"Trans people should not be allowed to use women’s showers and changing rooms, proposed NHS guidance says" - Darlington Nurses draft new guidance.

Exactly the likes of Gregg Wallis et all ie a non transwoman are vilified for inappropriate behaviour
yet
A transwoman isn’t. They can undress in front of women and we have to accept that

No women anywhere in the world campaigned for men to share changing rooms, showers, toilets or hospital wards - or anywhere where we undress.
This is a totally male led movement that women and girls offer up our undressed / vulnerable bodies in order to validate sad men, mentally unwell men or predatory men.

It effectively decriminalises indecent exposure / flashing which we know is a gateway crime to even more serious sex offences.

The tragedy of all this is that unthinking women and men, alongside the most vocal predatory men, are pushing for this despite all the evidence about sexual violence committed against women and girls.

I agree.
My calculation shows a much higher risk
Seven times in fact
And as noted these crimes by trans women are sexual crimes as well, they do not include physical violence or threatening behaviour whereas the crimes against the trans community do. If we factored those in as well the stats would show a much higher figure.
There are none reported though in any stats ( that I could find ) which is telling in itself
Id also love to know why websites telling people what terrible things to do to terfs ( their word not mine ) hasn’t been taken down. That is a hate crime in itself, surely!

We would not know because the police and press insist on lying in their reports and describing them as female

They certainly do.

Yet, whenever we ask to be linked to the evidence that show that any male person at any stage of transition has a lower risk (as per those crime stats) of committing sex related crimes, no one can seem to answer. In fact they either drop off the thread, or they turn and attack posters for supposedly being hateful for asking the question.

The figures I gave committed by transwomen are only reported sexual crimes where a transwomen was actually charged. (1 for every approx 1000)

The figures I gave for hate crimes were reported hate crimes but are not defined
( although there are legal definitions ) (1 for every approx 7300 men )

The figures identifiy the dangers to women

Anyway thank goodness Wes Streeting will put a stop to this in the NHS.

Now hoping Bridget Phillipson will do the same in schools and put a stop to unisex facilities. Too many girls are refusing to drink and missing school during periods etc due to being forced to share toilet facilities in schools with males. It's just not acceptable.

This is harrowing to read.
Yet we keep being told that ALL trans people ‘just want to be accepted and live their lives’

I’m sure some, maybe even most do and I hope it’s a vocal minority that are guilty of these transgressions. Genuine trans people should be equally horrified by this.

Indeed. When women are abused for using the word 'male person' to describe a male person with a transgender identity (as some of us have all too recently on MN) and someone who declares they are 'moderate' and wants to exclude male people from female single sex spaces, but to allow them in as they are really female, the time has been and gone.

As the saying goes, those male people who fully respect the needs of female people stay out of the female single sex spaces all the time.

Those who don't fully respect the needs of female people will say things that we think is agreement, but continue to use the female single sex spaces anyway. Because they believe they have special privileges.

I don't think it helps to build bridges when even the article criticising the extremism comes from a place of manipulation rather than genuine good faith. The reasons to rein in the 'confrontation' in a nutshell are best not make stupid people look stupid, because they don't like it, and bad people don't want to see themselves as bad, so we need to stop telling them that (even though we know it really) There is no acknowledgement at all of the type of comments pp shared, and a lot of justification for the 'anger'. I see no attempt to reach any form of compromise or recognise the rights of others there, just a call for a strategic change of direction. I agree it's probably too late. TRA and MR extremists are too intertwined now and it's hard to see where one stops and the other starts.

Thank you 🙏 And agreed. I shave my head and am often to be found in jeans and a hoodie (football fan). The stewards at the grounds I visit, with almost 100% accuracy, point me to the female steward if they're body searching. People can tell. Almost always 😚

Some sense at last!

This:

And of course, we then hear the stories that when that other space has been made available and most of the female people are using it (even if it is inconvenient them - such as female people walking to different buildings to use the space they have been told they can use as their alternative) the male people wish to access that space too. The result in that case is that a sub group of male people have access to all spaces they wish to use, and female people who want single sex spaces with no male people using them get no spaces.

My favourite graphical representation of the issue.

The concept is that no male person should be 'outed' or made feel discomfort in the fact that they have a philosophical belief where they can claim to be female people.

This solution is one that has been stated as the only available option by groups such as Stonewall who have been directly involved and influential in writing these policies. Just like if a female patient complains there is a male in their shared hospital room, they are to be told that there is no 'men' in that room and if anyone is to be moved, it is the female person who complained. Never the male person who is in the space that female people expect to be single sex.

