Biological men in woman only spaces

You are right but the trans lobby has a louder voice than women’s voices.

I agree that women’s rights are being eroded. I think men who have had the operation should certainly be allowed into women only spaces, and probably men who are living as women, taking hormone treatment and wearing women’s clothing. The difficult is that some men could choose to decide to be a woman and identify as a woman, and without treatment could decide to use women only spaces, and this can put women into danger. It’s a tricky situation.

I personally think men have had a rough ride the last few years. Don’t know about trans men though, because presumably they’re women in all but how they look.

It’s a difficult one isn’t it? So much about it everywhere now. I can’t say I would be particularly bothered about the public toilet aspect. I do tend to avoid them anyway, just for hygiene reasons. Would it worry you to think there may be gay women in them?

I think as regards safety, you wouldn’t necessarily be safer with a woman than a man.

I don’t especially feel women’s rights are threatened, but I’m sure someone will disagree.

BlueRuby you have re-opened a can of worms that’s already been well discussed. I’m surprised it’s got as far as 4 answers before you are bombarded with trans rights comments. I’ll watch and wait.

It's not really transwemen that are the danger to women, it is men pretending to be transwomen. Which they will if self identifying becomes law.

The leader of the Lib Dems was on radio 4 this morning and thinks that there should be no safe spaces just for women (biological females) so there you have it, don’t vote for them.

Ilovecheese

It's not really transwemen that are the danger to women, it is men pretending to be transwomen. Which they will if self identifying becomes law.

I agree with this, and with vegansrock's comment about men's voices being louder than women's.

I think it is a nonsense to say that you wouldn't necessarily be safer with a woman than a man (and to suggest that gay women shouldn't use female toilets is just idiotic). Most men are, on the whole, significantly stronger than most women, and biological men are far more likely to commit crimes of a violent or sexual nature than women. Gay women are biologically female and pose no more of a 'danger' (danger of what?) than straight women.

As Mollygo says, this topic has been discussed many times before, and it is a matter of time before we get lectures on waves of feminism, accusations of being stuck in the 70s and reminded that we don't know what is under anyone's clothes and that transpeople have been around for ages.

All of that is true, but until now transwomen haven't been legally able to access female spaces, and until now we were all agreed on what being 'female' actually means. Gender and sex are different - gender is a social construct (ie we teach and learn what is appropriate male and female behaviour), but sex is a biological fact.

Being able to claim to cross sex means far more than someone using the wrong facilities. It means that research into sex-based inequalities is rendered useless. Read Invisible Women by Caroline Criado to see how many things use the male as default - from the size of iPhones to crash test dummies. If men define as women that sort of thing will never improve, and nor will government policies about things like gender pay gaps or pensions. Men can identify as women and insist on being housed in female prisons, or join female groups and access changing rooms and swimming sessions designed for women-only access.

It is a minefield. Many people (myself included) are supportive of those who are seeking to live as women and have gender dysphoria, but not of the right to self-identify and be granted automatic access to women's rights and spaces, whereas TRAs (trans rights activists) insist on No Debate, and call anyone who questions their insistence that 'women' means 'anyone who says they are such' is transphobic and must be opposed at all costs.

So are the Government and Tory run councils supporting women's safe spaces? I must have missed something.

I don’t know Winter but I think there are discussions and divisions about it.
The Lib Dems are actively embracing the change though!

Doodledog @ 13.46, you're absolutely right. No winterwhite, the quest to eradicate natal women appears to be cross party, particularly in Scotland but slowly and surely moving South.

The irony of the Lib Dems statement on Radio 4 earlier today coincides with a statement issued by Priti Patel today: Tackling violence against women and girls should be as much of a priority as countering terrorism, a police watchdog has said. A report was commissioned by Home Secretary Priti Patel after the murder of Sarah Everard earlier this year.
According to official statistics, in the year ending March 2020 there were:
An estimated 1.6 million female victims of domestic abuse in England and Wales
618,000 female victims of sexual assault
892,000 female victims of stalking

Who thinks that removing the few remaining "safe spaces for women" will reduce these statistics?

