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

And that is also wrong nd should stop. Men deserve privacy and dignity too. So let’s all agree. Single sex spaces should be single sex and anyone of the opposite sex using them should be removed from the space. Awesome. We’re getting somewhere now aren’t we. ☺️

Do you understand that when women do this they are putting themselves at increased risk, whereas when men do it they are putting women at risk?

As would I.

For anyone who wants to know what should be considered for evaluating risk of this sub group of males to show that they have a risk level not less than any other male in the UK of committing sex crime, have a read through the statistics for males who have transgender identities who commit sex crimes in the UK
Firstly, This was a question answered earlier this year:

https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2024-12-16/20298.

Question from Rebecca Paul (MP Reigate): To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the HMPPS Offender Equalities Annual Report 2023-2024, published on 28 November 2024, how many of the 50 transgender prisoners who reported their legal gender as female were convicted of a sexual offence.

Answer from Sir Richard Dakin (MP Scunthorpe): 23 December 2024
Of the 245 transgender prisoners who reported their legal gender as male (i.e. those who now identify as women, non-binary or gender-fluid) on 31 March 2024, 151 were convicted of a sexual offence. This includes both contact and non-contact sexual offences. Offence data was not available for 1 individual.

Of the 50 transgender prisoners who reported their legal gender as female on 31 March 2024, the number convicted of a sexual offence is five or fewer. We do not provide exact data for such small sample sizes as it risks identification of individuals. This approach is in line with our standards on data disclosure.

To put this into perspective with what we already knew from FOI information. I posted the information to a regular poster from FWR on another thread, who did not acknowledge the information at all, so it seems sticking the info here is appropriate:

Here is data from the MoJ
Here is an FOI request from 30 April 2024

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/populationoftransgenderoffend/response/2641337/attach/html/7/FOI%20240322022%20Annex%20A.xlsx.html

Up to the 31st March 2023, the MoJ stated that of the 88 male transgender prisoners with one or more sexual offences.

The breakdown was
48 rapes,
0 attempted rapes,
10 Sexual assault or attempted sexual assault,
13 causing or inciting a child under 16 to engage in sexual activity,
0 indecent assault or gross indecency
6 sexual activity with a child under 16
0 other

77 listed here.... BUT there is a total of 88 in the total so there is 11 crimes not noted.

Possessing or making indecent photographs or pseudo photographs of child has not been recorded in this FOI.

However, there is are further discrepancies in the data of the following when you look at TOTAL NUMBER OF TRANSGENDER PRISONERS SENTENCED FOR A PRINCIPAL SEXUAL OFFENCE.

1 causing or inciting a child under 16 to engage in sexual activity
3 rapes
2 sexual activity with a child under 16
3 Sexual assault or attempted sexual assault,
This equals 9 additional... however the sum for TOTAL NUMBER OF TRANSGENDER PRISONERS SENTENCED FOR A PRINCIPAL SEXUAL OFFENCE is 99.

Therefore 2 more sex crimes have been hidden from this data.

There were 203 males who were declared as transgender in the prison at the time.

There were 24 NB who were not segregated into male and female. What is key here, is that THIS IS NON-GRC HOLDERS. And we all know that males holding GRCs have increased and they are excluded from this data. NO female people with transgender identities were sentenced to a principal sexual offence. There were 41 female people with transgender identities in UK prisons at that time.

As a comparison, I have stats that say as of April 2019 that the general male MoJ data for male sex offenders was just 16.8% of the male prison population.

And there were 3.3% of female people in UK prisons were sex offenders.
I will leave you to do your own sums. But... even using the figure of 88/203 is 43.3%. (And that doesn't include making or possessing indecent photographs of a child remember.)

By the way this exercise was done in 2021. And I checked this data myself from the data source and it was correct at the time. So, it will give some back ground to the above.

