Help me reply to Lord Lucas now before debate on Monday

I admire the clarity of the speakers on this subject in the Lords and no hiding behind closed doors and mantras.

Baroness Brinton quotes something published in the Telegraph five years ago to prove that WDIT. This is desperate stuff. I am seriously beginning to wonder about the donations thing, because Sal isn't that daft. Or is she just doing it for a friend (Belcher)?
Either way, it's not a good look.

I am fed to the back teeth of the whole 'exclude' word in the debate

Me too. TW are, and should be, excluded from women's spaces because they are men. It's not a slur, it's a fact.

Well done refuse.

There are good but and bad bits but overall this is another example of sunlight and this war is only going to be won by thousands of battles.

The big battle is to take down Stonewall.

The baroness seems to not like women at all

When in India at the moment trucks are being turned into safe toilets for women only.

Is it because only Indian men are unsafe around women.
Why is she protecting men

The bar for whether female people are allowed to retain female only spaces for privacy, dignity, personal boundaries and a non-hostile environment should not be set so low that they may only have it if they have proved, beyond all possible argument, that they will be attacked. Is that really all female people are entitled to? And how many is an acceptable number, what degree of collateral damage is reasonable to women to enable males? What does Baroness Brinton propose in a year's time if the statistics look bad? How is she going to reclaim female spaces once she's thrown them away for all women for her own personal political beliefs?

What provision will be made for female people who will have to self exclude from any space to permit male people to have a choice of spaces?

Why does Baroness Brinton not respond to the suggestion that the converted gender neutral spaces should be the male ones, not the female ones?

I am fed to the back teeth of the whole 'exclude' word in the debate. TW are not being 'excluded', TW already have full access to male facilities, and the issues they have with male facilities are never even mentioned never mind addressed. Other facilities could be provided. And no one mentions, never mind shows equal regard for females who will lose all access to any space if they fail to prioritise male feelings over their own at all times. There's a word for that: sexism.

Thank you pombear

Lord Lucas's speech is heartening.

Thank you pombear

Thank you Lord Lucas.

Lib Dem trope - violent women used to remove the safeguards for my daughters.

Banging on about haircuts???!! - what the fuck is she on about? I am happy to go to a barbers if they wash cut and blow dry long hair and sit alongside men. I don’t want the blokes in the barbers changing in front of my daughters if they happen to feel womanly.

For. Fucks. Sake.

The Lib Dem’s haven’t learnt from the swinson moment...

Baronness Brinton, part 2

So I wonder, could I ask the Minister, can she give us data on the actual incidents recorded in changing rooms and toilets broken down by gender and type of crime, ie theft and assault, and could I also ask her, what practical arrangements could that could be able to be made to police these spaces. Because I think there are many people who find that their turning up in a space that is deemed by some to be inappropriate, it would be very difficult if it was expected to be policed solely by other uses of that space

My Lords, I want toilets and changing rooms and all public spaces to be safe for all users. The data doesn’t show us that transwomen are more dangerous than anybody else. On the contrary, there is considerable evidence that LGBT people especially trans people are more likely to be attacked, more likely to suffer abuse and hate crime, and more likely to be at risk of suicide because of the pressure. So I just hope that we can pause for a moment and consider how a transwoman, portrayed as a possible danger to families by some might feel.

Last week, I saw on the BBC website an amazing young poet [name] tell of their experience. The concerns of non-binary, intersex and trans people rarely heard. I’m quoting selectively from their poem. “Our society has a limited capacity for people who don’t fit the norm. and we’re we normally offered male or female, mark the box with a tick, make yourself fit, but I am more that other, into this society entirely divisible by two, into man and woman, but I relate most to that ampersand and I need a hair cut, but still too often, for some of us standing clutching our bladders trying to decipher which bathroom symbol we better resemble, based on what we’re wearing or how brave we’re feeling. There’s a day to day battle like find a way to wear your own skin whilst navigating a world which you don’t always fit in. Life can be tough out there, so do you have to make a fuss?”

My Lords, I absolutely accept the spirit in which Lord Lucas has brought this debate but I am concerned that perhaps this matter is overstated.

there are a number of very strange men in this world and I think it's entirely reasonable for women to want a separate space.

(Thanks pom )

Last one: Baronness Brinton, part 1:

I thank Lord Lucas for securing this debate, and I think we all understood that the nature of this debate was going to be wider than perhaps the title of the debate proposed. Before we come on to that I just do want to make a very personal specific comment about the number of disabled toilets available and changing rooms available in public places, and whether or not they’re fit for purpose. I think LL debate is about finessing issues but disabled people often find that there are not disabled facilities available for them , they are in a slightly more difficult position.

