Matthew d'Ancona in the Guardian - 3rd spaces as the solution

Articles like this seem absolutely ludicrous if you live somewhere with self declaration and a strong feminist movement that's inclusive of trans folk.

Lots of feminists here are "inclusive of trans folk". I am. I'm just not happy to have the law redefined entirely to suit trans folk if it intersects poorly with women's existing rights.

it's like reading an article about how gay marriage will mean people will be able to marry dogs.

I have read this phrase once already today. I think it was on the crazy-cakes article about "radfem" being invented in 2004 and us all being rabid dogs...

I don't really like the idea of a third space, there is safety in numbers and it's always handy to have someone to hand you loo paper for the next stall, if there is none in your own, but I do accept that it would make some women feel better.

The 'third space' can be the majority space. I'd use it on lots of occasions I'm sure. I'd also like the option of the female-only one on some occasions.

It is about feeling better, it's not about safety, there is no evidence that countries with self id have seen a rise in violence against women and no evidence that women are attacked by non trans men, pretending to be trans women, in public loos.

It's not about the loos for a lot of people, so this is a reductive argument. In fact, as with a lot of the TRAs, when they realised it was a bit of a tipping point issue for the regular person on the street, I vow to "stop talking about transwomen in loos". I think the arguments are much more wide-ranging.

So with a heavy heart, I accept a third loo type, or a forth, if we've including accessible ones, which is an interesting side point, no one case about disabled women sharing loos with men, but I digress.

Eh? Disabled/accessible toilets are cubicles designed to be used by one person at a time.

If exclusionists want a loo of their own, let them have one. My feminism has generally been about accepting all women, even the ones I'm a bit uncomfortable with, but I accept that there is a tiny subsection of women who don't want to share with the majority and I.

Let them go forth and build their own loo. The trans women will be with the rest of us, in the ladies.

Why? Genuinely? Why would the trans women want to use the ladies female-only loos if a safe unisex environment was available to them?

If you're referring to Ireland, it's a different culture and a different demographic from the UK. Ireland is a lot more rural and people are more spread out.

Can you explaine why you believe that would have any impact on anything?

Also, Ireland still honours sex-based segregation in jails and other very specific circumstances; the GRA review proposed by Maria Miller wouldn't.

Ireland is pretty similar to the UK in allocating prison places on a case by case basis. What evidence do you have that Maria Miller would change the current policy in relation to prisons?

My feminism has generally been about accepting all women, even the ones I'm a bit uncomfortable with

That's right and I agree, my feminism is also about all women and the class women doesn't include men no matter how they identify.

Articles like this seem absolutely ludicrous if you live somewhere with self declaration and a strong feminist movement that's inclusive of trans folk. it's like reading an article about how gay marriage will mean people will be able to marry dogs.

Hmmm. I wonder why a Guardian writer wrote it and the Guardian saw fit to publish it?

Stillscreaming you do not represent the majority. You're entirely out of touch with what most people think. But carry on goading, do.

@stillscreaming If you're referring to Ireland, it's a different culture and a different demographic from the UK. Ireland is a lot more rural and people are more spread out. Also, Ireland still honours sex-based segregation in jails and other very specific circumstances; the GRA review proposed by Maria Miller wouldn't.

An utter legend on Twitter has made a list of times where men have impersonated women to gain access to women's spaces: mobile.twitter.com/iforgetalready/status/980548632213516288

No, sorry Screaming. You don't get to decide luv

Articles like this seem absolutely ludicrous if you live somewhere with self declaration and a strong feminist movement that's inclusive of trans folk. it's like reading an article about how gay marriage will mean people will be able to marry dogs.

I don't really like the idea of a third space, there is safety in numbers and it's always handy to have someone to hand you loo paper for the next stall, if there is none in your own, but I do accept that it would make some women feel better.

It is about feeling better, it's not about safety, there is no evidence that countries with self id have seen a rise in violence against women and no evidence that women are attacked by non trans men, pretending to be trans women, in public loos.

So with a heavy heart, I accept a third loo type, or a forth, if we've including accessible ones, which is an interesting side point, no one case about disabled women sharing loos with men, but I digress.

If exclusionists want a loo of their own, let them have one. My feminism has generally been about accepting all women, even the ones I'm a bit uncomfortable with, but I accept that there is a tiny subsection of women who don't want to share with the majority and I.

Let them go forth and build their own loo. The trans women will be with the rest of us, in the ladies.

It does, and often they don't have the self awareness to realise that is what comes across.

"But TRAs won't accept a 'third space' because this doesn't validate their identity as women. The only solution they will be satisfied with is full access to women's spaces."

That's the point. If TIM reject any or all 'third space' options, it's highlights that it's a validation exercise rather than a safety one.

But TRAs won't accept a 'third space' because this doesn't validate their identity as women. The only solution they will be satisfied with is full access to women's spaces.

There are also a lot of people who have been swept up in the transactivist cause who are neither predators nor woman-haters, but who are simply gullible idiots who imagine that the transactivist cause is a progressive one

This. I think in trying to get the issue out to the general public it is better to propose a reasonable "third space" option which at least then will expose the "transwomen are women #nodebate" stuff for what it is.

