Of course women will be safer

But don't you get changed in a cubicle? I dont want anyone seeing me naked frankly All nurses provide intimate care regardless of their sexuality

Women will not be safer, this puts more women at risk my friend is very tall, has fairly masculine features. She will be questioned, ridiculed and asked to use men's spaces while any male predators will still be predators

I was thinking of starting a poll of how many MNers have:

A transwoman friend who is 5'4 has had 'all the surgeries' and the poster didn't even realise was transwoman until they were told;

Or, a transman friend who is over 6 foot and muscle bound and is indistinguishable from a man;

Or, a teenage DD/DDs friend who is over 5'10 and androgynous and is constantly being accused of being a man in public toilets;

Or, a butch lesbian friend who is constantly being accused of being a man in public toilets.

I'm up to at least 10 since Wednesday. It's amazing.

However men can just say ‘I’m a trans man’ and enter female spaces, this just makes it easier for the actually dangerous men now.

However men can just say ‘I’m a trans man’ and enter female spaces, this just makes it easier for the actually dangerous men now.

Original birth certificates

But those get changed, no? I had to order my birth certificate online recently as I misplaced mine. If you'd had yours changed by GRC then it would come with your "new gender" on it when you order it.

Because surely 99% of trans women just want to live as they choose and will not harm or abuse anyone, but that 1% who want to access womens spaces just to abuse them will do it either way.

"I support the ruling but a sensible conversation would be great. & further discussion about how to keep women and girls safe. For every story of a trans “woman” harming someone in a women's space there are a 2000 of “cis” men harming women in women’s spaces. & that was happening looooong before there was any sort of acceptance of a trans person using a women’s space. It isn’t a new phenomenon that’s arisen due to trans rights."

This is another one of the arguments that we have seen used for years. It is about the overwhelming number of 'men' who harm women and girls. And it is absolutely true that the number is overwhelming.

Why though would you allow a loophole to allow any group of male people to access female single sex provisions to allow additional opportunities for female people to be harmed?

There are already laws in place for the general male population. And yes, there is a horrific lack of preventing those crimes and that harm.

Why though do women and girls need to wait until those crimes have been reduced?

When then will we be allowed by people saying there is more important issues to come back and address the loopholes that have been created?

This ruling means again that we can talk about ALL male people with the confidence that no groups of male people have been treated as specially exempt.

Why can women not work on multiple fronts and do both? We do this with many things, why is it that these male people get priority by some people that say we should leave this until later?

How many additional female people being harmed will be enough before we can address the situation for those who are saying that we should be focused elsewhere?

officers with a certificate they bought for a fiver to say they are really a lady.

Take your point. But that's not how GRC's work. Years waiting on the NHS lists right now or forking out hundreds just for an appointment where they assess you for hormone suitability, and you can stil be refused a diagnosis, and then after all of that you need letters from 2 medical professionals for the actual GRC application after it's been a certain timeframe. Think the local clinic in my area has a waitlist over 10 years long, and a private appointment (not the diagnosis itself just the initial 1st appointment) cost about £500.

Nobody pays a fiver for one.

You asked what she was on about. I responded with well-known stories about three well known people. I'm obviously not saying they are true, of course they aren't. But they are examples of women with non-traditional looks being harassed and judged for that fact. I've seen the Obama one discussed on MN. Nothing to do with incels.

Well, you know what? That’s good for you, at least you can tell if someone is trans. Maybe you’re not the vulnerable person that can’t tell or you have no need to worry when in a pub, cinema or restaurant and nobody is watching who goes in and out of the toilets.

There is no point because you people (the self-proclaimed ‘gender critical’), never even attempt to approach the topic with good faith.

Also, Black women and women who aren't conventionally attractive have always been harassed and classed as non-women. E.g. larger, more simply dressed, working class and so on. They are now less safe.

What on earth are you talking about?

Michelle Obama, Serena Williams, Lady Gaga and many others have all had rumours about them secretly having a penis because they are not conventionally "feminine ".

I agree cis men are threatening and sometimes I have radical separatist thoughts despite knowing a few gentle and good ones.

Strong argument there, well done 🤣
I am open to any argument with substance if you want to give it another try?

I've been seriously sexually assaulted and also perved at by women, including a bathroom incident at school. A lot of people I know have been assaulted e.g. by female childminders. It's often not as heavily violent as male assault nor can it cause pregnancy but it happens.

I'll only feel safer when there is more concern about addressing violence as such.

I feel less safe seeing the violence with which binaries are being enforced in the name of my rights. Not in my name.

I don't believe women will be any safer. You say the changes only upset a minority. Those examples you give are an even smaller minority, it's looks like they're all in the US too. There are huge levels of sexual assault, most of it taking place in family homes. If someone is so depraved that they want to sexually assault someone they will find a way, stopping trans women from going into women's toilets won't save anyone.

An increase in authoritarian legislation soon will be used against women.

Look around you. This is about increasing state control of bodies and individuals. Not about women's safety.

Is there going to be new funding or restored funding for women's and children's services now? For making public places safer and amenities more accessible? If not why not?

Next step will be legislation to protect men's spaces from feminists.

Also, Black women and women who aren't conventionally attractive have always been harassed and classed as non-women. E.g. larger, more simply dressed, working class and so on. They are now less safe.

How anyone could defend men infiltrating lesbian, menopause or breast feeding groups is beyond me. The efforts to stop women being able to have anything to ourselves is sickening. Bullying women, threatening venues etc.

No, they can assert “I am a trans man” and walk into the women’s toilets, even when they are a cis man. And none of you will be able to object.

You’ve invited nefarious threatening cis men into your toilet.

You may be part of tiny minority of the population who claims they can’t tell by looking what sex a person is.

Interestingly there is a huge crossover between this population (let’s call you ‘sex-blind’) and trans activists. It is an odd affliction as even many animals can tell what sex a person is quite easily and they don’t even know about fashion.

Thankfully the vast majority of people do know, so this ruling is beneficial to women who now won’t be searched by the male police officers with a certificate they bought for a fiver to say they are really a lady.

Maybe your sex-blindness is treatable - I suggest seeing a doctor as your safety could be at risk if you can’t spot which humans are men.

I certainly never heard of this happening before blokes started to demand access to women's spaces and even since never actually seen or heard of this from a reliable source.