Drag Queen fuming after being told to leave the ladies loo.

Yup. Hope he didn’t need the loo when he was there.

So hang on, have I got this right.

A man who tweets out how he wants to punch a little girl on a bus is invited in to a primary school to hang out with the kids there?

I would like to pee in a bathroom where I feel safe

Wouldn't we all? But that's not a line working for women.

If Flow is a woman then I believe the script goes:

• you're stupid and horrible to imply that men are in some way unsafe - no all those statistics prove nothing
• if you get assaulted or worse you can always call the police afterwards
• you should be repeatedly exposed to your irrational fears a la Nutjob Tatchell so you get over them
• your traumas and issues are no reason to be mean about men
• men just want to pee, no one cares what's in your pants
• you have a locked cubicle, don't you?

Welcome to womanhood. Only men get additional options and considerations.

I mean removal from the DSM .

The blame for all of the damage is placed with anyone critical of the movement, Bovary.

The removal of gender dysphoria as a disorder is both bizarre and cruel, I'd say.

May I reiterate something I said on a different thread. Possession of a GRC only has relevance in relation to certain law. It has no relevance in any other circumstance. It also has no relevance to any private citizen. These days, given same sex marriage is law, pension ages are equalised, benefits are all subsumed into Universal Credit, the only remaining law where a GRC has any relevance is discrimination law, which is included in the Equality Act 2010. The Exemptions in the EqA make it very clear that to excludes males from female only spaces is entirely lawful.

I just want a pee in peace. I don’t want to be dragged into a drama or fight by an egotists looking for validation.

You can’t even get away with ignoring people like that. They can’t stand people not noticing/commenting on/admiring them. The

I would like to pee in a bathroom where I feel safe

Yeah, FlowJob, wouldn't we all? For me that means without your presence. Kindly fuck off and use the single sex space provided for you.

High five for the door staff!

It’s not wanting to use the facilities - it’s wanting to provoke. That’s all. Drag everyone onto the drama of their lives. Play the victim when confronted.

If the woman’s loo was completely empty do you think they’d give a flying monkeys to use it? It would be too dull and boring.

India is getting involved now.

Well yes, she’s one of us now ... allegedly. 🙄

^To be honest I think flowjob seems to be a damaged and perhaps vulnerable person who could use support and probably therapy.
Unfortunately the TRA narrative means flowjob is encouraged to be 'brave' and affirms what I would see as dysfunctional behaviour. Shows up some of the murky and quite cruel aspects of this ideology^

That's an interesting point Scrimshaw The activists of this lobby do not seem to care at all about the damage it is doing. The appalling attitude to Keira Bell is another example of this.

Always used to associate AGP with older men, but I do feel it is increasingly a motivation for younger men too.

I tell you what, I'm bloody sick of males who think they can dress as women and use women's facilities

This is the inevitable result of radical transgenderism; and certainly the result of Self ID should it ever be introduced.

I think we’ve l met or observed people like that.

Very brash, loud, ‘naughty’, always wanting to entertain/be the centre of attention, always a drama going on, never a dull moment... when we are young we think they are fun and great to have around.

When we get older we generally find a background of trauma and abuse, vulnerability and substance abuse. Not so pretty and fun after all.

But - doesn’t mean we can’t challenge and try to limit the damage they do to others in their wake.

To be honest I think flowjob seems to be a damaged and perhaps vulnerable person who could use support and probably therapy.
Unfortunately the TRA narrative means flowjob is encouraged to be 'brave' and affirms what I would see as dysfunctional behaviour. Shows up some of the murky and quite cruel aspects of this ideology.

*I think Flowjob Queen demonstrates the problems of self ID beautifully.

Another TRA sherpa.*

Yes I'm highly appreciative of Flowjob's sterling work in this area, rapidly peaking the nation. Keep it up hun 👏

Shorter TRAs - Casinos, pubs, etc should definitely send female security in alone to deal with a random male in the women's bogs, who may possibly be drunk/high and spoiling for a fight, which they won't know until they get in there. Let's get female security guards punched in the face by men for the sake of trans equality! Yay kindness!

I'm blocked by India Willoughby. I've never tweeted anything ever and I have in the past, before I was blocked, liked tweets by her.

Which one?

^not in possession of a GRC

🍿

The Equality Act 2010 does, of course also cover toilets. That's via the single-sex exemptions in Schedule 3, Part 7 (titled SEPARATE, SINGLE AND CONCESSIONARY SERVICES ETC), paragraph 26, sub-paragraph 6:

(6)The condition is that—

(a)the service is provided for, or is likely to be used by, two or more persons at the same time, and

(b)the circumstances are such that a person of one sex might reasonably object to the presence of a person of the opposite sex.

Link here

The need for separate toilets for both sexes is also explicitly stated in the relevant Building Regulations for Northern Ireland, Scotland, England and Wales. These regulations also specify how unisex toilets (single-entry facilities for use by both sexes, but only one after the other) have to be built.

A person like this complainant has no legal right to use a facility provided by the owners or operators of the building you are in (assuming this person remains legally male, i.e. has no Gender Recognition Certificate).

And any provider of such a facility would do well to remember that excluding males from a service or facility provided for females is not unlawful discrimination on the basis of sex if and only if ALL males or all males not in a position of a GRC are excluded.

As soon as you let some males who remain legally male in, but keep other males who remain legally male out, you are unlawfully discriminating against the latter. The men so excluded could sue for sex discrimination and would likely win such a case.

It's easier to do this by invoking a strict single-sex exemption which also keeps males who do have a GRC out, but providers do not know the law well enough to know this is perfectly legal and, of course, they do not know enough about how to invoke the single-sex exemptions.

We do not check people's right to use such facilities, because we have had such a strict social convention of staying out of single-sex facilities provided for the opposite sex. This taboo has been so strong and existed for so long - since these facilities were first provided for the benefit of women - that there was never any law needed that spelled this out.

No decent man would have ever dreamed of denying women the right to toilets dedicated to their own sex. But given that it's not the decent men currently in the ascendancy, we might need that law now though.

India is getting involved now

twitter.com/IndiaWilloughby/status/1236014644147507200

I think the law provides for women to have the right to object to a man in a female only space. It's in the Equality Act exceptions.