, if a man dressed as a woman and assaulted her in the Ladies, a changing room, a female hospital ward or similar, there could be a penalty for the assault, and another mandatory one for using a female disguise in order to be there in the first place.

That wouldn't have any impact on 'ordinary' transwomen, but might deter criminals using the cover of trans to prey on vulnerable women. Maybe someone willing to enter into discussion with me might like to tell me why that wouldn't work?

It would show that there had been thought given to the nature of predatory males and the type of actions they take to gain access to females.

All we seem to get is denial of what happens in everyday life to females of any age - even in old age or childhood. I believe that every woman could give instances of receiving unwanted male attention. Conviction rates really mean nothing.

It would be a way of bridging a gap between now, when men are able to access spaces designed for women, and some point in the future when people (ideally other men and transwomen) have come up with a mutually acceptable solution rather than insisting that women put up and shut up.

It seems to me that anyone objecting to that happening is ignoring the fears of women and girls, or just doesn't think that they are important.

I think it’s a real lack understanding of the power of fear to prevent females from leading the life they want. Violence and abuse does not have to actually happen, there only has to be the chance of them happening to place all kinds of restrictions on females.

Not being able to go to the theatre at night because of the isolated car park. Not being able to go for a walk along footpaths without a man trying to engage your attention. Having to walk a quarter mile more home from town rather than go through a small wooded area.

These are calculations about safety that women make every day because the possibility of a predatory male is always there.

And now not being able to go to a toilet without judging who is also in there, or try on a dress without feeling uneasy about who is just a curtain away. Or worst of all being afraid to seek help after abuse because other abusive males are able to access your place of shelter.

To think through the impact that the GRA will have on everyone, both positive and negative. Surely this is what we would demand of any new law.

I agree completely, Lathyrus.

There can be an attitude of 'I don't feel like that, so anyone who does is overreacting' from people who have never been through something, but that is so lacking in empathy.

I've posted before about a friend of mine who was sexually assaulted in a Ladies' loo when we were students. The perpetrator was not a transwoman. He 'presented as' a man, which is why, when he was seen loitering around the Ladies, which was set back from the busy bar area, someone noticed him and reported it, so he was caught before actually raping her. I can't help wondering what would have happened if he'd looked like a woman, or if the person who spotted him didn't report it because even people who are obviously men can now say they 'identify' as female and cry 'transphobia' if challenged,

That happened years ago, but it still haunts me. Just because someone may not have gone through anything similar is no reason to discount the experiences of others, or dismiss their concerns.

Just because someone may not have gone through anything similar is no reason to discount the experiences of others, or dismiss their concerns.
I grew up in an area that is now considered niche and upmarket ( and I couldn't afford to buy there even before this happened!). When I lived there on a council estate I'd be frightened walking home on my own at night. If you've never walked with the fear generated by footsteps behind you, is it still so hard to imagine what it's like?

Lathyrus

I think it’s a real lack understanding of the power of fear to prevent females from leading the life they want. Violence and abuse does not have to actually happen, there only has to be the chance of them happening to place all kinds of restrictions on females.

Not being able to go to the theatre at night because of the isolated car park. Not being able to go for a walk along footpaths without a man trying to engage your attention. Having to walk a quarter mile more home from town rather than go through a small wooded area.

These are calculations about safety that women make every day because the possibility of a predatory male is always there.

And now not being able to go to a toilet without judging who is also in there, or try on a dress without feeling uneasy about who is just a curtain away. Or worst of all being afraid to seek help after abuse because other abusive males are able to access your place of shelter.

To think through the impact that the GRA will have on everyone, both positive and negative. Surely this is what we would demand of any new law.

I'm sorry but I refuse to accept this whole concept of women as simply victims. Is there a possibility of violence in street? -yes. But actually the crime figures show that most street violence and violence in public places is perpetrated against young men. Does anyone suggest to young men that they may be victims and they shouldn't go to certain places? No
The fact is that more crime is committed against women in domestic settings than in any public places. Yet women are constantly being told they should fear public places. It seems to me that there are some women who choose to create these feelings of fear in other women. Quite why I have no idea. I can see why men would do it. It's another way of controlling women, but quite why other women should perpetuate this myth I don't know.
If you are posting about men being in toilets
If you are posting about changing rooms being a danger
If you are posting that women are raped or attacked by complete strangers
Then you are perpetuating myths.
Because most women are attacked or raped by men they know. The crime figures are quite clear on this.
Perhaps if instead of perpetuating these myths more women were warned about the ways relationships spiral into violence and that the men close to them can become more dangerous than complete strangers women would be safer and suffer less harm.

