Of course women will be safer

It isn’t behind a paywall, I’ve just double checked.

For future reference, you can type a URL into archive.ph to get around paywalls.

You’ll have to look at the stats on trans prisoners. They are out there, but I don’t have them to hand at the moment and am about to go out for the day (though someone else may oblige you).

Remember, trans women are men, not women. You’ve had evidence that males do 99% of sex offending. What extra offending will satisfy you? 99% is extremely high!!

The vast majority of women CAN tell very easily who is male. It’s an evolutionary survival mechanism, honed over millennia, to enable us to keep ourselves safer from predatory men (the oppressor sex). Men may find it more difficult as their survival hasn’t relied on doing this with accuracy.

Any evidence that isn’t behind a paywall? Please bear in mind that I’m asking for evidence that trans women pose an increased risk.

You cannot tell who's a man and who's a woman from looking
This again? Will you stop talking shite, ffs!

Sorry for your medical problems, that sounds tough for you.

If your appearance is ambiguous (though it doesn’t sound as if it is really?), were you to be challenged in a women’s single sex space, the minute you speak will make it very obvious that you are a biological female. There’s no need for you to avoid using the women’s toilets.

You absolutely can detect sex by looking with a very high degree of accuracy. Don't be silly.

And now that the law has been clarified, any man who tries to infiltrate women's spaces, knows that this is wrong and they are breaking the law. Those men need to act with decency and stay out.

You cannot tell who's a man and who's a woman from looking. So this ruling changes nothing. Rapists and abusers will continue to break the rules and go where they like.

In fact, if we become accustomed to seeing trans-men in female spaces, that makes it really easy for male-presenting people to go unquestioned.

If a week ago we assumed a rapist was willing to claim to be a trans-woman, why on earth would they not now claim to be a trans-man?

Here’s some evidence that you are more unsafe in mixed sex spaces.

https://fairplayforwomen.com/unisex-changing-rooms-put-women-in-danger/

Plus take a look at the ONS stats on sex offending. The most up to date show that 99% of sex offences are carried out by men. Previously it was 98%. It varies slightly from year to year, but is always hovering between 98-99%. Stats show trans women commit sex crimes at the same or slightly higher rates than other males.

So just keeping males out of what should be women’s single sex spaces - not just changing rooms and toilets, but prison cells, refuges and other places where women are vulnerable - keeps women MUCH safer. Which is why women’s single sec spaces were created in the first place.

The alternative is a female officer being forced to strip search a male. How is that right?

If you can’t imagine how that having clarity in the legal backing to demand policies that exclude men who identify as women is going to make women safer than it’s going to be hard to help you.

Try reading up on events of the last few years and find out? There is a long list of women and girls that specifically would not have been raped or sexually assaulted, had the authorities followed the actual law including Dolotowski’s young victims, the women raped in a female hospital ward by a trans identifying male (at least two off the top of my head) and the women in prison punished for complaining about being sexually assaulted. All if those utterly preventable.

How many raped and sexually assaulted women would be enough for you to agree there been an issue that we at least now have the tools to fix?

I’m not sure what you mean by ‘the cause’ and why you feel that makes you collateral damage?

You do understand that women are a lot more vigilant and sensitive about who they see in female only spaces now purely because so many men have decided they want to barge in as well?

The implication from your slightly aggrieved sounding comment is that women are somehow to blame for this situation - I suggest that if you worked with us rather than against us and we re-established women’s spaces for women only then eventually things will settle down and you will be hassled less.

I’m asking for the evidence which shows I will now be safer following the Supreme Court’s judgement. Where is the evidence that I was unsafe prior to the ruling? As per OP’s observations.

This

Who hassles you for using the disabled loo? I used it regularly when I had kids in nappies as that's usually where the baby change is, and am guilty of still sometimes using it for convenience. It would be perfectly reasonable for someone to challenge me as I am not disabled - I've never been challenged and never seen anyone else challenged for misuse of disabled facilities. If someone wrongly challenges you surely you just say you have a disability they can't see and it's none of their business?

I'm sorry this has affected you but it's certainly not an argument to allow men into women's facilities. At least now we can safely challenge males in women's spaces without fear of being accused of hate crimes. I'm rather upset a masculine looking female than allow a predatory male into women's spaces.

Well said. I’m sick of women being made out to be the demons. We’re not

Yep - it’s funny how “A woman misgendered in the loo” distresses people more than “women raped by TW in prison DV shelters and hospital wards”.

Rather embarrassed your “proof” is random unsubstantiated (and let’s face it, unlikely) story about something happened before the ruling. What don’t you understand about toilets being the thin end of the wedge?

Yeah a lot of us are collateral damage - non gender conforming people of both sexes, women with PTSD, people with religious beliefs, LGB people, ND and mentally unwell children who've been told they're in the wrong body, little girls sexuallly assaulted in Morrisons toilets, women prisoners locked up with violent men to protect the men for mother violent men.

We're collateral damage to the cause of an aggressive mens rights movement. Not the cause of women's single sex spaces. Put the blame where it belongs.

So you are going to let the idiots win and not even use a disabled toilet? My DS is disabled and sadly we don’t live in a perfect world, I’m always gonna get morons making comments but I’ll be damned if I let them get to me. A sarcastic reply usually works a treat.

I'm surprised you get "shit" for using disabled toilets given that you are disabled. You have every right to use them and the ladies' loo. I'm surprised also you've been accused of being trans. What happened when you said you weren't?

Carry on using both facilities as you are perfectly entitled to. But please don't belittle "the cause" as something inconsequential. Women's rights aren't inconsequential.

We can all find random anecdotes that support our view. This happened a year ago so how does it show the impact of the SC ruling?

I have just seen this on threads. Women are not safer... www.threads.net/@laurasidestreet/post/DIrlJVRA_Nr?xmt=AQGzWKD0wALihORDehr33iWE3EzD5VKSkYjs-C0f87BMsg

@ThisUsernameIsNowTaken
Did you actually read the post? The OPs views are actually shared by the majority. She is entitled to her opinion and perfectly valid views without being accused of being ‘anti trans’ My issue with this whole argument is exactly this. You can’t express relief as a woman for not having the very real fear of having to share your changing rooms etc with men without being accused of being anti trans. I’m not remotely anti trans and in no way does it appear that the OP or anyone else who agrees with the ruling is.

Sorry but it didn’t come across as sincere … all that was missing was an eye-roll emoji.
I have already said that I was frequently mistaken as make when I was younger. But I am happy to be questioned by a concerned women rather than allow men easy access to our spaces

As I said, my solution is to avoid using public toilets at all. Like I said, collateral damage.