Why are so many women ok with males taking their spaces?

And why do so many women accuse other women of being 'pearl clutchers?' It seems to be the standard 'shut her down' phrase to anyone with any reservations about anything now.

but then the idea of going in wouldn't even cross their minds anyway.

That's it. If they are so lovely, and don't pass, then I would imagine a "good" transwoman would just do the right thing and not go where they know they would cause discomfort. None of the nice men I know would dream of wanting to be naked with women. It's simply the polite thing to do. Forcing one's way in is pretty hostile.

Re: Victorian prudishness, 'prude' and 'frigid' have long been insults used to convince women that their boundaries don't matter. Women and girls need to be taught that they have the right to say no without being accused of transphobia/kinkshaming/lack of 'sexpositivity'.
I am not sexpositive, and I'm sure my opinions on dress, promiscuity, porn etc would get me labelled as prude so I don't say anything; it's my opinion, and I have it because of my own personal experiences. I've never been raped; I have been molested/touched against my will, and I do not want a man even thinking of me in a sexual way. I would love to live in a non-sexual society, where people only have sex with partners they love. Because I think we would all be much happier and more balanced that way. But we're a long way from that. We cannot behave as if this is a utopia, and make laws accordingly, when we aren't. We do live in a highly sexualised society, and that's the reality we must cater for.

Real lesbians dont sleep with the enemy

I think it's fine to criticize handmaidens. Saying it's unfair or even unfeminist to label women as handmaidens is thought-stopping and is an attempt to prevent us from analyzing male power.
First of all it's not true that everyone can be a feminist or all types of thinking are feminist. Liberal feminism was a backlash against real feminism and libfems unfortunately serve and shore up male power. An individualist pro porn pro prostitution pro trans stance isn't feminist. If you think it is then its fine to call yourself a libfem. But libfems are handmaidens and we do need the tools and space to analyze why they do what they do.

Handmaidenry is the most upsetting part of patriarchy to me. Women selling out other women and throwing other women under the bus for the crumbs and scraps than men hand out to them in the form of attention.

And fear of putting one's head above the parapet

It's internalised misogyny

Has anyone else noticed that it's most prevalent from non-straight women? Well, the ones I know that describe themselves as pansexual that is
??!! I'm a lesbian and we are literally erased by Trans ideology and I've had woke lesbians tell me I'm transphobic for rejecting the notion that trans identified men can be lesbians and therefore valid sexual partners for actual lesbians i.e. adult human females who are attracted by definition to other adult human females. Well that used to be the definition before Stonewall changed it.

“We should all learn to share spaces together, as equals”

• It just seems so idealistic. Who is going to ‘learn?’

Like any group there are bad apples but the vast vast majority of transpeople are just trying to live their lives without having their genital status constantly being an issue in public.

I don't think it's currently possible to refer to trans people as a coherent group as the trans umbrella is so wide. Without the ability to define sex it is impossible to defend the rights of anybody who suffers prejudice because of their sex, whether they are female, trans, or gay.

Currently male people in heterosexual relationships who are happy to present as men all or some of the time, are not just claiming to speak for lesbians/trans people/women, but in positions of power where people listen to them.

It's our socialisation innit?

We have, to a (wo)man, been told from an early age that it's our job to be kind and nurturing. To protect the vulnerable.

It really isn't just younger people. I have seen a fair few people on gransnet say they have no problem with it. And the 3 main reasons seem to be:
I'm not a fossil - move with the times you old fuddy duddies (= it's cool?)
I can handle it if an idiot man messes around inappropriately (= women who are scared are wusses, brave up)
Someone I know (or know of) is trans. This one I get. My hubby worked someone who had the surgery, and is a very gentle person. But this was when trans meant transexual and body dysmorphia seemed to be the only reasoning. Now of course it is all much more complicated and I think most people really don't know how to deal with the dilemma that there are all sorts of people who have put themselves under the trans umbrella and we just don't have a way to differentiate. Or are unaware of the more extreme members or think they are very very few. A relative said to me that the extremists were very few but just made the most noise and headlines. Truth is I don't know myself how many there are.

