Andrew Gilligan in The Times - sex pests target unisex change rooms

All I could think of when I was reading the article was Stella Creasy's awful response to the woman who told her about her daughter being having to undress while another "girl" played with their "female penis".
twitter.com/stellacreasy/status/975440621765873664

If we can't name the problem as males having access to what should be female private spaces then this will just get worse and worse.

I have never been in a unisex changing area that had completely private cubicles. They all have walls and doors that meet properly at the vertical edges, but none reach ceiling or floor. The standard way of working out where your friend or child is, is to call out and they wave their hand over the top or their foot under the bottom of the door. We pass things between cubicles in this way, too.

The privacy is token, not real. It depends on mutual consideration and respect.

Basically yes, can't remember if its snug into the floor but will check next time. We're still around men puting stuff in lockers and you have to shower in your bathing suit, but its always been the case in the pool itself, in only a swimsuit. A casual reader of that article might think men are routinely getting into open plan changing with women and children which I've never heard of, and would be wrong on so many levels.

In saying that if an area is designated for a particular sex then it needs to be enforced or it defeats the purpose of sex segregation.

Inclusive sex facilities are de facto exclusive.

My favourite comment, what now doesn't seem to be present, was:

What a disgracefully voyeurphobic article.

Sorry posted too soon - are the cubicles divided by floor to ceiling walls?

What is the spin this article is putting on it scotsheather?

Who were the politicians harping on about 'inclusive' unisex facilities?

Perhaps people have already been tweeting this article to them.

Our pool has unisex changing and its not exactly communal as the report would have you believe, all sturdy cubicles with locking doors. It does mean you have men and women in the same area but I don't exactly feel in greater danger, in fact I dislike communal changing even with females only. Its a serious issue but I think this article puts a very poor spin on it which doesn't help the issue at hand which is our safety, privacy and dignity.

But a man (I know, NAMALT) goes to the extent of lying about a changing room being out of order to more easily access his victim, it doesn’t need much imagination to see him also claiming to identify as a woman to achieve the same ends.

I know regulars here already know what I'm about to say, but lurkers may not and it's worth saying repeatedly.

Under self-id, a man would not have to "claim" to identify as a woman to enter freely any woman's changing area or other space. Under self-id, he cannot be challenged or asked for 'proof'.

Under curent GRC regs, a person identifying as a woman must 'live as a woman' (I know, I know) for a period of time before being granted a GRC. Self-id sweeps aside any notion of this - which means there will no longer be talk of "passing as a woman" (I know, I know) in order to enter women's spaces.

We already know that a significant number of people who already 'identify' as women do not look like women - and under self-id, predatory men (NB Mumsnet - I am not saying that transwomen are all "predatory men") can use this to enter women's spaces, knowing they cannot be challenged.

THAT is the point.

And the TRA’s are right, this man isn’t trans. But a man (I know, NAMALT) goes to the extent of lying about a changing room being out of order to more easily access his victim, it doesn’t need much imagination to see him also claiming to identify as a woman to achieve the same ends.

Quite. Saying "I am a woman" is a hell of a lot easier than the ruse this pervert was pulling.

And let's be clear that the judge said he could have gotten away with it, too, had the girl not reported it to her sensible parents.

"The girl’s courage in coming forward and telling her mum and the police, I hope she is made to understand you would have continued to offend had she not come forward."

The shit that goes on and doesn't get picked up.... Gives me nightmares.

The article is on the front page of the paper.

There are two other stories that caught my eye: Cathy Newman's abuse at Charterhouse and Naomi Wolf speaking about her rape.

the perpetrator planned it all out to normalize his presence in the same changing room as the victim.

Exactly this. Legislation that normalises the presence of penises in the spaces where women are vulnerable and should be able to feel safe is dangerous. And I know far more posters have said the same thing more eloquently than me, but my concerns are very much over keeping women safe.

And the TRA’s are right, this man isn’t trans. But a man (I know,
NAMALT) goes to the extent of lying about a changing room being out of order to more easily access his victim, it doesn’t need much imagination to see him also claiming to identify as a woman to achieve the same ends.

This is on the front page of the paper edition of The Times!

The most popular comment by far on the article is by Catharine Coleman, with a link to the Fair Play for Women website. Hurrah!

All it will take to stop this authoritarian madness is for parents to get pissed off enough to say:
"That's enough now, dear. You've had your fun. Playtime is over and the grown-ups need to talk. Go eat your vegetables. Stop fussing - the carrots identify as chips."

This article was in late editions of the online Times yesterday but is now in the Sunday Times, if anyone wants to find it in the paper or app.

They should be the ones providing evidence of their outlandish nonsensical claims, not make us have to keep defending obvious basic facts.

Indeed. All they do is state over and over again: "Transwomen are women." As if stating it was all that was needed. As the late Christopher Hitchens said: That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

It's all such BS.
They are the ones wanting to change the law. They should be the ones providing evidence of their outlandish nonsensical claims, not make us have to keep defending obvious basic facts.
No, the definitions of sex/male/female, reality of basic reproductive biology, and the fact of male violence are not up for debate.
You cannot force everyone to accept your ideology.

The trans lobby would say voyeurs dressing as women to access women+trans spaces is unlikely/not a problem.

And their evidence to back this up...?

Oh, I forgot, no evidence needed. It's all about the feelz.

Katya
That case is horrific... Shows also how the sick perpetrator planned it all out to normalize his presence in the same changing room as the victim. What a brave 8 year old girl.

The trans lobby would say voyeurs dressing as women to access women+trans spaces is unlikely/not a problem.

Putting on a frock or lipstick does not change a man into a woman.

heterosexual males and females, not those who are transgender

Being trans and sexual orientation are two separate issues. One can be trans and heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual or asexual.

Echoing my thanks to those who offered share tokens and to Andrew Gilligan and The Times for reporting on this.