To wonder if there's any actual evidence that's trans women are not safe in male loos?

None of them.

We let none of them in.

I am getting confused now
So WHICH Transwomen are we supposed to allow into women only spaces now?
Ones that "pass" (so none then)
Ones that are harmless (how do we know?)
Ones that have had their penis removed (I really don't want to have to check that)
Ones that have never threatened women on SM?
Ones who aren't doing it just for sexual kicks?
Ones who are in their 70's?

If a TW is a woman just because they say so then any man can be one, and in fact in order to be a TW one first has to be a man.
So who exactly are we supposed to let in now? Men?

Statistically, this means very few offences overall are committed by trans people, and where they are, it’s still overwhelmingly by those assigned male at birth (i.e. trans women), not as a unique category of risk.

Yes, indeed. It's still overwhelmingly the trans people who are male at birth (and also male every day of their lives up to their death and even after their death, because humans can't change sex) who commit these offences.

Because trans women are male and retain a male offending pattern which is why there is no coherent argument for treating them as a special category of male people who pose no risk to women.

Because they are just like all other males and pose the same risk - or possibly even an increased risk - to women as all other males do.

You're this close to joining the dots.

In short, transwomen are more at risk from men than women, and despite the law should in my opinion make their own call which loo to use based on that risk. The chance of encountering a trans person in a bathroom is infinitesimally small, the chance of them doing anything violent even smaller.

Yes, we know trans women are more at risk from men than from women.

Everyone is more at risk from men than from women.

This is why we keep women a little bit safer from men by giving them spaces which have no men in them.

We can't protect men in the same way by segregating some men from other men so men need to come up with a different solution to making some men safer from other men.

Removing women's protection is not the answer.

Readers note:

UK hate crimes record misgendering as abuse. As well as being exposed to stickers that are offensive, if I remember correctly.

Be very wary of self reported hate incident statistics. Always check where the information is sourced.

And this:

There is no evidence that trans women, as a group, pose a heightened threat to women:

• No peer-reviewed UK studies have shown trans women to be a significant source of risk to cisgender women in public or private settings.

• Where risk exists (e.g. in custodial settings), it is based on individual risk profiles, not group identity.

is a poor faith statement.

There is prisoner statistics that show that male people with transgender identities continue to have at least the same risk of committing sex and violent crimes as all other male people in the UK, regardless of transition status.

Strong safeguarding principles are based on GROUP not on INDIVIDUAL for the purpose of creating policy. If the policy is for INDIVIDUAL cases to be assessed on risk of that individual, then that is done.

Access to FEMALE SINGLE SEX SPACES RISK ASSESSMENT is based on CATEGORY RISK ASSESSMENT. Not on individual basis.

Just as all male people are assessed to have high risk of harming female people in a female single sex space, this includes even nice male people who are friends and family AND it includes all male people with transgender identities (who could also be those friends and family).

Does that mean that depending on my financial circumstances I can make my own call as to whether to commit fraud or not?

There is no evidence that trans women, as a group, pose a heightened threat to women:

Please see stats posted upthread. They offend like men because they're men.

Where risk exists (e.g. in custodial settings), it is based on individual risk profiles, not group identity.

The group they belong to is men. That's not an 'identity' it's a fact. They are at least as much a risk to women as other men are. Because they're men.

What's the difference between a transwoman and a man? Not in the transwoman's own head, but in the world, which you seem to like calling messy? There is no difference for anyone other than the transwoman. The fact that you are willing to prioritise the transwoman who has no right to be in a female space, over the women who do, shows you up.

Statistically, this means very few offences overall are committed by trans people, and where they are, it’s still overwhelmingly by those assigned male at birth (i.e. trans women), not as a unique category of risk.

The ones 'assigned male at birth' (sic) are the ones you want to be able to choose to use women's spaces! Transwomen offend at at least the same level as other men, as PP posted the evidence of upthread. 70% of the transwomen in prison in the UK are sex offenders. They are men and offend like men because they're men.

Are there any statistics for how many men are assaulted by other men specially in lavatories?

That’s not women’s problem. If some men are afraid of using men’s spaces, that’s up to men to sort out. Maybe tell men to #bekind.

There are trans identified male who are not delusional who do know they are men and who use men's bathrooms and facilities dressed in what would be considered women's clothing. One of them posts often on twitter and he's never had any issues as far as I know.