The ones that say that in the March/April 2021 data collection period, the MoJ stated that of the 97 transgender prisoners with one or more sexual offences.
The breakdown was
40 rapes,
8 attempted rapes,
31 possessing or making indecent photographs or pseudo photographs of child,
32 Sexual assault or attempted sexual assault,
20 causing or inciting a child under 16 to engage in sexual activity,
10 indecent assault or gross indecency
9 sexual activity with a child under 16
27 other

The 97 sex offender transgender prisons collected 177 sentences between them.

And that according to that FOI 197 prisoners are transgender.

This is why NO SUB GROUP OF MALE PEOPLE SHOULD BE EXEMPT FROM RISK ASSESSMENT. This group of male people still retain the same male pattern of committing sex and violent crime, at ANY STAGE OF TRANSITION.

Plus, female single sex spaces are needed not just for safety for female people but for privacy and dignity which is often unique to female people's usage of that particular space.

Yet I have very often witnessed female people “making their own call” and using male toilets at concert venues for example when there are queues for the female bathroom.

Nobody asked the men for consent, they just assessed the situation and did what they needed to do.

How many transwomen would have to express these views, before you acknowledge that they are not extremist but are commonplace amongst TRAs? That those views are actually 'the majority view of that community'? Because there are literally thousands of examples of transwomen saying similar things. I posted the terf is a slur link upthread but there are plenty more besides those.

Or is it like the examples of when women have already been harmed by transwomen in women's spaces, that the number which would make that matter is always n+1.

I get the strong impression from your posts that you know some nice peaceful transpeople. I do too. But there's no evidence that those transpeople represent the majority of transpeople, or that the peacefulness of those transpeople in any way mitigates the danger posed by the likes of Baker or any if the other violent aggressive misogynists amongst the transwoman community.

If you let the nice transwomen in, you have to let Baker and his ilk in. There's no way not to. Apparently you think that's a risk to women worth taking, but I don't.

And they can. They are very welcome to use the toilets designated for their sex. And anyone harassing them for doing so should be dealt with as with any other harrassment offence.

This approach allows female people to be harmed in many different ways.

Something that the poster has not yet acknowledged.

No male people should be 'making their own call' about entering a female single sex space. The 'call' should only be to stay out and find another solution.

I do appreciate though that the poster thought to add "regardless of what the law says'. That makes it perfectly clear that we should not expect this poster to respect for the law at all.

And how exactly do we tell the difference between the peaceable trans people and the violent trans people and the pervy trans people?

Telling the difference between males and females is much easier. So we have rules keeping all the males out.

And how about the male people with transgender identities who will choose to use a female single sex space when they have threatened and intimidated female people about allowing them to use female single sex spaces?

Do you actually understand why safeguarding single sex spaces needs very clear boundaries yet?

The safest option for all female people is if all male people are excluded from female single sex spaces. As per the legitimate discrimination exceptions allowed under the EA.

No male person with a transgender identity should be making any fucking decisions about whether they should be in a space designated as being female single sex. They should respect all female people and keep out and find another solution for their personal situation.

This also means that not one person has to arbitrate whether someone is 'transgender' or not. Or even that really 'hateful' act, transgender enough to enter a space.

It is not hateful to point this out. It is, in fact, the law of the UK under the EA.

The thread is about whether transwomen are at higher risk of violence if they use a male toilet. My view from the beginning has been that it depends on the context, venue, circumstances, and that the transgender person needs to assess the risk and make their own call - regardless of what the law says - it’s about their safety in the moment

And this approach gives no consideration to the safety of the women in the space that that transwoman has decided he needs to use for his own safety. That's the point. Your approach only considers the transwoman. Women exist and are actual full humans with our own rights, needs, and wants. We are not support animals or human shields.

If a woman's rights activist carried a sign telling people to be 'afraid' I would be fucking horrified.

I’ve already very clearly stated that extremist views among members of any community should not be taken to represent the views of the majority of that community. And this goes for transgender people too, as it does for any other community.

Most transgender people just want to peacefully use a toilet with dignity, avoid being subject to harassment or even violence, and get on with their day.