IndistinctRadioChatter
We will 'police' it as society has always policed sex segregated spaces that are there for the protection of women and children. By being able to ask a man to leave a space identified for women,
The number of trans women who 'pass' is infinitesimally small no matter what people claim. Humans have managed - and continue to manage to identify the opposite sex. Just ask all the gay men currently using adult human females as their surrogates. They suddenly have no problem in knowing that a TW is amazingly not an adult human female!

Frankly, concerned as I am about keeping women safe, I am incandescent with rage at those currently inviting every male self identifying as a woman to share toilets and changing rooms with children. A quick look at this week's revelations about men exhibiting their bodies and sex acts in their work place and inviting children of all ages to view an art exhibition displaying fetish and porn reminds me that diluting sex segregated spaces erodes safeguarding - of women and children. It is not your place to hand over our rights to these people.

But I don’t think it’s healthy to go around being inherently scared of penises.

I'm not inherently scared of penises. I am sometimes scared of the body attached to the penis. I can't think of the last time I felt the need to be in a single sex space, and don't notice the sex of other people in the toilets - but I also can't remember the last time I was forced to enter a space where I felt vulnerable. Women aren't asking for every space to be single sex. They are stating their need to maintain the right to some single sex spaces. I don't want single sex supermarkets. I do want the law to make it possible to provide single sex spaces for women sleeping amongst strangers.

but my preferred solution to this would be an entirely unisex society where we stop sexualising bodies in what, to me, is a throwback to Victorian prudishness, and work towards equality on not just a social level but a bodily level.

Equality requires recognition of difference. Women do not go through male puberty, they do require contraception to control their fertility, they can be forced into pregnancy and (assuming no massive drop in population levels) most women will have children. None of this is ever surprising. Sometimes women have fertility problems, but this will be because of specifically female health issues. Ignoring all of this makes as much sense as pretending that any other kind of structural inequality doesn't exist.

Re: Victorian prudishness, 'prude' and 'frigid' have long been insults used to convince women that their boundaries don't matter. Women and girls need to be taught that they have the right to say no without being accused of transphobia/kinkshaming/lack of 'sexpositivity'.

That’s like saying you’ve never felt like a lesbian or a French person

Being French has nothing to do with feeling. Whether or not I feel as I imagine a French person would, I am not entitled to French citizenship because I don't meet the criteria.

Gender, and by extension, womanhood and manhood, are social constructs that have no place in modern society.

Completely agree.

I don’t believe my genitalia is the foundation of what makes me a woman.

I think the foundation of our rights is our humanity. I just happen to be a human with a female reproductive system. It's no more my identity than the colour of my hair. What else would make me a woman apart from female biology?

Indistinct, well, obviously if a trans person passes extraordinarily well then they will get away with using female facilities and there isn't anything anyone can do about it. This isn't common because human beings are very good at picking out the opposite sex, but yes, of course it can happen.

Essentially, what I would like to see is that we retain the cultural ability to challenge someone we perceive to be male in a female space. I can't enforce that males who are trans respect the specific female spaces if they think they can get away with using them, but I do think that helping women and men retain the confidence to challenge a boundary transgression is key to a lot of issues.

I’m just coming back to the thread and I must say I am impressed by how civil we are all being. In my earlier post I referenced a few trans friends, and that was misinterpreted to mean I think my small experience should make the rule for everyone. I’m not that naive. Yes I only personally know a few transwomen, but I have read and learned about many others. Like any group there are bad apples but the vast vast majority of transpeople are just trying to live their lives without having their genital status constantly being an issue in public.

I vehemently disagree that being trans is a mental illness in and of itself, and I think that position is untenable. It is, however, a great way to discredit and de-legitimise people who disagree with you.

But still, nobody has answered my question. If you want to keep transwomen out of women’s spaces how exactly do you plan to police that? There are many trans people who pass very well. You never know about it because you don’t notice it. So no matter what you do there very well may be transwomen in “your” spaces. I am quite private so I don’t take off more than I would at the beach in front of any strangers. Perhaps we all need to decide where and how much to disrobe with the automatic expectation that there could be transwomen in the room. If it bothers you, most clothing can be tried on with a cami and underwear on. I know it’s not just dressing rooms but my point is it’s really very unusual to have a that you must undress in front of strangers with no private option. Where are these millions of clothing stores with mandatory shared dressing rooms anyway?