Doodledog

And (if my POV counts for anything) the fact that 48 women have succeeded in having their distress result in a conviction makes one wonder how many weren't believed, didn't report it, or (probably more likely) have no idea that it even happened.

But yay! It was successful, apparently.

Of course we legislate for the possibility that someone might do something disturbing. That is why there is an extra penalty for carrying a knife, or for stealing mobile phones. Or for hate crimes.

I have suggested before that there could be an additional penalty for any male bodied person committing a crime in a women's space, but was ridiculed. I don't know why that wouldn't work, though. Whatever the penalty for the crime, there could be an extra one if the perpetrator had used disguise to carry it out. So, if a man dressed as a woman and assaulted her in the Ladies, a changing room, a female hospital ward or similar, there could be a penalty for the assault, and another mandatory one for using a female disguise in order to be there in the first place.

That wouldn't have any impact on 'ordinary' transwomen, but might deter criminals using the cover of trans to prey on vulnerable women. Maybe someone willing to enter into discussion with me might like to tell me why that wouldn't work?

16 men 48 instances doesn't necessarily involve 48 women Doodledog. Several pictures taken at the same time could be of one woman , they could still be considered as separate offences. The woman wouldn't necessarily even be aware or identifiable if the images were on the perpetrators phone. Still why bother with accuracy?

I pointed out that the women may be unaware. I suspect that the majority of victims of upskirting have no idea that it has happened, as of necessity it is done surreptitiously.

But why bother with reading my posts when you can just have a dig?

I'm glad you see the need for separate prison accommodation for transwomen Glorianny. Unfortunately that isn't being used enough in the UK and elsewhere.

You said, tho, This was nothing to do with transactivists. It was trying to find a solution to a problem.
In Scotland, it definitely was all to do with transactivists. It is documented in 'Trans Britain - Our Journey from the Shadows" ed. Christine Burns, that transactivists lobbied to persuade the Scottish Prison Service to place transwomen in women's prisons.
The idea was that they'd then be able to point to how successful it was.
That didn't turn out so well, due to no records being kept of the success or otherwise.

I assume you equally deplore the portrayal of transwomen as victims. The statistics indicate they are one of the demographics that are at least risk.
Perhaps instead of perpetuating these myths, allies could focus on the risks to transwomen and not say that toilets etc are a risk to them.

Glorianny
16 men 48 instances doesn't necessarily involve 48 women Doodledog. Several pictures taken at the same time could be of one woman , they could still be considered as separate offences. The woman wouldn't necessarily even be aware or identifiable if the images were on the perpetrators phone.

So the important thing for you isn’t that an offence was committed against females, by males, but how many males were involved.
Unbelievable!

“Some women choose to create this feeling of fear in other women”.

Of course it’s the woman’s fault🙄

I went to London recently for an evening performance.

In just one day

On the tube a man “bodied up” to me, closer than he needed to be

A man demanded “change” whilst looming over me

A man “accompanied” me from the venue and sat next to me on the tube even though I had declined his offer

Did I report any of this. of course not. There were loads of people around so I didn’t feel threatened then.
Would I have felt threatened on my own? Of course I would.

Every day this happens to women. It’s not reportable so people just dismiss it. Close their eyes and ears and say it doesn’t happen.

I’m over seventy and nobody’s sexual dream. Good knows what young women have to deal with

Myths, by G or T

If you are posting that women are raped or attacked by complete strangers . . . G will tell you it’s a myth

So according you G

no unfamiliar male has ever raped or attacked a female

no female has ever been placed in danger because a male has been granted the power to be allowed in female spaces simply by self ID as ‘woman’

No TW has ever been allowed to stay on a female mental health ward, (where some patients have been traumatised by males), whilst demonstrating his maleness, because removing him would be transphobic

. . .

No woman (me) had ever gone into a toilet and been followed by a male who masturbated to the sound of her peeing ( and incidentally when relating this on another thread was told it was the best joke ever)

No woman has ever sat next to a man on a plane masturbating under his blanket.

