Scarf in Suffragette colours not allowed in Scottish Parliament.

So you blame Stonewall for the discrimination the gender critical are creating. Wow but then I suppose expecting you to take responsibility for the results of your views is expecting too much.
No. Stonewall is to blame for pushing the trans agenda to the point where it is no longer about a small number of men who want to be women being able to be treated as such, but about anyone who wants to take rights from women being able to say they are female and have that taken as true. The so-called 'gender critical' are not creating discrimination. That is entirely unfounded and inaccurate.

After all transmen never get discussed because admitting that transmen would be using the same facilities as women even though they look like men and that might make those facilities open to other men is never to be mentioned.

Yawn. How many times are you planning to ignore this - transmen are rarely mentioned on here because our concerns are for women, and transmen are not a threat to women. If a transman is in a female space it is unremarkable because transmen are female. It Is Not About Appearance.

You see I wouldn't mind your views quite so much if they were logically and thoroughly thought out, but they're not.
It is logical to say that men should use male spaces and women use female ones, surely? The illogicality comes in when you start saying that because you believe men to be women if the want to be then they should be given free rein to go where they please - now that's illogical.

So if you restrict facilities to what you consider to be accurate. that is transwomen are men and must use men's facilities then logically transmen are women and must use women's. Which means people who look like men will be walking into women's spaces
I don't care if transmen use women's spaces. They are women. If they use men's spaces and men object, men can sort it out, as they expect women to do when men use our spaces. How Many Times? Transmen are most unlikely to pose a threat to men. Women are most unlikely to pose as transmen with a view to exposing themselves or otherwise behaving inappropriately in men's spaces. The reverse, sadly, is not true.

Meantime the assertion that you can always tell a transwoman, and a transwoman is a man, causes harm to women, who get shouted at and told to get out of toilets and changing rooms because of the way they look . But this is nothing to do with people who post constantly about the dangers of transwomen in toilets.
So you keep saying, but as I say, I have never even heard of this happening other than from you. That is not to say it doesn't, of course, but it does seem odd that if this is commonplace it has never happened in any way that I have heard of. I can't even imagine being in a Ladies and hearing women being shouted at and told to leave. In what sort of establishments does this happen, and who does the shouting? Does no-one step in to defend the manly-looking women? Did it happen before the days of Stonewall, or is it a recent occurrence?

Anyway, if this is the case, then as was said upthread it is wrong and needs to be addressed - you know, in the way that you say that if men use the cover of being trans to sexually assault women it is wrong but not all men are like that so it's ok.

And I'm told I'm the one who doesn't care about women????
Yeah, that's right. If you did you wouldn't clutch at straws about women being shouted at to leave toilets, and suggest that the risk of that happening is more important than the risk of women being assaulted. You wouldn't want women to be deprived of our spaces, or to have the words we have used to describe ourselves and our lives for centuries to be removed, or for research figures to be rendered meaningless when they rely on accurate information that differentiates between the sexes.

As for the lines between male and female being blurred I do wonder how that can be? Don't you believe it is impossible to change sex? So aren't those lines immovable? And if you are saying that you want men and women to be clearly identifiable isn't that the same as saying that you want gender norms enforced?
Nice try at a gotcha, but no cigar.
The lines referred to are the lines which used to mean that women could use a changing room or a loo without wondering if there would be a man in there. She could go to hospital and expect to sleep in a female ward amongst other women, with no danger of being assaulted when she is too ill to fight back. That sort of thing. She is a mother if she has a baby, and can choose to breastfeed her baby, instead of being a birth giver who chestfeeds.
As they have broken down, women are more alert to the possibility that there might be men in their spaces, and that may explain the phenomenon you describe of male-looking women being shouted at to leave public toilets.

Re The Daily Mail.
It has always had a large female readership.
I think that far more women read it than any other paper.
In fact, in the 70s and 80s it marketed itself as the newspaper for women.
(Funnily enough though, I’m the only woman on Gransnet who reads it!)
Hate it or hate it, it’s a behemoth in the industry and it knows its demographic inside out.
Here lies the reason for its success

I think placing transmen in mens prisons for example would be beyond harmful. As I have said about seventy thousand times. But yes I never mention transmen.

You see that is what is so interesting about the gender critical (and which makes a huge hole in their beliefs) because if you believe transmen are women, as you believe transwomen are men, then you should be concerned for them. They are after all, for you, women and therefore should have access to women's spaces. Which means as I have already said there will be people who look like men walking into women's facilities, which logically means predatory men will not even have to disguise themselves as women, they can just claim to be trans

Your answer to this seems to be "Oh but transmen can use men's facilities" which effectively says we think they are women but the wrong sort of women so we don't care about them or want them to be safe. And once you start designating some women the wrong sort where does it stop?