The number of times I’ve gone into disabled facilities in a public building and discovered that it’s also the dumping ground usually, but not only, for cleaning materials and equipment, one restaurant just the other side of Parliament Square was using their disabled toilet as a spare chair store so you couldn’t even get in through the door let alone approach the toilet itself.
This isn’t a matter that requires change or regulation. It’s always about staff training and the culture of an organisation

Lord Lucas very carefully was trying to assess where the boundaries are in this difficult debate about women only spaces. and argued that some people needed them because they feel less safe - that men or others whether trans or not risk making these spaces unsafe.

My Lords, I think this could be a difficult assertion. In my years working with victims of abuse and domestic violence, one common feature is that they could they could never have imagined their perpetrator as dangerous to them until it was too late. Abusers look like us, all of us.

In January, a woman who posed as a teenage boy was jailed for grooming girls as young as 13 starting online and then meeting them. The judge described her behaviour as predatory and her targets, vulnerable girls, often started with low self-esteem, that’s why they were the targets.

And five years ago the Daily Telegraph wrote an excellent article, on female paedophiles following the jailing of Marie Black and Carol Stadler who were part of a gang in Norwich , and the article quotes forensic psychologist Nina Burrows, who says of female abusers, “I do believe women sexually abusing children, it happens less often than men, but it happens a lot more than you realise and I suspect it’s much more underreported” And she suggests that society has not been willing to learn more about female paedophilia she said we find it abhorrent because it challenges our ideas of women and motherhood we like to live with the idea that men are dangerous and women are safe, so when you see children talking to a male stranger in the park, it’s dangerous, but if they’re talking to a woman it isn’t.”

But I think the people who are genuinely advantaged by this change, are essentially the woke administrators of public institutions.

I am in love

Thanks Pombear

Thanks Pombears. You deserve a

Lord Lucas, House of Lords, part 3

So there ought to be, I think, a genuine and open discussion as to who should be allowed in the ladies and similar women’s facilities, under what circumstances, and it should be a discussion that takes place without insults. And the first requirement for that is that the government should step up - the government has a responsibility to hold the ring in these discussions. And it has vacated the ring. It has allowed it to become a space for warring interest groups and I think that’s been extremely destructive.

Secondly, I think the principal interest groups, those with the strongest and longest reputations need to commit themselves to discussions .I think Stonewall should put away its kimono and baseball bat and settle down to the idea that maybe it needs to modify its rather extreme views. I think that Fawcett should listen to its founder and the quote that is on the statue in Westminster Square founder Courage calls to courage everywhere and get involved in the discussion in a serious way

At the moment we have a serious firefight, and the people who are getting hurt in this are not the combatants, they are all the transgender and other vulnerable people who are on the sidelines of this.

It is our responsibility as a government and as a society to settle these things in a civilised way and to and produce a civilised outcome. I do think there is the potential for that, if we settle down to do it, we shall be successful My Lords, there are many aspects of the relationships between women and transwomen and men and transmen which needs sorting out. We need to sort out who is allowed to compete in sport, we need to sort out who is allowed in which kind of spaces, what kind of services people are allowed to request as being provided by someone who is of the natal gender that they require. I don’t see why women should be required to provide intimate services such as a search or to someone who is of a gender, of a sex that is not their own I do not see why women should have to be examined by someone who is genetically male if they’d prefer someone is genetically female.

These are difficult questions, I think they need sorting out ,and I really urge the Government to get a grip.

Lord Lucas, House of Lords, part 2

A much better way of catering for these people is to provide a limited gender neutral facility. Either we can do as we have done with disabled toilets and to provide separate facilities, and label them so that the expectations are clearly that you don't use them unless you need them, or if that’s not possible, you convert a gents, and I think pretty well all men could survive having a woman, a brave enough woman, as company in the gents, I don’t think it’s going to upset them. I don’t think they’ve got, I mean, they might, they might be a little ashamed of the way they’re behaving but I don’t think otherwise they’d be disadvantaged. If we're going to provide gender neutral facilities. convert the gents, don't convert the ladies.

And when it comes to changing facilities, I really don't think there is any circumstances under which it’s appropriate that the women's changing rooms should include exposed male genitalia, I really think that’s going beyond what we would all consider is reasonable.
So we should legislate, my Lords, we can't let this train go on. Something that we, a facility that we have provided for women all my life is being removed from them, without their consent, without their consultation, without any consultation at all as far as I can see.

We should legislate. So that organisations that live off public funds should provide women with the toilet and changing facilities that match their established need, and by that I mean is that the organisation should conduct proper enquiries as to what that established need is.

My Lords, the question that goes alongside this is who should use women’s facilities? As noble Lords who listened to my last speech on this subject will know I am thoroughly in favour of breaking down gender boundaries.

I don’t see why we shouldn’t all have the freedom to act and behave and dress in a way which is permitted in a way to anyone of any gender. I don’t think gender boundaries have done us any good in education and careers, I think by and large they have set back women in their ambitions, they don’t make life easy for {?} I think we should do away with them, so I don’t personally have any difficulties with the idea of self-ID as to how we behave in the world and act in the world But that does not mean, necessarily, that we should have access to women only spaces, that I should be able to march into the ladies over there, just because it’s nicer facilities and I feel like a woman right now. Women have facilities set aside for them for many good reasons, as I’ve set out

Lord Lucas:

My Lords, recently a number of institutions have converted the communal toilets that are available to the public from ladies and gents as separate toilets to gender neutral.

Is this desirable, is this justified, has there been research as to why this is a good idea, have needs been identified, have women been consulted? My Lords, I'm not aware of anybody quoting any of that sort of stuff. So, let's look at the consequences of these changes. Who is disadvantaged by them? Well my Lords, women who prefer not to be in an enclosed. unobserved space with men. That can obviously apply to women whose religion or custom forbids such things, but there are a number of women who have had uncomfortable experiences with men in the past, there are a number of very strange men in this world and I think it's entirely reasonable for women to want a separate space.

I myself used, found myself using a gender neutral toilet at the Department of Education. I found it a really uncomfortable experience, to come out of a toilet not knowing, if they are of a cubicle not knowing whether you'd frighten some woman who thought she was in a women’s toilet, or was not expecting to be in the company of a man. I do not want to cause that sort of discomfort, it does not suit me just to have gender neutral toilets.

Many women have expectations of toilets being clean places. Most men will know that not all men leave toilets clean, not even in this place. Women do not like to be around overt male sexual behaviours in a space that they find it hard to get out of. There are many men, and I have, who have maybe event have flashed at me who act in such a way and it seems reasonable for me that women should have a place where they can be free of that.

In some places, like nightclubs the ladies can be a source of refuge from some serious unwarranted behaviour, and I don't think any woman wants to wash her bloody underwear where she has flooded after enduring a period in front of men. So altogether, what are we doing? Why are we seeking to make women feel unsafe in the toilet provision we make for them unsafe and uncomfortable. What is the justification for it? Who's gaining an advantage in this process?

My Lords, there are some people who feel they use the toilet that appears to be appropriate for their sex, they will be questioned as to their apparent gender. I can understand that discomfort. There are occasions when one accompanies someone of the opposite gender, when I'm looking after my daughter, or when a carer is looking after someone of the opposite sex, and wants to have a facility where both, both can go.

But I think the people who are genuinely advantaged by this change, are essentially the woke administrators of public institutions. I can see very few people who genuinely benefit from having universal gender neutral toilet provision.

I'm obviously having a throwback week to my previous transcribing career. Would anyone like Lord Lucas' speech? I've had my tea, and just went through his opening remarks, as I'd missed them earlier on:-

Oops wrong thread!

OP sorry you’re having a tough time with this. it is upsetting when those close to you can’t or won’t see the issues.

That’s a silly question from your brother though. if we can visually determine the sex of skeletal human remains correctly, why would we not be able to do so at one look with living humans? Humans especially in interaction with others, offer loads of other visual, audible, other physical information as to what their sex is. As PP have said, we have evolved to know the difference.

It’s all part of the validation game to have to pretend that we (as women) would be uncertain about this, or to have to pretend that women in general believe men in general ‘pass’ as women, when we meet them. They don’t pass. That’s fine. It’s inescapable fact after all- humans can’t actually change sex. Sex markers are permanent, real and they are inherent to our physical selves, for so long as our physical selves persist.

You could also your brother if he agrees that in any healthy relationship or situation, nobody should be forced to validate other people at a cost of their own detriment.
If he agrees, then doesn’t it follow that those people looking to obligate or enforce such personal validation under such circumstances from others, should be seen as presenting some serious red flags?

Agree pombear - incredible to hear the grown ups talking, with nobody shouting "TWAW" or "fuck off and diaf TERF!"

Labour Leadership - take note.

Thank you, Lord Lucas - that was a great opening to the debate. The bottom line (for me) is that no woman should feel she risks seeing male genitalia in a women's changing area. Single sex spaces should be single sex.

Really appreciate the debate and particularly Tanni's comments. What a woman.

And thank you your noble lordLucas for bringing this debate to light when women haven't

Thank you all for this. pombear, that was terrific and very good of you to do all that work for us.

(Hey, it worked! I never tried to do that before.)

We know that the Lib Dems have taken money from pharmaceutical companies pushing transgender ideology......they cannot be trusted. Hugely grateful to all who spoke out today

Thank you pom

Tanni is consistently amazing

pombear I could not have it loud enough to hear it clear enough to transcript. And I was doing some work on the side too. So, thank you!!!

I thought the weakest speaker was Baroness Barker by far. It added nothing to the debate except to attempt to shut down debate. I can understand if Lord Lucas was a tad nervous, particularly when discussing flooding periods for women, but most of all because he obviously knew that the two LibDems would go on to minimise and declare that it was all fear and scaremongering.