"She believes trans people should be able to take part in sports as their current gender as long as they are physically transitioning."

How many transpeople actually physically transition - very few.
I am sure that if your daughter was competing at a high level at any sport, she would quickly see the advantages a male bodied person would have in comparison to her.
There are very clear and sensible reasons why sports should be separated by sex and not gender ID.

Ok dodge, I have a little time before I go out this afternoon, and honestly, I am never especially happy with the polarisation around this. I am more than happy to have a civilised discussion in good faith.

As a fellow rape and abuse survivor, I can certainly understand that there are different responses to trauma and its unhelpful to generalize. But I would always say that the person who is deeply affected by something to the point they have stricter boundaries would always be the baseline, rather than the person who has the looser boundaries if that makes sense.

With respect to safeguarding, which is essentially what the argument for sex segregation in specific circumstances is based on, it's important to remember that it is not about individuals. We employ class analysis - so we look at the stats about specific groups and assess the potential risks based on that.

Men being excluded from some spaces for women is based on the stats which show men as a class are a risk to women's safety - not that every man is an abuser, just that any man could be, so we exclude them to reduce risk.

When it comes to trans people who identify as female but are, in fact, male, nothing actually occurs in the identity of 'trans' to take that person out of the class of 'male', so there is no coherent reason to assume they are any different to any other normal, pleasant male who we exclude simply because of safeguarding protocol.

I hope I'm not coming over as patronising- I'm aware that these can be complicated concepts, especially with the language restrictions here.

Socialisation. Gaslighting. Fear. Indoctrination. Not seeing the bigger picture. Occasionally, being a quisling.

Respectful debate is always good, dodgeball.

I disagree with you because of some basic sociological facts. The vast majority of sexual crime is committed by males (98%) as is the majority of violent crime. Men as a group have physical attributes that give them an advantage in physical confrontations. Biology is not destiny but for whatever reason sex categories seem to be linked to observable behaviour. These statistics are often obscured because they make men look bad. That is sexism.

We actually don't live in a sex-segregated society. I don't think most people in the UK would want that. Personally, I'm relaxed with nudity and have some lovely male friends that I would share intimate spaces with in a non-sexual way. I agree that we should try and always see the human being first. But I also think that nobody can force anybody else to deny reality so that another person can have validation. I actually think that's cruel to everyone involved.

I think that's the damaging claim that gets thrown about but I don't actually see being said, dodgeball. Yes, very few, genuinely transphobic people might say transpeople are a threat. The vast majority are saying men will pose as trans to enter women's spaces. That is entirely different.

Indeed Floral which is why I said I respect people’s right to think that. I’m glad you’re willing to have a reasonable discussion about this as it is maddening to see insults being thrown around when actually some people have carefully considered their position. If I’ve mischaracterised anything that’s not intentional, I actually would welcome a reasonable debate about this without name calling from either side, and I should also have mentioned that I understand some people’s boundaries/stance may be informed by trauma that’s had a far more profound effect on them than mine did to me, and I think it is reductive to say the least to call those people bigots.

However I do have an issue with the insinuation that sometimes pops up that there is an inherent threat from male-bodied people, ie trans people, being in toilets or changing rooms etc. To me that’s like saying all black people carry a knife. You can recognise that crimes are committed by people from a certain demographic without tarring them all with the same brush imo.

dodgeball we would all love a utopia where people are kind and respectful to each other. Who wouldn't? I respect transpeople's right to live how they want to but back in reality, even if it's a small percentage of the population, there are men who don't fit into that lovely world and who will do what they can to get to and harm women. We need to account for that.

I think that's a fair explanation of your position that you disagree with separating by biological sex dodge. I think you've mischaraterized a few things there, and ultimately, while I'm interested in your personal reasoning, neither of us has the right to tell women with stricter boundaries than ourselves that they cannot have them.