As for women being targeted for the way they look more and more are posting and writing about it
www.advocate.com/commentary/2015/07/07/op-ed-im-lesbian-targeted-bathroom-police www.refinery29.com/en-gb/gender-policing-single-sex-spaces-uk
So women who don't want to face confrontation will have to start changing their looks and that isn't the fault of transwomen. It is a direct result of those people who continue to believe and to spread the falsehood that you can tell a transwoman just by looking.

So my concerns for women are just as strong as yours I simply don't believe that your ideas are logical or that they can be applied without damaging women.

I also think that anyone who shows concern for all people is far more likely to support women than anyone who chooses to dismiss and vilify minority groups in order to achieve their aims.

I’m sick of saying this, but yet again:
This is not about not wanting transpeople to exist or to do what they want to do. It is about safety for women and women’s rights.

You could treat people like children and say ‘oh, it’s not fair that transmen can do that (in this case access male facilities) when transwomen can’t. We’ll have to make them both the same.’ But just as laws are not made based on ‘feelings’, they are not made on a ‘tit for tat’ basis either.

Transmen are not likely to be a danger to men. If, as adults, they want to use the Gents’ then I don’t see it as my business. Why would I want to stop them? It’s not about whether I ‘care about’ transmen. It’s about whether they pose a threat or inconvenience to others, and they don’t.

If men find it embarrassing or otherwise inappropriate they can speak up, but I don’t hear a chorus of men complaining about transmen -do you? This convenient ‘no win situation’ you think you have dreamed up is a nonsense.

If that’s the only thing you can argue with I think you have to agree that your arguments’ are failing badly.

Mollygo

because if you believe transmen are women, as you believe transwomen are men, then you should be concerned for them

Actually, it’s not as I believe, trans-men are female or the transwomen or male it’s the fact that they actually are.
I see the argument is getting away from you again, Glorianny.
You have decided that other people, whether gender critical, (which is another title that you’ve unilaterally decided to allocate to people) or not, don’t care for trans men.
The big hole in your argument is of course that, as a feminist I care females.
Transmen are female.

Your arguments can be summed up in one simple sentence.

If males want something females have, you think they should be allowed to take it.

All your fancy wording and verbose posts say the same thing.

If males want something females have, they should be allowed to take it.

Changing what you call males doesn’t make them female, or even the proper definition of women (AHF).

If you truly cared for women you would accept that.

Re transmen in female toilets:
Have transmen been accused . . .
• of attacking males in male toilets?
• of uptrousering under the toilet door in male toilets?
• of exposing themselves to cause distress to males?
No-and why not, because they’re female and have more decency that the males who do that.
Despite that, you believe,
If males want something females have, they should be allowed to take it.

I'm not saying that women like the one in the article Glorianny linked to have never experienced embarrassment when using female facilities. I will, however, suggest that an article in Advocate, a US magazine about LGBTQ+ issues, is perhaps not representative of the world at large.

The victim is 'a writer and comms specialist' who has an axe to grind, and the article is very much an opinion piece rather than a balanced overview of a situation. In itself that is absolutely fine - Advocate doesn't pretend to be anything other than a mouthpiece for the American LGBTQ+ community. But we do need to bear all of that in mind when reading it - this is not Mrs Average from Smalltown UK who has been mistaken for a bloke in the M&S powder room.

It is interesting that Julie Compton (the writer of the article) uses a phrase so often heard on here - 'you can't tell what's between someone's legs just by looking at them'. It's straight out of the trans rights playbook.

All the posturing in the world can't destroy the logical argument that if you believe transmen are women then they must be permitted to use women's facilities and that therefore the danger comes not from them but from the predatory men you are afraid of, who wouldn't have to bother dressing up as women, but could walk in as men and just claim to be trans.

As for the "Im not listening because you have an axe to grind" argument if only that was applied to all the anti-trans information posted on these threads

The trouble with the "you can't tell by looking" argument is of course that it is absolutely true and the gender critical only tend to use truths which suit them.
I linked to two articles. No comment on the other one of course

All the posturing in the world can't destroy the logical argument that if you believe transmen are women then they must be permitted to use women's facilities and that therefore the danger comes not from them but from the predatory men you are afraid of, who wouldn't have to bother dressing up as women, but could walk in as men and just claim to be trans.

All the posturing you do won’t make a difference to the fact that transmen are female and transwomen are male.

Males should not be in female toilets, if you really care for females, you would admit that.

If you don’t admit that, then whatever ‘posturing’ you do, you don’t care for females whether they’re transmen or not.
QED

So how will insisting transwomen should be in male facilities protect women Mollygo? and if predatory men are the danger how will admitting transmen into women's facilities keep predatory men out?
Please explain.

