Trans women and single-sex spaces

It is heterosexual males that create the most danger for women

No it's not, it's biological men who create the most danger for women.

96% of the prison population are male for which, 80.4% are in prison for violent crimes. Of that 96%, 0.34% are transgender, equating to 295 in prison.

The most common crime for which transgender individuals are jailed is sexual offenses. Data from the Ministry of Justice in England and Wales indicates that a significant portion of transgender prisoners have been convicted of crimes of a sexual nature. Specifically, one report found that 60 out of 125 transgender prisoners counted in 2017 were serving time for sexual offenses, with 27 being convicted of rape.

Yet here we are discussing a tiny few cases where transgender women have created a criminal act .

Of course we are because this is the focus of this thread, the injustices carried out under the guise of equal human rights for women and transwomen. The demonstrations yesterday were a clear indication of the dislike/contempt/hatred felt by aggressive members of the transgender movement towards women, coupled with their strange desire to emulate them and share their spaces.

It appears the NHS and certain MPs, eg. Angela Eagle and Chris Bryant are intending to circumvent the Law, and Lord Sumption is attacking its veracity: 'it doesn't mean what people think it means.' Meanwhile, absolute silence from Keir Starmer.

Like plaiting fog. Brilliant!

Most transwomen are heterosexual men! That is the very reason why we don’t want them in our spaces, and why so many of them claim to be Lesbians.

It’s like plaiting fog sometimes.

I don’t see the logic.

Of course there are more cases of violence from heterosexual men. There are more of them. And why should violence from another male group excuse violence from transwomen.

Nor do I accept the “minority” argument. A violent minority can carry out many acts of violence given the means to do so.

Now that it has been made plain that there are transwomen who wish to harm and kill women, I cannot understand how still believe that there is no need for women to have safe spaces.

The evidence is before you.

Now who's cherry picking?

They are in the same group. Its like saying men called Harry only commit a small number of violent crimes.

TerriBull

In the Guardian's article "One Hell of a Turnout" a sort of up beat inference to yesterday's demonstration and what appears to be a dogged attitude by those together with a handful of Labour MPs to flout this new ruling, I can't help wondering how bad it would be if the ruling had gone the other way. Two demonstrators were pictured in this article, bearing placards, with "Trans People are Not a Threat" and in many instances that may well be the case. However given there are umpteen recorded instances where they have been. The hate, that women are accused of so often, has become evident since the ruling from the opposing side, no many trans people are not a threat, but those who say that are talking from their perspective and seem to have a blind eye as to the aggressive and sometimes violent amongst their number. If they weren't a threat then how do they explain the death and rape threats against the women who oppose them ?

It is not umpteen . It is a small few .It is heterosexual males that create the most danger for women . The numbers are huge .
Yet here we are discussing a tiny few cases where transgender women have created a criminal act .

What could have happened had the ruling been any different, doesn't bare thinking about TerriBull.

Not all trans people are a threat, but yesterday we saw some who are and they're doing a great disservice to those who are not.

In the Guardian's article "One Hell of a Turnout" a sort of up beat inference to yesterday's demonstration and what appears to be a dogged attitude by those together with a handful of Labour MPs to flout this new ruling, I can't help wondering how bad it would be if the ruling had gone the other way. Two demonstrators were pictured in this article, bearing placards, with "Trans People are Not a Threat" and in many instances that may well be the case. However given there are umpteen recorded instances where they have been. The hate, that women are accused of so often, has become evident since the ruling from the opposing side, no many trans people are not a threat, but those who say that are talking from their perspective and seem to have a blind eye as to the aggressive and sometimes violent amongst their number. If they weren't a threat then how do they explain the death and rape threats against the women who oppose them ?

Surely when speaking about the atrocious behaviour on display yesterday in Parliament Square, it's imperative to say we are referring too TRA's as no decent, self respecting trans woman would want to be associated with them.