These men know they aren't at risk but for these men what is at stake in that the illusion of their female identity will be shattered by having to use male facilities. They need for everyone else to go along with the fantasy or be compelled to go along with the fantasy in order to feel validated and to gain satisfaction from their paraphilia. If they must use the male facilities then the whole acting out of their fetish becomes redundant and their female identity is destroyed. So to them it is like a kind of death. However, hard cheese, women should not and will not give up their hard one rights so that a bunch of deluded men with an out of control sexual fetish can use both women's spaces and the women in them to satisfy themselves.

Nope.

The law disagrees with you on this. Trans women are men.

You put the wishes of men like Sarah Jane Baker over the safety of women.

We are not human shields.

Enough harm has been done to women. We deserve better.

Men can sort their own safety out now.

No, the law is very very clear that men should stay out of women's spaces. Disregarding that makes them predatory men.

And transpeople make their own call depending on circumstances. In the real world. The messy, real world.

So men go in the men's.

Easy.

No I don't know that. I guess people said that about women's spaces once upon a time, but they fought and changed things. Go and advocate for change for your cause instead of supporting TW taking things that don't belong to them.

Because you know full well that creating third spaces everywhere is impossible. It’s just not pragmatic.

Cut to the chase, you just think men are more important than women. Every single point you make underlines that.

Otherwise, why wouldn't you advocate for third spaces. That solves the problem without impacting women's safety, dignity, boundaries. Only a person who doesn't care about those would take your position.

How ridiculous.

It's not akin to being racist to expect every man to stay out of women's single sex spaces because some men are violent.

Men are not women, not even if they identify as trans.

Trans people, particularly trans women, are overwhelmingly more at risk of harassment or violence from males, not females.

UK Home Office data (2018–2022) on hate crimes shows that most transphobic hate crimes are perpetrated by men.

In the 2021/22 dataset, 84% of hate crime suspects across all categories were male, and there’s no evidence to suggest trans-related hate crimes differ significantly in that pattern.

Galop’s 2020 report on trans people in the UK:

• 4 in 5 trans people experienced a hate crime in the previous 12 months.

• The majority of those crimes involved verbal abuse, threats, or physical attacks, most often from men in public or domestic settings.

International studies (e.g. U.S. Transgender Survey, 2015) also consistently show:

• The perpetrators of harassment, assault, and sexual violence against trans people are overwhelmingly cisgender men.

• In intimate partner violence, trans people are disproportionately victimised, again, most often by male partners.

Women are far more at risk of harassment or violence from males than from trans people.

Violence against women is overwhelmingly male-pattern:

• In the UK, 97% of sexual offences and 78% of violent crimes are committed by men.

• The vast majority of domestic abuse, sexual assault, and harassment is perpetrated by cisgender men.

Trans people, particularly trans women, make up a very small share of the population:

• Fewer than 0.5% of adults in the UK identify as transgender (ONS, 2021 Census).

• Statistically, this means very few offences overall are committed by trans people, and where they are, it’s still overwhelmingly by those assigned male at birth (i.e. trans women), not as a unique category of risk.

There is no evidence that trans women, as a group, pose a heightened threat to women:

• No peer-reviewed UK studies have shown trans women to be a significant source of risk to cisgender women in public or private settings.

• Where risk exists (e.g. in custodial settings), it is based on individual risk profiles, not group identity.

In short, transwomen are more at risk from men than women, and despite the law should in my opinion make their own call which loo to use based on that risk. The chance of encountering a trans person in a bathroom is infinitesimally small, the chance of them doing anything violent even smaller.

Did you feel clever when you posted that?

Well that’s exactly what happened here.

Honestly, I don't think @HangryLikeTheHulk cares. If women are collateral damage, that's just tough, isn't it? A price worth paying. 🤷‍♀️

If you let the nice transwomen in, you have to let Baker and his ilk in. There's no way not to.

The point that we have been making for pages and pages. Thank you namey, I just thought it needed to said again.

It is why to be fair to all, the law has to be to exclude 'all' male people. No one then needs to arbitrate who is and isn't transgender. No one then needs to arbitrate who is 'transgender enough'. It is clear and it is fair.

I agree that no female person should now be accessing male single sex spaces.

Because as you seem to be now acknowledging, male single sex spaces are needed for privacy and dignity, not just safety.

However, it is the female people who are making a judgement call about their own safety when they do that. Female people do not have a known and established high risk of committing violent and sex offences. It is those female people choosing to take that risk.

When a male person, any male person, enters a female single sex space the risk of harm is from the male person.

I am very glad that you pointed this out. This is yet another post about how symmetry is lacking.

To be clear, two scenarios are only symmetrical in privacy and dignity aspects, not safety. Once a male person enters a female single sex space, that male is considered to carry a high risk of harming a female person within that space. After all, that is why all male people were always expected to stay out of female single sex spaces unless they were children.