Trans women and single-sex spaces

Galaxy

I think men are entitled to privacy and dignity too.

So do I. When DH was in a 6-bed ward after surgery a few years ago, it was men-only, and I think he would have felt less comfortable if the ward had been mixed. Partly, at least, because he would have thought that female patients would be upset.

Yes, the decent men understand that instinctively.

Well, I certainly think DH is decent, Galaxy

Forgot the !

The sentence is lovely with or without the emoji

Thanks. The trouble is that it is so easy to be misconstrued when what you want to say is written down, so is short of nuances!

There are fat more important problems for the the UK than this issue.

It appears that the Supreme Court disagrees with you Grantanow.

There are equally important issues but why do you believe this isn’t an important problem.

Iam64

There are equally important issues but why do you believe this isn’t an important problem.

Indeed, I would have thought most of us believe that it is an important issue - not just for us, but for our daughters, grand-daughters and future generations.

Sparklefiz Of course men on a mixed ward will feel fine. Surely that's obvious!!
Why should it be assumed they will feel fine? I suspect many would find it embarrassing and inappropriate. I certainly know several who would!

Galaxy

I think men are entitled to privacy and dignity too.

They certainly are!

Grantanow

There are fat more important problems for the the UK than this issue.

Not if one looks at it strategically and at the implications across significant areas of people's lives!!

Grantanow

There are fat more important problems for the the UK than this issue.

That’s not to say that this isn’t very important and has been addressed successfully.
Would that we could have the same success with the other problems we are currently facing.

Galaxy

I think men are entitled to privacy and dignity too.

I agree. My Dh came round from anaesthesia to find he was in a unit with two women some 30 years older than he was. They were both very unwell and he was mortified that he was, as it were, a bystander to the indignities they were undergoing. He felt most uncomfortable, thinking how upsetting it would have been if it was his mum in the same situation.

Looking back on the event from over a quarter of a century ago, I suspect he’d been placed in a post-op HDU, hence the mixed ward. Thankfully, he was moved to a normal ward the next morning.

Grantanow

There are fat more important problems for the the UK than this issue.

The Scottish Government were taken to the Supreme Court to force it to change its policies, had this bit happened or had Scotland.gov won the case the repercussions in Scotland and beyond would have destroyed women's rights. The track Scotgov has been on for years, fully supported and led by Sturgeon (and in part cost her the leadership) was undermining women's rights, and led any dissent to be countered by claims of bigotry and transphobia.
It has been absolutely ugly in Scotland as Sturgeon relentlessly followed her trans agenda, it was absolutely vital this case was brought against Scotgov and they were defeated.

What I meant was that now the Supreme Court has decided the matter there are far more important issues for the UK government to address, e.g., national security, the cost of living, energy policy, negotiating a better deal with the EU, tariffs, etc,

Grantanow
That’s true. Let’s hope the government are as capable of making the right decisions and stating the truth as the Supreme Court.

Grantanow

What I meant was that now the Supreme Court has decided the matter there are far more important issues for the UK government to address, e.g., national security, the cost of living, energy policy, negotiating a better deal with the EU, tariffs, etc,

Not quite what you said in your initial post, where you said more important problems for the UK than this issue. as if this issue was rather unimportant, which has been why it's taken so long and caused so much stress to those who fought for women's sex based rights to be upheld.
I do hope the UK government can apply itself to addressing more than one of the problems you've listed at a time.

Madgran77

*Sparklefiz Of course men on a mixed ward will feel fine. Surely that's obvious!!*
Why should it be assumed they will feel fine? I suspect many would find it embarrassing and inappropriate. I certainly know several who would!

I would find it embarassing as well, same as I wouldn't feel comfortable using the same toilets as women and changing rooms at a sports centre.

Grantanow

What I meant was that now the Supreme Court has decided the matter there are far more important issues for the UK government to address, e.g., national security, the cost of living, energy policy, negotiating a better deal with the EU, tariffs, etc,

Actually the supreme court judgement is just the beginning. I really don't understand why you don't see the overall importance of this. If women's rights are so low in your estimation don't waste your time commenting on a women's rights thread.

