Advanced search

Best tweet ever on trans madness

(85 Posts)
AssignedPerfectAtBirth Mon 06-Nov-17 11:34:59

Had to post it grin

StealthPolarBear Mon 06-Nov-17 11:35:54

Yes love it

BatteredBreadedOrSouthernFried Mon 06-Nov-17 11:36:20

grin brilliant!

DJBaggySmalls Mon 06-Nov-17 11:46:52

''Many socially constructed things have real-world referents. But the language we use and the categories and concepts are in our heads''

Things are real but language we use to name the things is in our heads.... good grief @theDXman, did that sound profound to you when you wrote this?

woman11017 Mon 06-Nov-17 14:06:25

Don't know where would be the right place to post, but, just returned from local tesco where a very big man (6+foot ish, 15 stone or so) 'dressed' as a woman was working on self service tills. He started some loud suggestive banter with some other women workers there while 'helping' me. I was intimidated. Would he be able to use women't toilets?

Little kids from local schools visit there a lot.

Anyone got any advice? Contacting the store, I will do, although I suspect they'll claim Equalities Act covers him working there.

BatteredBreadedOrSouthernFried Mon 06-Nov-17 14:11:16

He shouldn’t be having “suggestive banter” in front of customers regardless of what he is wearing. What was he saying?

woman11017 Mon 06-Nov-17 14:21:40

Something mild like 'we could all do with a bit' or something. Just it was a bit weird and creepy.

DonkeySkin Mon 06-Nov-17 14:30:22

woman11017, what would you be reporting him for, exactly? Wearing a dress? I reckon most feminists would say it's OK for men to wear dresses, and that people shouldn't be fired for not conforming to sex-roles around dress and presentation.

Or did you mean the 'banter' with female colleagues? This is fairly vague, as banter could cover anything from, well, banter, to sexual harassment.

Sorry if this sounds overly interrogative, it's just that your post set off some warning bells for me, in the sense that maybe it's intended to goad some Mumsnetters into saying that men should be reported to their employers for presenting in feminine dress, and presenting it as 'evidence' that we want trans people fired.

If there's more to the story then feel free to elaborate in another thread (as this one pertains to something else).

woman11017 Mon 06-Nov-17 14:40:08

I can report the inappropriate behaviour, woman If the colleague is transgender though - which is not something which we would have to confirm - they are allowed by law to use the facilities of the gender they identify as. There is no action we could take to change that.

So large man in make up will be using toilets where girls and young women go.

Has anyone else had any experience of challenging this malarkey, especially in supermarkets?

DonkeySkin Mon 06-Nov-17 14:40:30

Sorry, X-post.

Something mild like 'we could all do with a bit' or something. Just it was a bit weird and creepy.

I am all for women listening to their instincts when a man comes across as creepy. Our gut feeling on this is NEVER wrong. The problem is that there are many things that men can do to make women uncomfortable, creeped out, etc., while doing nothing officially 'wrong' - or at least, walking a borderline which gives them plausible deniability. I'm not sure what Tesco would do about your complaint - they might warn him (and the women he was 'joking' with) not to engage in sexual banter in front of customers.

woman11017 Mon 06-Nov-17 14:44:10

DonkeySkin Sorry to disrupt thread, I just wondered if anyone has successfully kept public spaces safe and especially toilets for girls and women. Genuine query, but thanks, I won't disrupt further.

woman11017 Mon 06-Nov-17 14:45:18

I'll shut up now! The post at 14.40 was tesco reply. It's the law.

DonkeySkin Mon 06-Nov-17 15:04:07

Thanks for clarifying, woman11017. I didn't realise your main issue was toilets/change rooms.

Yes, it's really shit, isn't it, that our sex-segregated spaces have been opened up to men - that women and girls lose the right to participate equally in public life in the name of 'equality'. Very Orwellian.

DonkeySkin Mon 06-Nov-17 15:39:30

Anyhow, back to the amusing tweet grin

It is indeed remarkable how easily the pomo 'sex is a spectrum and a metaphysical unknowable' shit falls apart when you apply to any other biological phenomena. And it's ripe for satire, as this tweet shows.

It reminds me a bit of Mary Lou Singleton's remark about her trans-supportive left-wing friends (paraphrasing):

'They will claim that biological sex is fluid and too complex to define, but somehow, when they want eggs, they just know to get hens.'

