Transgender musician cancels gig after being 'banned' from using women's toilet

A bit tenuous, I think, given that wokie practices are usually imposed upon employees by institutions/organisations/companies in an uninvited top-down manner, and then it's those employees, the actual service providers, who bear the brunt of service-users anger. Service-users and service-providers of all classes and all philosophies.

The idea that working class people in service jobs are there to validate TRAs comes up again and again.

Yes, it does. And serfs to be sacked if they don't come up to sufficiently deferential scratch. They might as well demand we doff our caps.

That Instagram!

The idea that working class people in service jobs are there to validate TRAs comes up again and again.

In this case I'm not sure how the service worker in question was meant to know that this particular performer considered themself to be anything other than what they appear to be at a quick glance. Who knew that psychic powers were meant to come standard?

Hopefully the training that will be put in place at the venue will be to teach staff not to ask about trans status in any way, but to counter that the Equality Act states that trans people must not be discriminated against relative to their sex, therefore it would be illegal to ban any male from using the men's loos on the basis of their presentation or self-identification. Also that the EA specifically permits barring trans-identified people from opposite-sex services when reasonable - eg loos, where it is reasonable to protect the safety and dignity of women.

Something along those lines, though more succinct and clear than I have put it.

More evidence that TRAs love bossing around working class people.

Seems to be a lot of bar staff, retail workers, receptionists, bouncers etc are supposed to have a crystal ball and know that someone who looks like a natal Male is actually a woman. 🤦‍♀️ TRAs genuinely seem to think people on minimum wage, zero hour contracts deserve to lose their jobs because they didn’t validate them.

Ahhhhh they work at Bristol university - that famously women friendly university

The counter to this is that perhaps venues which don’t want to upset their female customers might think twice about booking this band, who behaved in a highly unprofessional manner.

So Amelia wasn't forced to use the men's toilets, putting Amelia at risk? So nothing to do with wanting to pee safely and in peace and everything to do with validation and making a political point.

Thank you for fixing that @Agrona

"It is illegal for anyone to to tell or suggest to any individual which facilities they can or cannot use in any establishment. It is discrimination, period.
"Transgender people have protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010."
The act states that establishments that provide separate services for women and men are required to treat transsexual people in the same way as the gender they present as.

Not true. Stonewall law.

not a single thought for the women who don't want the person in there.

I prefer this version:

Amelia said: "Be an ally to trans people women. Speak out and speak up against ignorance and prejudice, we need you and your voice. There is zero place for transphobia misogyny or discrimination in modern society."

Also here.

The big question is: if a male person claims to be female, is that person female, or a male claiming to be female?

If the first - what is female?

A clearer picture of Amelia here:images.app.goo.gl/gab2VBoieZFRBkmn7

Incredible that the female customers didn't recognise Amelia's inherent femininity. Terribly transphobic of the venue to offer a compromise which met Amelia's needs but allowed women privacy.

Still, they have learned that resistance is futile. Hopefully the manager has been 're-educated'.