This has also been the solution insisted on for other instances as well, that have been changed back to prioritise female people mostly but it has been said about spaces for female children as well in the past.

At all times, the person with the transgender identity should be centred and not excluded from the space.

And of course, we then hear the stories that when that other space has been made available and most of the female people are using it (even if it is inconvenient them - such as female people walking to different buildings to use the space they have been told they can use as their alternative) the male people wish to access that space too. The result in that case is that a sub group of male people have access to all spaces they wish to use, and female people who want single sex spaces with no male people using them get no spaces.

This is incredibly shocking. I'd like to know what all the decent, peaceful transwomen who 'just want to pee' are saying to the people who are posting this in their name. Because any women who are tempted to 'be kind' must surely have pause when they read these comments and realise that opening the door to 'Nat(alie)' who wouldn't hurt a fly, means opening it to these people too. Because this violence is not a reaction to women failing to comply, the lack of compliance merely serves as an excuse for their desire to rape, maim and kill women.
These comments need to be shared widely (thank you for posting) and the 'moderate' TRAs need to get their house in order and address this rather than expend so much energy trying to persuade women their fears are groundless. Because once you've seen this stuff, well, you can't unsee it, can you? If ever a further argument for the protection of single sex spaces for women was needed, here it is.

The purpose was to punish, intimidate and make an example of women who didn't want to undress in front of a man even if it hurt his delusional self image.

He needed to have the designated female space to uphold the pretence that he is a woman. And the women who changed elsewhere needed to be smeared and not given a designated female space, because that would, again, have made the statement that he can't enter female spaces as he isn't female.

Because the male would complain about being "othered" and the NHS as an organisation has been totally captured by trans rights activists. It's necessary to punish the women pour encourager les autres.

What I didn't understand with the hospital in this case was why they put the women into the cupboard with a window onto patients to change, leaving the solitary trans man with the big female changing room. Surely this should be a space per usage thing?

You're looking for a way men can continue to join women and girls in bathrooms, toilets etc and reducing the impact on women enough to make it 'acceptable'.

But since there's no need for men to be in there at all there isn't a problem to fix and no need for ANY impact on women

Exactly, these figures are not accurate. We need to see what these ‘hate crimes’ constitute. Misgendering someone is considered a hate crime. I however see it as correctly sex-ing someone.

Yep I think back to the various coming and goings in my student house share and there isn't a single case of 'remember the time Dave brought back the man who turned out to be a woman', or 'what about when Sarah pretended to be straight for a month because the girl she started dating was actually a guy and she was too embarrassed to say anything.'
Given the sheer numbers involved if it was actually even remotely tricky to tell men and women apart there should be at one incident.

”There doesn't seem to be any objections to them accessing male facilities. In fact, they are entirely removed from the trans debate. And it always grates on me because I don't think women who advocate for female spaces being used on the basis of the DNA actually honestly would accept someone who looks male accessing their spaces. So I can only conclude that anti-trans agenda is really largely anti-men agenda. So why not call it what it is...“

What is the ‘anti-trans’ agenda though?

The women and girls who are seeking to prioritise sex based rights being prioritised over gender where sex matters do consider all female people’s needs. In talking to female people with transgender identities we have learned that a small % will use male single sex spaces. However, many we talk with tell us they are fully aware that their presence in a female single sex space may cause distress if they have taken testosterone. They choose to use gender neutral spaces. They will take the steps to plan trips to unfamiliar places to have options.

They also resent being used as political leverage by anyone attempting to force female people to accept male people into female single sex spaces. Those female people continue to be centred in feminist campaigns because they need the benefits of those campaigns. And should rightly benefit from feminist campaigns.

Those female people are certainly not forgotten particularly on mumsnet where so many parents are discussing the needs of their daughters, who might be female people with transgender identities. It is why the accusations of being anti-trans and transphobic don’t really work.

Anti-men? Only if you think that prioritising the needs to give female people equitable access to the same rights and opportunities that male people have is ‘anti-men’.

And just what are these 'hate crimes'? No assaults are ever reported in the media - if there were assaults the pro-trans media would be rubbing it in our faces non-stop. As is reported in many places, a female saying 'no' to a male is seen as a 'hate crime'. Some transwomen have reported strange glances as a 'hate crime'.

I'd like to see an actual definition of these hate crimes and what they actually involve, before I believe even ONE has ever taken place, let alone 'thousands'.