All these words games around semiotics, intersex conditions etc, are ultimately sophistry in service to a political goal: to deny sex-based oppression by saying that females don't exist.

FizzyWaterAndElderflower Mon 06-Nov-17 16:45:16

they are allowed by law to use the facilities of the gender they identify as

That's not quite correct. Actually, there are no laws about which toilets people use at all, any many can go into a women's toilet in the UK, but social convention is that these are sex segregated.

There is a duty for an employer providing facilities to provide sex segregated ones where appropriate though - gender isn't a protected characteristic, only people who have a GRC are covered by it at the moment.

DJBaggySmalls Mon 06-Nov-17 16:51:33

Gender reassignment is a protected characteristic now, the Tories changed the Equality Act. People are protected as soon as they decide they want to start the process to apply for a GRC. They dont have to have made any changes.

Puresummer Sun 12-Nov-17 12:26:36


As DJBaggySmalls says, you're incorrect. Anyone in the process of transitioning is covered and has been since 2010.

This is one of the weird things I've found about this campaigning, to be honest. People are acting as if suddenly Men are going to be allowed to use the women's toilets IF the changes suggested by the Conservatives actually go ahead, when in reality transwomen (MTF) have been allowed to use women's toilets fully since 2010, in whatever stage of transition they are in. Some of the people around here are still trying to fight a battle that was lost in 2010, and acting like the battle hasn't actually even happened yet.

The fight currently is against self-declaration and self-diagnosis without any medical diagnoses, NOT against diagnosed transpeople using the bathrooms (or other facilities) of their choosing. There's nothing that can be done about that - it's been law for the best part of a decade.

Employers aren't even meant to ask for a GRC legally.

Puresummer Sun 12-Nov-17 12:29:18

Sorry, I should clarify - you're right mostly regarding that there aren't laws currently protecting bathrooms as single-sex occupancies, HOWEVER there ARE still bathroom laws - as companies find out if they try to stop transwomen from using the bathroom of their choosing (they are taken to court and the companies lose under breaking the provisions of the Equality Act 2010 and the Good Practice Services Guidelines).

Ereshkigal Sun 12-Nov-17 15:04:28

Some of the people around here are still trying to fight a battle that was lost in 2010, and acting like the battle hasn't actually even happened yet.

There is currently provision for exemptions, even in the case of GRC, where it is considered proportionate, such as employing an MTF trans as a rape counsellor. They are not generally applied. Part of the feminist campaign will be to strengthen these exemptions. Transactivists want to get rid of them.

PencilsInSpace Sun 12-Nov-17 15:24:43

It's not just about toilets though. For example prisons cannot refuse to house a TIM in the female estate if they have a GRC:

4.1Arrangements must be in place to determine the legal gender of all offenders at the first point of contact. This will inform assessments and decisions where binary (male/female) services for offenders are required1. Where legal gender cannot be determined, staff must use the best information available and consult with equality leads where necessary (sources of advice and support are listed in Annex F). Staff must not ask to see a GRC but can request sight of a birth certificate. Where an offender does offer a GRC as form of evidence and identity, they must be treated in the gender identified on the certificate. (from PSI 2016 - Care and management of transgender offenders)

PencilsInSpace Sun 12-Nov-17 15:26:40

And we know Miller's report recommended getting rid of ALL exemptions for those with a GRC.

Ereshkigal Sun 12-Nov-17 15:45:17

And the battle hasn't been "lost". Laws can be changed. This was slipped in under the radar. People don't know that their rights have already been given away. That doesn't mean campaigning and challenging and awareness raising should stop. Quite the reverse. It's more needed than ever.

FizzyWaterAndElderflower Sun 12-Nov-17 15:46:24

Christ - I stand completely corrected - I was under the impression that sex based segregation was still legal where there was a demonstrable need, apart from in the case of a GRC..

Well.. that's a bugger.

Ereshkigal Sun 12-Nov-17 15:50:38

It is. Changing rooms are given as a specific example in the EA as something which may need to be exempt. The problem is various trans centric guidelines and backlash that organisations get. We need to raise the profile of women as a protected class.

morningrunner Sun 12-Nov-17 15:51:18

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: