Transgender people can be turned away from female only spaces government says

Anywho... nice to see there are a few media outlets covering this now. It's nearer reaching tipping point every single day

The huffpost article made me smile, all about Mr Twocock and Jane Fae saying the trouble with women's groups is they just won't listen, so blatant, so coercive.

No statement from TwoCocks condemning the bomb making equipment and threats on women.

The debate seems like it is going to heat up over the summer.

Beyond and others

Fermat I agree with you. But this is when things go well.
What about when things don’t go so well? When women are feeling uncomfortable because an Obvioulsy Male person is entering their all female space?

I would actually really support a form of ID that would specify the gender if the person. And that Id would be obtained after getting the GRC.
Because atm, anyone can self Id. Some Id as a man one day and a woman the next. So somehow those people can go in women space one day and notbthe next?? And we are supposed to believe that women are safe when it’s the day when identify as a woman?
Or women in a prison are supposed to be safe from a self Id woman who has been sentenced to prison for RAPE?

Of course, we can just get on with the proposal, let trans woman come in women space and wait for the obvious increase in rape etc... or for women now to stop doing xxx because they feel unsafe.
The danger of course will be that we still won’t know because ... ah yes they will be recorded as ‘women’ and not men or trans women of course. So ‘no realisation’ that women aren’t safe anymore. They are just been raked by other women. Such a shame but how can we stop that!?!

Meanwhile back in the real world, DV and rape crisis centres can turn away volunteers if they want to have a space for biological females to heal from male violence.

If a women's rugby club wants to turn down a 17 stone, 6'4" forward on safety grounds, they can

These sorts of propotionate sex-based exclusions to the GRA are legal.

Yep. And not only are they currently legal but government is signalling that they will remain legal. The task for us is to ensure they are applied wherever appropriate. We need to spend time pressuring public bodies to apply these legal exemptions wherever it is best for women and girls. We must learn to use our time productively and not waste it on derailments.

It's certainly possible pratchet, I'm not decided either way. But coverage is good, regardless :)

If a women's rugby club wants to turn down a 17 stone, 6'4" forward on safety grounds, they can These sorts of propotionate sex-based exclusions to the GRA are legal.

That's a weight/height exclusion not a sex exclusion. The two tend to be conflated but they are different.

Am I alone in thinking this is a piece of PR to lull people into a false sense of security ahead of the consultation?

Guys, please, please stop upsetting and stressing yourselves by responding to thread derails. You're providing exactly what's wanted.

This thread is about government acknowledging women's right to single sex spaces and services where they are needed.

I go for option 3 "trying to get people to snap"

By "people you might want to say "women who have had major gynaecological procdues inclduding for cancer"

But, best to leave it really, I think interesting for lurkers.

So, on the scotland thing. Clearly the equality website needs to be contacted, best someone in scotland does it who feels brave enough?

They can but it's legal not to, isn't it? So we need sex specific spaces to be something we can sue for.

Anywho... nice to see there are a few media outlets covering this now. It's nearer reaching tipping point every single day :)

trans women are biologically different from women you mean? Well yes, obviously.

Snappity

Transwomen have neovaginas, and neovaginaplasty. To equate vaginas with neovaginas is patently absurd! There would be no need for neovaginaplasty if transwomen were born with vaginas!

Anyone reading that post will come to their own conclusions about it - and those conclusions are highly unlikely to be sympathetic

Meanwhile back in the real world, DV and rape crisis centres can turn away volunteers if they want to have a space for biological females to heal from male violence.

If a women's rugby club wants to turn down a 17 stone, 6'4" forward on safety grounds, they can

These sorts of propotionate sex-based exclusions to the GRA are legal.

And at the same time, thanks to the GRA, trans people with bodily dysphoria are protected against discrimination in the workplace and in housing etc in the 99.9% of cases where sex doesn't matter.

Win-win. Hooray for the great British political compromise.

Am I going to be deleted for saying that transwomen are biologically different from women?

Are we all biology-deniers now?

some people are trying to set up is a view that trans women are biologically different

No one has to try Snappity. Literally no-one.

Can you define the word 'vagina', Snappity? Think we established several threads ago that you couldn't explain what a 'woman' is.

Ffs this is ridiculous. You won't make me rise and tell you anything factual that you object to though, I know exactly what you are doing.

I hope you are reading this @JustineMumsnet

"trans women are biologically different".

Well, let's face it, they are. Having different biology and all.

Oh here we fucking go again.

I don't know what is more worrying; that Snappity is enjoying upsetting people or that Snappity actually believes what Snappity says.

Or of course there is option 3 - that Snappity is trying very hard to get people to snap.

Nope, nope, nope. All the nopes.

The question that needs to be asked to all these bodies is why not?

Why was an impact assessment not done? Was this oversight, or deliberate?

It is the question that needs to be asked. And, of course, no adequate answer will be forthcoming because the truth is that equality duties have become a box-ticking exercise that they don't really care about, they passed it to inadequate parties to carry out, and virtue-signalled the results. At no point has any public body actually considered - or cared about - deeply embedded societal misogyny.

Why let obvious shit-stirrers derail a thread? The topic of this is not Do Women Need to Dilate Their Vaginas - it is about female-only spaces.

Quite. And what some people are trying to set up is a view that trans women are biologically different so it makes sense to exclude them by using one set of terms for trans women's biology and a different set of terms for other womens' biology. I am not stupid.

Snappity: this doesn't feel like a civil approach from you. It looks like gloating.

I have been here long enough to realise that that what happens is that attempts are made to deny certain words being used in relation to trans women - woman is the most common but on this thread the same is being done with vaginoplasty. Then that sets up an atmosphere in which trans women are seen as other - they aren't women, they don't have vaginoplasty.

Well a little secret. Trans women are women and they have vaginas and their surgeries are vaginoplasty. If you don't want people to need to mention that, stop denying it.

Why let obvious shit-stirrers derail a thread? The topic of this is not Do Women Need to Dilate Their Vaginas - it is about female-only spaces.

I see this time and time again. Don't engage: ignore. You are not going to change the shit-stirrer's beliefs. You're just giving them the satisfaction of engagement.