Once they have to argue publicly that they are rejecting a third space option because they are genuinely women in all sense biology be damned, a lot more people will "wake up" and see it for what it is.

So I am on the side of any argument in favour of women's rights in this debate, no matter how woolly, is a good one. Particularly so if it is published in the left's newspaper of choice.

in issues of consent, no always trumps yes

Love this!

Well put Truscum (glad you're back, I've missed your posts)

I don't think he really gets it. Trans women are women! and that is what legal changes are all about. A biological male can be a woman in every area life (i.e birth cert change, driving licence etc).
If those people are then told they're not actually women and need to use separate spaces there will be a legal challenge and the trans advocates will probably win...because they will be women according to a changed GRA.
It is important to keep pushing against proposed changes. This proposal will not solve the problem.

in issues of consent, no always trumps yes

That is wonderfully succinct. I'm going to use that. A lot!

And I think we can all imagine what kind of fully intact man is trying to force his way into women’s spaces

Exactly.

And I think it's very telling that, obviously based upon posts of people on t'interweb alone, the transwomen I'd be happy to share spaces with are the ones I'm least likely to encounter in them!

trans women seeking work will have to accept that their aspirations are trumped by the rights of the horribly violated. Sorry, but there it is

This is the bottom line for me.

I have no issue with using preferred pronouns or names. I think transpeople should be able to live their lives free from prejudice and to be represented, and visible, in all aspects of life. And I think they should be able to live free from fear, violence and persecution.

I think 'genderbending' non confirmity and people who 'increase the bandwidth of what it means to be a woman' (or, more importantly, a man) makes for a more interesting society. I think people should be able to express themselves, enjoy interests/hobbies and pursue careers that are not typically associated with their sex and without being told that boys/girls/men/women can't/shouldn't/don't do that... but that doesn't mean they have changed sex.

And I won't 'pretend' that a transwoman is the same as me because they are not.

As to the points above, my personal feeling is that TIMs who use vile language to talk about women, who issue threats of rape and violence against women don't actually deserve the respect of being referred to as she - they are the ones so concerned with 'gender' and female/feminine behaviours and stereotypes. Yet they are also the ones behaving like the worst sort of men displaying the worst of male behaviour. Women generally don't parade themselves on social media wielding baseball bats and threatening murder, whilst being supported for doing so. You are the ones who think it's all about behaviour. If you want people to pretend you are/treat you like a woman, then take a bit of responsibility and start acting like one.

As for being represented in society and daily life, as far as I can see, TIMs have managed to achieve proportional representation long before women have. TIFs significantly less so mind...

And as for living a life free from fear, violence and persecution goes, for all the literal violence some TIMs claim to experience from women at the other end of the country via their computer keyboards , it's actually men who are the problem. Yet it's women they direct their threats of violence and anger towards and women they hold responsible when men assault them

But I will not stand by and passively let women's language be erased. I will not support women being made to feel scared or uncomfortable to make a man feel better.

As I read in one of the many articles I've read over the past few days, in issues of consent, no always trumps yes.

Where does that leave all the transgender women who many of us have known for decades?

I’d be over the moon at a third (fourth) space.

I used to use women’s bathrooms when I was out with female friends and there was no unisex option (always use facilities with unisex changing rooms) but stopped that some time ago.

Happy to report that apart from a few bemused looks as I wait for a cubicle (and one incident of just a young man showing off in front of his friends and trying to embarrass me - which I just took in good humour - he was about 13) that using the men’s bathrooms has been uneventful.

Now, before anyone starts to say that means all men are harmless and should be allowed in the ladies I’d like to point out that that particular group would be self selecting.

And I think we can all imagine what kind of fully intact man is trying to force his way into women’s spaces

"It's notable that even in this article his "finding out stuff" hasn't included asking any women: the only two people quoted in the article are both men."

Ha! Spot on.

I still think that this is a (small) positive step

It is. But the Grauniad has a lot to do before I even consider bunting, let alone start hanging it out!

As a man, I was not entitled to offer an opinion on the effect of new gender recognition rights upon cis women. I’ve thought long and hard about this and realised that, to use the technical term, it is bullshit. The notion that only those with “lived experience” of a specific phenomenon can write about it effectively abolishes journalism – which might be snappily defined as “finding out stuff you didn’t know about, and reporting it”.

This is disingenuous. Firstly, very little journalism these days is just reporting information. The majority of journalism is monitoring Twitter, copying and pasting and writing opinion pieces about it. And d'Ancona writes purely opinion pieces for the Guardian. If you find stuff out and express an opinion, particularly about other people's experiences of course you're going to attract opinion or criticism back, rightly or wrongly. It's notable that even in this article his "finding out stuff" hasn't included asking any women: the only two people quoted in the article are both men.

Second, he invites criticism of this article, but this is another trans article on the Guardian without comments because they're terrified, so any criticism or opposing opinion will no doubt only be expressed on....Twitter.

"Where does that leave all the transgender women who many of us have known for decades? "

It should make most sane people realize that "transgender women" aren't women and it's not women's responsible to budge up to accommodate them. Transgender people have demonstrated that they are effective campaigners with a lot of media attention. It's up to them to find a solution that doesn't impact women and girls.