..To be mortified at the treatment of rape victims at the Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre?

Just want to pick you up on point 4 there, @TorghunKhan

you wrote:

4. Social Discomfort: People may feel awkward using toilets in front of other genders.

and used "genders" by mistake when you meant "sex"

Absolutely. It's just sex that's fair game.

Also I noticed we've gone from 'transpeople want to be in single sex spaces because they feel they belong there' to 'sensible trans people accept they don't belong in single sex spaces and are fine with that'.

ah, the "tru trans" concept. Which is... transphobic.

I just think there’s a difference between having an opinion, and speaking to people like shit.

just as well i don't speak to people like shit then, isn't it. But i do tell people who tell me to #BeKind to the kind of shit who defends the non-binary idiot at the Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre to pull their heads out of their arses. In a clearly enunciated home-counties accent to boot.

Gosh i'm so mean for centering traumatised women over some woman's non-binary kid who isn't even there with me.

But that's the point! If person A believes they belong in a category or a space because of their feelings,and person B says person A doesn't belong there because this category or place is for bodies, not feelings, then there cannot be agreement. That's where your 'oh how people identify doesn't impact me' falls down because actually, it does impact.

Wadhwa, we are told, believes he is a woman. Everyone who needed to use ERCS had to agree. That's the point.

In ERCS, the subject of the thread, everyone didn't have the opportunity to get their needs met, did they? Only women who were able or willing to go along with gender ideology could get a service. So it very much was an issue, if you think those women deserved to be helped.

And once it was clear that this was an issue (and frankly it should have been clear before MW was employed, that there would be an issue, but benefit of the doubt) who took precedence? It wasn't the raped women, it was the gender ideologue staff.

What happened at ERCS is what happens every time gender overrides sex.

Yes. No one with any sense of perspective or empathy would put MW's and the non binary support worker's lack of having their gender identities validated above the feelings of female rape survivors, or seek to compel their speech. I have zero respect for the opinions of anyone who does.

But that’s neither here nor there. So what. I’m 42, I could walk about believing I’m 18 again. And? No one has to indulge that in any way shape or form, especially to the point it makes 18 year olds uncomfortable or people losing their jobs and the like for stating I am actually, 42.

The difference is that if people thought you truly believed it they would see it as mental illness, and if they knew you were lying deliberately they would be able to call it out as such.

In ERCS, the subject of the thread, everyone didn't have the opportunity to get their needs met, did they? Only women who were able or willing to go along with gender ideology could get a service. So it very much was an issue, if you think those women deserved to be helped.

And once it was clear that this was an issue (and frankly it should have been clear before MW was employed, that there would be an issue, but benefit of the doubt) who took precedence? It wasn't the raped women, it was the gender ideologue staff.

What happened at ERCS is what happens every time gender overrides sex.

But that’s neither here nor there. So what. I’m 42, I could walk about believing I’m 18 again. And? No one has to indulge that in any way shape or form, especially to the point it makes 18 year olds uncomfortable or people losing their jobs and the like for stating I am actually, 42.

I'm going to resist people who want to make the thread about "courtesy" and pronouns and toilets and continue to focus on the utter callousness of Mridul Wadhwa, trans rights activist and the women and men who enable it.

I don't believe many of these males genuinely "feel they belong there". They want to be there. Subtly different and harder to defend.

How would you know whether they "felt they belonged there"? Just because they say so?

At least quote me properly. What I said was that they felt they belonged there, not that anyone had to agree.

I think what is quite clear is the only opinion that matters here is the one that agrees with the mass opinion.

Indeed, it is the mass opinion of people in this country, thanks for acknowledging this.

YY @Kucinghitam exactly.

I think what is quite clear is the only opinion that matters here is the one that agrees with the mass opinion.

And not to return to an old point - I’ve never questioned the context of the original post or the people involved, what I’ve said is that the debate IMO becomes unhealthy, and targeted. Which you are sort of evidencing right now.

Because distracting with toilet/pronoun/manners squirrels might make the Naughty People forget that this thread is about raped women being retraumatised by Righteous ideology.

But that's not what happened at ERCS is it? No raped woman went to ERCS and said she objected to their being men's, women's and shared spaces, because that's not what there was. There was shared (but pretending to be single sex) or nothing.

TRAs don't want third spaces. Do Stonewall campaign for third spaces? GIRES, Mermaids? No. Why do you think that is?

Also I noticed we've gone from 'transpeople want to be in single sex spaces because they feel they belong there' to 'sensible trans people accept they don't belong in single sex spaces and are fine with that'.

Toilets and pronouns are not the be all and end all of the issue.

Why are you trying to make this about toilets? It isn't about toilets, just like it isn't about pronouns

In all honesty - no idea, because I’ve never had that argument before.

As long as in this example everyone has the opportunity to go to a toilet, I don’t really see an issue.

Anyone with any sense would be able to accept that, especially if they’re self-identifying within that group.

But they don't accept, and they don't understand because "self identifying" has fuck all to do with being female.

This is the linchpin of transgenderism. Women simply matter less.

@SleeplessInWherever you've been quite clear about the contempt you hold for us "angry" women discussing women's rights on this thread about the problems with gender identity ideology at Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre. So why would you think people should be particularly interested in your opinions about trans issues in general? They sound like you've given the matter all of 5 minutes' thought, to me.

But what would be your answer when they say they are a woman so should not be excluded? Or are you going to pretend that wouldn't happen?