You can refuse to listen to others by writing them off as 'posturing', Glorianny; but you might get more respect if you engage with what they are saying. I disagree that there is anything logical in the first paragraph of your post. Read it back - it makes no sense. My concern is for the safety of those who have not made the choice to use facilities not intended for them. The women in the female loos and the men in the male ones. Women are far more at risk from men in the Ladies than men are from women in the Gents. It really is as simple as that. I could add 'despite your posturing and twisting of the argument' but I won't sink to that level.

I think placing transmen in mens prisons for example would be beyond harmful. As I have said about seventy thousand times. But yes I never mention transmen. ( Galaxy )

I think the difference there is that when someone is sent to jail they are not given a choice about where to go - part of the punishment is that they go where they are sent. There is a choice about which facilities to use, so the situations are not comparable.

I have no idea if transmen have applied to go to male jails, but I could understand that being refused if the authorities decided that it would pose too much of a drain on resources to keep them safe. IMO it would be wrong to insist that transmen go to male jails, but it is equally wrong to insist that female prisoners should have transwomen thrust upon them. The punishment is always going to jail, not to be put at risk when you get there, and that should be paramount. It should also be remembered that it is unacceptable to give prison officers even more responsibilities than they already have by giving them more safety issues to deal with.

We should remember, however, that nothing about jail is done for the prisoners' convenience, and that is as it should be - they are there because they have committed crimes - and transpeople should not get treated better than other criminals because of their trans status. I am not in favour of shiny new 'trans prisons' being built to house those saying they are trans, whilst the inferior conditions are reserved for those who don't.

It's really difficult, as this is a sudden phenomenon. Even ten years ago nobody was being asked to rethink building regs, sport, public facilities, school trips, hospitality, social groups (such as scouting or the WI) and all the other ways in which men and women have traditionally used separately. Now we are, all at once and at a time of spending cutbacks. Not only that, but we aren't really being asked - we are being told - with threats and brouhaha.

It is difficult to know how to be fair to everyone, including those with disabilities and other vulnerabilities who may have been waiting a long time for their needs to be catered for. How do we decide (and who decides) whose needs come first?

Glorianny All the posturing in the world can't destroy the logical argument that if you believe transmen are women then they must be permitted to use women's facilities and the important word there is PERMITTED . I wonder how many transmen would want to use female facilities? You're surely not going to insist that transmen have to use the women's toilets are you, that would seem unnecessarily authoritarian?

Glorianny

So how will insisting transwomen should be in male facilities protect women Mollygo? and if predatory men are the danger how will admitting transmen into women's facilities keep predatory men out?
Please explain.

I'm not Molly, but I'm confused by this.

If transwomen used male facilities women will be protected by not having men in the Ladies. Isn't that obvious?

It shouldn't need repeating again, but that statement recognises that not all transwomen are a danger, not all men are rapists, not all women who look like men are transwomen etc etc etc.

The point (yes, I know it's been said a million times before) is that some men are dangerous to women, and as long as men are able to say they are women without so much as shaving off their beard and be allowed into the Ladies then all bets are off. It is a shame for the 'ordinary' transwomen who have been happily going about their business until Stonewall started their nonsense. I'd really like to think that the trans lobby might see the folly of their actions and dial back on the No Debate thing, but I doubt they will do so unless forced, as the agenda is being driven by a deeply misogynist philosophy.

I wouldn't insist on anything Rosie51 but since you believe transmen are women I wonder that you would consider exposing them to the dangers of male toilets as acceptable.

But no one has yet explained to me how predatory men posing as transmen could be kept out of women's facilities.

Bringing prisons into the issue might be considered a diversionary tactic because it is a question you can't answer and seek to avoid. Sometimes by saying transmen are not a danger (I never said they were), sometimes by saying they should use male facilities (but you believe they are women) and sometimes by introducing things like prisons.
If transmen are women legally then they must legally have access to women's facilities. They may or may not choose to use them. But predatory men are just as (if not more) likely to access women's facilities by saying they are a transman as they are to dress up as a transwoman to do so. So quite how are you keeping any women safe?

Glorianny

So how will insisting transwomen should be in male facilities protect women Mollygo? and if predatory men are the danger how will admitting transmen into women's facilities keep predatory men out?
Please explain.

I didn’t insist any such thing. I thought you didn’t approve of twisting people’s words.

Transmen are female.
Are you now saying, by your convoluted thought processes, that you’re concerned for females, because transmen are predatory? And that females would claim to be transmen just so they could go into a female toilet and be predatory against females?
Predatory females, who want to harm females would just do it without needing to pretend that they’re suddenly men.
Transwomen are male. They know they’re male. Males should not be in female toilets.

Mollygo

Glorianny

So how will insisting transwomen should be in male facilities protect women Mollygo? and if predatory men are the danger how will admitting transmen into women's facilities keep predatory men out?
Please explain.

I didn’t insist any such thing. I thought you didn’t approve of twisting people’s words.

Transmen are female.
Are you now saying, by your convoluted thought processes, that you’re concerned for females, because transmen are predatory? And that females would claim to be transmen just so they could go into a female toilet and be predatory against females?
Predatory females, who want to harm females would just do it without needing to pretend that they’re suddenly men.
Transwomen are male. They know they’re male. Males should not be in female toilets.

Oh I thought I explained the argument pretty clearly but obviously not.
So here it is again
Transmen are not a problem.
Predatory men posing as transmen are. (or could be)
So if transmen are female and should be able to access women's spaces what is to stop a predatory man posing as a transman to enter that space.? And he wouldn't even need to dress up.

What is to stop an apeophile posing as a gorilla to get access to the monkey house in the zoo? Probably not much by way of deliberate deterrent but as it is highly unlikely there is no need to write to our MPs about it. I see your scenario as vaguely similar. And just as odd.

Glorianny I don't see a transman using male toilets as me putting them in danger, but them making a choice. If men are uncomfortable or feel threatened by these generally smaller transmen then it's for them to work out, nothing to do with me.

I've answered every question you've put to me so would you please be kind enough to explain how a man who becomes a transwoman lives and presents as a woman. What changes do they make to how they lived and presented as a man?

Doodledog

What is to stop an apeophile posing as a gorilla to get access to the monkey house in the zoo? Probably not much by way of deliberate deterrent but as it is highly unlikely there is no need to write to our MPs about it. I see your scenario as vaguely similar. And just as odd.

No odder than a man putting on a dress, doing various other things and all to access a woman's space. In fact considerably less odd because he wouldn't need to do any of that, just wander in looking as male as he likes and assert he's a transman.
But I do sympathise it must be awful to have a massive hole blown in your favourite hypothesis.

Rosie51

Glorianny I don't see a transman using male toilets as me putting them in danger, but them making a choice. If men are uncomfortable or feel threatened by these generally smaller transmen then it's for them to work out, nothing to do with me.

I've answered every question you've put to me so would you please be kind enough to explain how a man who becomes a transwoman lives and presents as a woman. What changes do they make to how they lived and presented as a man?

So they choose to use the women's facilities Rosie51, as you believe they have a right to. But they look like men. So people who look like men are in women's spaces, so what is to stop a predatory man entering as well and saying he's a transman?

I haven't read the last couple of pages, but here's a cute little video.

youtube.com/shorts/ktloQ8lXq3Q?feature=share

So trisher, because you believe a lie, (you are very careful to avoid using the word female) but what you believe is a lie nevertheless, we are all expected to enter into your fantasy situations.
There is evidence of TW exposing themselves to already traumatised females, in hospitals and in female changing rooms. Evidence of TW upskirting in female changing rooms. There is evidence of males cheating to gain an unfair advantage in sport.
As a feminist, I care about the impact on females. As you refuse to condemn those actions and refuse to support provision to reduce the potential for that to happen, you evidently don’t.

(Unlike you, I also care about the impact those TW have on all non-predatory trans, but I don’t need to be a feminist to do that.)

Please supply evidence for transmen being harmed or attacked when using male toilets?
For transmen exposing themselves in male toilets, in male changing rooms or on mental health wards with males already traumatised by females?
For transmen cheating in male sport by having an unfair advantage.

It won’t make any difference to your argument as it will still be based on a lie,
as are the actions of TW who access female spaces.

^But I do sympathise it must be awful to have a massive hole blown in your favourite hypothesis^🤣🤣🤣

I know you weren’t answering my post, but you haven’t blown a hole in anything -and your use of hypothesis is as questionable as your belief in the lie that TW are female.

FarNorth

I haven't read the last couple of pages, but here's a cute little video.

youtube.com/shorts/ktloQ8lXq3Q?feature=share

Oh FarNorth that was funny. One rather loud young woman taking a rather tongue-in-cheek trans video seriously. I can't decide which is the daftest one.

* Mollygo* I've posted my views on gender many times just read a couple of the threads.
I thought it was men you were concerned with and most transwomen are OK. So is it all transwomen or just men ?
How will insisting people use the faciilties that match the gender you believe them to be keep women safe?
Transwomen will be in danger in men's facilities
Women will be in danger because people who look like men will be in theirs.

So Glorianny, you admit your belief that TW are female is based on a lie, that TW who enter female facilities do that based on the same lie and all your pontificating about gender is just to avoid having to admit the truth that TW are not Female.
Good to know.