To be annoyed I had to watch GB News to see coverage of anti women protestors at Southwark

I have literally no idea why that’s a response to what I said. But yeah, OK!

It's interesting you don't ask @callmeLoretta1 that, when she's posted repeatedly and often about genitals and penises.

The data comes from cross referencing the number of people who declared themselves to be trans in the most recent British Government's census with data from the Ministry of Justice about the trans population in prison, all turned into an infogrsphic for ease of viewing.

I know it must be hard for you to see this portrayed like this. The usual trans objection is that the prison data is too small a sample, not that it's an infigrsphic, but anyway, the prison data is not too small. And it is similar to other countries.

The fact is that trans women are not some unicorn type of being. They are not like women when it comes to sex offending. They retain male offending patterns.

And so there is no evidence that suggests they can safely be let in to women's spaces. And so, on what grounds is it even being suggested? It can only be because women's needs aren't considered important.

I use a David Lloyd gym with a mostly open plan locker room. There are 4 little cubicles too which allow women more dignity if they need it.

We did have a trans woman at one point a few years ago and I can tell you that this individual did not use the cubicles. He would also hover around when fully dressed, on his phone.

I believe trans women would be perfectly safe in a David Lloyd men's changing room. The idea they would be beaten up by fellow members is absurd.

Why are you obsessed with mentioning genitals?!

Presumably then you don't go to a gym, because you wouldn't be able to walk down the street, through the reception or use the facility once you're there, because there will be penis owners in all of these places?

In case it helps, Tall, the misunderstanding may have come from your words above. It does suggest a certain emotional immaturity, given the absurdity of the argument and sheer disrespect it shows to women reading who have experienced sexual assault.

I could actually see that the post's style may have led some posters to think cartoons are the right level of response.

As it happens, though, what you seem to think are cartoons are actually infographics, an increasingly well-recognised way of communicating important information to the public favoured by multiple organisations eg. the NHS, charities and businesses.

Honestly, this site brings out an acerbity and cynicism I didn't know I had. I'm finding I've less patience by the day for cartoonish strawmen like the italics above, and am finding it harder and harder to understand how anyone posting such things could feel it shows them and their arguments in a good light.

ETA Just checked to see if the infographics have sources, and they do, which I'd imagine (I know in several cases of those posted, being familiar with the numbers) will themselves lead an invested right right back to the original sources. I don't like those which don't have any sources - totally agree with Tall to be wary of such - but those which do can serve a very useful purpose.

I mean, except it has DEPARTMENTAL DATA. And in them most have actual URLS to the actual source.

You can't answer that one.

Just admit you were not genuine in your quest for the evidence. It's that transparent.

Edited to add that I don't know what your last quite truculent paragraph refers to, I didn't ask you to reply to every post I made.

I mean, I could create an AI infographic in two minutes which 'proves' that Terfs care about women's rights. It would prove exactly the sum of FA, as your 'evidence' does.

And in terms of not responding to everything you post: it's not worth my time, and I'm on a break from work. Not all of us have all day to argue on the internet.

Possibly. That poster's excuse is so pitiful, you'd think they'd be embarrassed at calling a graph a cartoon. I would have more respect for them if they just admitted that they weren't genuine when they asked for evidence. It's obvious they hoped I wouldn't give it and had no interest in seeing any evidence. The ready made excuse of a cartoon (without even looking and seeing it is graphs and data) says this. Their mind was already shut and made up. No evidence was wanted.

No one forces you to watch the opinion channel called GB News. Calling it a news channel is misusing the language.

They are GRAPHS. Not 'cartoons'. Do you even know what cartoons are? And the sources for these graphs are at the top of them. They are actual government departmental data.

So now what's your excuse?

@SingleSexSpacesInSchools that you pretend that infographics like that are evidence you're just showing how ridiculous your argument is. If you genuinely believe it, it shows how misinformed you are.

I don't have the time or inclination to answer you points one by one, but to show how weak your points are, one example you give is religious modesty. If you truly care for religious modesty you'll know that Muslim women (if following this tradition) can't show their body from the stomach to the knee to another unrelated woman (unless out of necessity eg medical reasons) So I presume as someone so concerned about other women's religious needs, you have avoided going into any changing rooms that muslim women may use, or campaigned for them to always have access to cubicles. Because in that instance, you're the problem and you shouldn't be there.

But lots of mainstream outlets have deemed this unnewsworthy.

It seems that this is just your personal issue with the BBC. I could understand your angst if they were the only news outlet NOT covering this. But it seems all the news outlets, except GB news considers this unnewsworthy.

Canada and New Zealand:

UK and US:

Do you have any evidence for these statistics (that aren't cartoons?)

Anyone with a penis is a threat to you. Presumably then you don't go to a gym, because you wouldn't be able to walk down the street, through the reception or use the facility once you're there, because there will be penis owners in all of these places?