Or woken up to find a mans hand on her breast

No woman has ever had a man run his hand over her bottom at a party

I could go on and on. But you’ll understand these are all things I’m making up in order to scare other women.

🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

. . . No preteen has ever been flashed by a TW -yes, a man in a dress! when walking home from school

. . . No female (me) has ever been groped on a tightly packed escalator by a TW. (He did apologise. He was just feeling for his purse which had slipped up round my chest)

. . .

I'm not saying it doesn't happen.
Although I have been to London, travelled by tube, walked in deserted and crowded areas even late at night and never suffered from any of the attention you mention Lathyrus. I realise I am very capable and have developed strategies which would deter many people from approaching me. I have travelled extensively on my own and rarely felt at risk. I have been approached by men who thought I might want company but a simple "Go away" seemed to deter them. I'm sorry you suffered such attention Lathyrus but it has never been my experience.
In fact I've had some nice interventions from men in London, including help with my suitcase when I was struggling up the stairs from a tube station (it did make me realise that I was getting older).
Maybe I'm just too innocent and don't realise what men are up to. Or perhaps I just don't attract them.

But I still wonder if these things are happening what on earth it has to do with transwomen. How you expect keeping the same expensive and restrictive practices in place for Gender Recognition Certification will do anything to stop it. Or indeed why predatory men are not the object of your ire and not transpeople.

Mollygo

Glorianny
16 men 48 instances doesn't necessarily involve 48 women Doodledog. Several pictures taken at the same time could be of one woman , they could still be considered as separate offences. The woman wouldn't necessarily even be aware or identifiable if the images were on the perpetrators phone.

So the important thing for you isn’t that an offence was committed against females, by males, but how many males were involved.
Unbelievable!

It's just a question of accuracy Mollygo something I know always concerns Doodledog

Predatory men are the object of our ire.

For the billionth time - it is because predatory men can disguise as women and access our 'safe' spaces that we are concerned. That, and the fact that women expressing concern or reporting feeling threatened are so rarely believed, and/or are told that they have a victim mentality.

So the important thing for you isn’t that an offence was committed against females, by males, but how many males were involved.
Unbelievable!
It's just a question of accuracy Mollygo something I know always concerns Doodledog.
*And for you just a question of supporting males against females, something I know always concerns you Glorianny.
I see.
It makes sense of the reason you say intersectional-meaning males take priority.

Because something hasnt happened to you is completely irrelevant. I havent experienced domestic violence, that doesnt mean it doesnt happen or that strategies dont need to be in put place to address domestic violence.

Galaxy

Because something hasnt happened to you is completely irrelevant. I havent experienced domestic violence, that doesnt mean it doesnt happen or that strategies dont need to be in put place to address domestic violence.

But domestic violence is well documented and is in fact the primary cause of injury and death for women. Street violence is mainly the cause of injury and death for young men. So isn't it reasonable to ask why this focus on women being at risk when it is actually young men? Why is no one telling young men they may be victims?

And as I have said many times legislation to change gender recognition will not stop predatory men. Just as restricting toilets etc to single sex provisions and insisting people only use the sex they were assigned at birth won't prevent men accessing them. Because transmen will be using female facilities so challenging a man will be more difficult .

These discussions go round in circles and they bore me.
The whole argument of the gender critical seems to be improving the lives of trans people threatens women, although there is little evidence to show this is true.
Present any evidence to the contrary and it is ignored

Lathyrus You questioned the source of the information about Argentina. This is the website www.openlynews.com/about-us/

Oh, my fault again for giving off signals that just beg men to approach me. Mea culpa.

It a attitude I would have said belonged in the 1950s when as a teenager I had my first experience f being stalked by a man in a park. But here it is again, rearing it’s head just when we thought we had established male harassment was not acceptable.

What’s triggered this change. You don’t have to look very far to see the rise of male dominance. And, as in the past, the “virtuous” women who will support them.

Glorybe
These discussions go round in circles and they bore me.

Don’t you realise that you’re part of the boring cycle you mention. 🤣🤣🤣

As long as you continue to support TW and TRA who cause harm to female and damage the image of trans, I’ll continue to post that refusing to condemn those TW and TRA I mention means that you think their behaviour is right, whether you openly say so or not.

It isn’t right. That behaviour harms females and the trans you purport to support.