Grantanow

What I meant was that now the Supreme Court has decided the matter there are far more important issues for the UK government to address, e.g., national security, the cost of living, energy policy, negotiating a better deal with the EU, tariffs, etc,

The Supreme Court has made a clear judgement but how even that will be interpreted in different organisations and scenarios is a big issue to be watched. Judging by the madness of some of the decisions made previously I think there is more to come as the implications of this judgement are "put into practice" by various organisations! And the government must take a lead on that as issues arise which they will. To be honest I expect mad decisions to be made that do not treat trans women with respect alongside mad decisions that misinterpret women's rights and men's rights! Watch this space

OldFrill

Grantanow

There are fat more important problems for the the UK than this issue.

The Scottish Government were taken to the Supreme Court to force it to change its policies, had this bit happened or had Scotland.gov won the case the repercussions in Scotland and beyond would have destroyed women's rights. The track Scotgov has been on for years, fully supported and led by Sturgeon (and in part cost her the leadership) was undermining women's rights, and led any dissent to be countered by claims of bigotry and transphobia.
It has been absolutely ugly in Scotland as Sturgeon relentlessly followed her trans agenda, it was absolutely vital this case was brought against Scotgov and they were defeated.

It was ugly in Scotland because right wing element jumped on trans rights as a way to undermine what was a very strong leader and party. The change that was being put in would have normalised Scotland with about 30 other western (and non western) countries who have had self id for years with out any fuss at all. The only one to change it back is the US under Trump who just wants to scapegoat anyone that isn't a white straight Christian.

... and having heard all the arguments, I am still at a total loss to understand what rights women are supposed to lose because trans people have some. Most of Europe has mixed sex toilets and changing, so do planes, trains, petrol stations etc. I can't remember a changing area that didn't have cubicles for those that prefer that. Never seen anyone turn back from a toilet because there was "male attendant on duty" and the whole thing about prisons was nonsense. One person spent 48 hours in segregation before being correctly assessed and sent to male prison, never near female prisoners, no danger to anyone.

... and while we are here, the Supreme Court ruling is a nonsense. I went to the bother of reading 88 pages of legalese and found a few things in there.
First off, they didn't let any trans groups present evidence, but had representations from 2 anti-trans groups, one that has only exisited a year, has no discernible funding stream but plenty of staff, and was presented as a Human Rights groups when all it does is argue against transpeople. The second is from 2030 and is a business not a charity, and was called a women's rights group, when all it has ever done is agrue against transpeople. Amnesty International did get to speak for the trans people, but is barely mentioned in the ruling.
The ruling sweeps aside the very clear and simply based judgement from the Scottish Courts (ruling on Scottish law in Scotland) with little reference to it.
The Gender Recognistion Act 2004 (because we have had legal trans people since then but strangely only seems to have been called a problem in the last 4-5 years) says transpeople can change birthcertificate and passport legally, so are legally in their new gender. The Equalities Act, which they were arguing about, came along on 2010, 6 years later. the EA at no point states that it is changing anything about the GRA, nor has any subsequent law. So the GRA still stands, trans people can still legally change their gender. However, the Supreme Court judgement, somehow manages to say that they think the EA meant "biological women" and not include transwomen, even though it doesn't say that anywhere.... and so you don't have to apply the EA to transpeople.

So effectively, transpeople are women, and also are not. You can't discriminated against them, except you can.

No-one had given any viable definition of "biological woman" (and you can't because nature never works in absolutes. There are 400-500 babies born in the UK every year where it's not obvious at birth, and more people with chromosonal differences make it less clear also, most don't even realise it)
Once you try and define "biological man" too, then you leave out all the people who don't fit in your categories and the argument that there's only two caterogies falls apart again.

The judgement also seeks, with no evidence presented at all, to define what a lesbian is, saying that to be a lesbian you would only be attracted to bio women (again, no definition so how would they know) which means if you are a women that fancies a full post op transwomen you have to hand in your lesbian card presumably. It calls the idea of a transwoman at a lesbian group "chilling"

Non-binary and intersex people are just ignored, as usual. Their status is now totally unclear.

Long post, but the judgement handed down will cause more problems than it will solve.... and the problems it was trying to solve weren't really problems in the first place.

The real dangers to women and girls are as they have always been, domestic violence and unequal treatment at work in in society. Now it's the encroaching right wing misogyny, the Andrew Taits of this world, and even more "chilling" the Donald Trumps. Their attempts to limit our voice and our rights are real and present dangers.