"My view from the beginning has been that it depends on the context, venue, circumstances, and that the transgender person needs to assess the risk and make their own call - regardless of what the law says - it’s about their safety in the moment."

I know. That is my point. But it is not worth explaining it to you, you don't seem to be able to acknowledge the issues with your position at all.

I'd like you to answer my question about all the very real trans people who display signs like this (and much worse than this).

"No, that person does not represent all trans people."

But Baker does represent some people with transgender identities. And many male people with transgender identities agree with Baker on this issue. That any of those male people with transgender identities that wish to access female single sex spaces, should do so.

Male people with transgender identities have even had 'piss protests' to convince the public and organisations to support their demand to access female single sex spaces. And this topless protest, was at least the second that I have seen over the past weeks with another in Edinburgh.

Baker's view that they should have access to female single sex spaces is a view that has also been supported by at least two male barristers with transgender identities who have stated they will continue to use female single sex spaces that are clearly marked as being female single sex spaces. And an ex-judge has too.

Now you want me to address your new fantasy scenario about this deranged guy Harry who dressed up and pretended to be transgender in order to make a fake threat and use it to entrap a police officer ? You want to know what would happen if this Harry person who was pretending to be transgender actually did become transgender ?

This scenario is frankly bizarre.

The thread is about whether transwomen are at higher risk of violence if they use a male toilet. My view from the beginning has been that it depends on the context, venue, circumstances, and that the transgender person needs to assess the risk and make their own call - regardless of what the law says - it’s about their safety in the moment.

How your weird speculation about a male GC activist making pretend threats while dressed as a pretend trans person in order to entrap a police officer then them going on to actually become transgender affects anything, I do not know.

Why did the police officer pose for a photo with him?

Why was his presence tolerated at a peaceful march?

Incitement of violence is a crime.

Aircrafts are also not segregated by sex and there is no legitimate discrimination available that would allow an aircraft with tickets open to the public to be discriminated by sex.

Unlike female single sex spaces.

OK, so what about the vast majority of those who brandish similar placards, who are actually real trans people?

There has never been safeguarding criteria that keeps Muslims out of anything.

There HAS been safeguarding criteria that keeps men out of women's spaces. And you now want us to relax this criteria and allow people like SJB into women's bathrooms, changing rooms, prisons, rape crisis centres, domestic violence shelters.

That is what you are advocating for here. And we are all bigots for not agreeing with you. 🙄

Honestly, I never fail to be shocked at how little regard people like you hold women in. It's appalling.

Of course, now we are getting women - women born women - being challenged in women's loos if someone thinks they look 'masculine

I doubt this is happening as a butch woman looks like a butch woman. But in any event as soon as she opens her mouth all will be clear.

And Sarah Jane Barker?

At an advertised "trans rights protest march" in London this weekend? That's what Barker called it on Barker's Facebook page.

I am not backtracking.

I know Harry is not a male with a transgender identity.

BUT if Harry decided that he was, he would have the access that you have being supporting on this thread. Straight away.

So, tell us, if Harry decided he had a transgender identity, would it matter to you whether he had access to a female single sex space? Because you don't seem to understand the points that are being made on this thread.

Instead, you are desperately trying to accuse posters of something that is false, and again, this is another false accusation you have made about me today, instead of having a discussion about Baker and other males with transgender identities who make posts meant to threaten or intimidate female people and whether female people should have any spaces designated as single sex that exclude them.

Should Muslims be welcomed on aircraft ?

Some fundamentalist Muslims have attacked aircraft in the past.

I think Muslims should absolutely be allowed on aircraft. You cannot tell by any biological marker that they are Muslim or not. It is a cultural identity they have adopted. Some of their fundamentalists advocate
violence and murder, and in extreme cases have perpetrated that violence.

If a non-Muslim turned up at a peaceful Muslim event - an Eid celebration for example - and dressed as a Muslim and held up a sign saying “burn the infidels” - we would rightly regard them as unhinged.

That’s what this nutjob did, and people on here have taken at face value.