They are not IMO trans women or their representatives. They're misogynist, bullying biological men.

Any criminal damage should be paid for by these people. Should have a criminal record.. Trans should not be in women's safe spaces their actions prove this to be true. .
No amount of drugs or surgery, anyway, turn one sex into another.

Thank you Doodledog for putting it so clearly, starting with the rejection of the passive aggressive features, which seem to have become a feature of Luminance’s posts.
Also for your reiteration of the need for mentioning TRA in relation to the issue of the ruling.
A need highlighted by the behaviour of TRA in Parliament Square yesterday.

Sensationalist journalism to attract the easily led

The easily led, in this case, being men who haven't got the gumption to realise that they have the exact same privileges and protections today as they had on Tuesday. They're so easily led that they've gone on a spree of vandalism and destruction that could well land them in jail. Locked up with those big burly men that they fear so much. Typically male trait of lack of critical thinking.

I don't think we need passive aggressive posts about how you are kind and we aren't though.

Unless you can say how you feel you would behave differently from me, say, we are not going to move forward.

People have said that they are not anti-trans and you have said that you understand the reality, which is that one set of rights (or protections if you prefer) will always get in the way of the other. Women can't have safe spaces at the same time as men are allowed into them.

We have explained that the reason TRAs come up a lot is because they are at the root of the issues that have led to the need for yesterday's ruling, not because we think that all transpeople are TRAs. We can't discuss any trans issues without reference to TRAs because letting any men into our spaces means that we have to let all of them in, and that will include the criminal element and remove our rights and protections.

So having said all that, what is it that you find 'sad'?

I just feel rather sad that saying anything positive about trans people is met with an essay about "TRA". I feel that I have read that same essay over and over again. It's become a stick to beat with. I don't think anyone here needs that particularly.

Galaxy

Thankfully there will be a variety of media who will report this accurately, the times, the telegraph and the spectator can be relied on to show the misogyny. If the BBC and the guardian cover it I will be amazed but we can but hope.

You are joking . They are no different than the Daily Mail . Sensationalist journalism to attract the easily led .

Exactly Lathyrus3.

Absolutely spot on, Lathyrus!

The demonstrations and calls for violence against women have really made it plain why transwomen can’t be allowed into women’s safe spaces.

It’s difficult to understand why anyone would continue to support those who issue death threats and advocate physical violence and continue to believe that they should have the right of entry to places where women are seeking safety.

What I want to know now is whether M &S have returned their changing rooms to Female and Male. Last time I was there each one just said changing room.

Thankfully there will be a variety of media who will report this accurately, the times, the telegraph and the spectator can be relied on to show the misogyny. If the BBC and the guardian cover it I will be amazed but we can but hope.

Yes, exactly, Mollygo.

ViceVersa

Aggressive is the right word indeed. I've just been looking at pictures from one of today's protests, with placards urging 'bring back witch burning' and 'kill all TERFS'. And yet they are the very same people who are constantly harping on at us to 'be kind' to them. Surely the trans people who just want to live their lives and get on with things in their own way must be horrified at this kind of thing do?

Yes they probably are horrified. Possibly even terrified, just as women are and will continue to be whilst men are acting like this and in some cases, being supported in their actions by women.
Why wouldn’t they be terrified? The men and the supporters of men’s rights are having a field day because they’ve been told that they can’t be women.
Their behaviour exactly clarified the need for female safe spaces.
If there needs to be trans safe spaces, now would be the time for TIM to canvass vigorously for them, without taking away safe spaces for women.

Aggressive is the right word indeed. I've just been looking at pictures from one of today's protests, with placards urging 'bring back witch burning' and 'kill all TERFS'. And yet they are the very same people who are constantly harping on at us to 'be kind' to them. Surely the trans people who just want to live their lives and get on with things in their own way must be horrified at this kind of thing do?

It is an aggressive men's rights movement, and men are sometimes very dangerous when told no.