Perhaps now is the time to add ‘ spaces ‘ ‘ toilets etc for those who identify as ‘non specific’ or the undecided.
Unfortunately public toilets rarely feel safe , especially at night or in less busy places.

Excellent post Doodledog. I agree with everything you’ve said.

Why don't we just look at the evidence and see whether other countries have experienced any problems as a result of enacting this legislation?

mermaidsuk.org.uk/news/safety-and-dignity/

Yes because Mermaids are well known for their accurate reporting. The utter sexism and stereotypes that have been used by their founder alone is enough to raise concerns. There are numerous reports of incidents in other countries, have you seen the recent case in Anerica which is causing them to look again at their prison policy. Please stop telling women that these things arent happening, it's not kind.

vegansrock

You are right but the trans lobby has a louder voice than women’s voices.

They are certainly loud and demanding but I'm sure they are still a small minority.

After all the years of seeing women fight for equality and their rights, to see them having to compete against a masculine build trans 'woman' in sport is very saddening. I'm thinking of an article I read recently about a women's boxing match between a woman and a trans woman. The woman was almost killed by being choked in the fight. She didn't have the equal strength.

I think there Is a problem with allowing what are biologically men into women's spaces and especially as the OP said, those who have self identified.

To me it makes the fight for womens rights pointless. Also, I refuse to be referred to as 'Cis'. Its a name they made up to further their own agenda.

It's time people spoke out against this and women should drown out that small minority.

Well varian California has the self ID law, did you miss everything about the traditional Korean WiSpa? A "transwoman" went into the obligatory naked women's section and sat on the spa side with a partially erect penis inches away from naked women and girls. It has since been discovered this is a convicted sex offender. This was not the first time this man had done so. Still what's the mantra.......no debate, be kind, it never happens.

Being female is more than a feeling.

varian are you seriously referring us to Mermaids for unbiased reporting? That's like referring us the Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre for a completely unbiased opinion on whether a man with a penis, who wears a frock, should be housed with vulnerable battered women.

i saw part of that ?mixed martial arts contest, it was hard to watch.
and what kind of a person who was formerly a male soldier and MMA fighter, would want to get into a ring with a born female and fight her so ferociously.
it was dangerous.

Mollygo

BlueRuby you have re-opened a can of worms that’s already been well discussed. I’m surprised it’s got as far as 4 answers before you are bombarded with trans rights comments. I’ll watch and wait.

It might have been well-discussed on here and elsewhere but it is an ongoing problem.

Doodledog has expressed it all well (again) but it needs to be reiterated.
Women's rights are being eroded.

lemongrove They have just lost my vote.

To add to the post from Rosie51 about the spa in California.
First we were told that there never had been a man in the spa, that the women who complained had made it up.
Then we were told that it was a transwoman in the spa, so her penis, was not intended to intimidate, and that the children who noticed it were being rude.

But it fact the man was just a common or garden flasher, with previous form, who saw an opportunity to intimidate women and girls because he wanted to.

This is bound to happen here if self id is introduced with no qualifiers. Instead of pretending that this will not happen, isn't it better to try and work out a way to cope. The law as it stands here in the UK could have given the staff at the spa in America a reason to eject the man, but with self ID they felt unable to do that because he claimed to be a woman.,

It has been reported recently that butch lesbians are experiencing criticism and negative remarks when they use women's loos. Nothing to do with anti-trans publicity or things like the OP of course. Which I very much doubt ever happened. Still who cares if women who don't conform with the accepted norms of femininity have problems.

By the way self ID has never meant for trans people just the chance to decide you are a different gender. They just want a simpler legal process which isn't as expensive and doesn't require a medical diagnosis. It would still need some legal input and a GRC.

I care. But I see that as a different issue. Conflating it with trans rights isn’t helpful.