A query about third spaces

Different people have different ideas what third spaces might look like. And in different contexts they might be different from each other as well.

But most people seem to see them as being in some sense individualised spaces rather than communal, and also probably providing for the needs of a variety of people who have problems with the usual sorts of communal sex divided spaces.

: I just think there should be an additional unisex area, which is equipped to provide for disabled people, parents and children, and anyone who wants to use it. We already have a disabled loo, which should remain restricted, but an additional such loo, available to all, would double provision for disabled people as well as making life easier for parents, and trans and non-binary people. Everyone would win from that.'

Who is 'we'?

Why should the accessible toilets be given over to do and sundry after so many years of groups working so hard to get them in the first place?

Why should the accessible toilets (usually 1) cover people with disabilities, women (or men) with kids AND gender variant people.

It won't work anyway because the tras say it is stigmatising.

Doesn't work. Practically, there is no way this will happen.

The people firmly standing in the way of trans dignity while peeing are TRA's themselves, and their stupid mantras and power plays. Imagine all that energy directed at women who dare express a need for single sex provision, turned into a campaign for gender neutral provision. There would be a gender neutral loo on every bloody corner!

Yep. If this were desired, there are certainly a lot of extremely well funded orgs there to ensure it came to pass. But it's not desired.

I've never heard of anyone saying a third space should be trans only. That would be really stigmatising, and also a waste, given there are other groups who could benefit. I just think there should be an additional unisex area, which is equipped to provide for disabled people, parents and children, and anyone who wants to use it. We already have a disabled loo, which should remain restricted, but an additional such loo, available to all, would double provision for disabled people as well as making life easier for parents, and trans and non-binary people. Everyone would win from that.

And if the third spaces are for everyone, how is the safety of trans people any better protected than if they used the bathroom which accords with their biological sex? Surely a trans woman who passes poorly or not at all is just as likely to be assaulted in the free for all third space by a man, as in the men’s bathroom?

If that were so, orgs such as Stonewall wouldn't be aggressively campaigning to remove single sex provision, in favour of unisex. I have no idea why. I wouldn't use a group unisex setting, no. And I wouldn't expect anyone else to, which is why I think we should double disabled provision, and allow half to be used by anyone who wants to do so.

Not read the whole thread

A few thoughts

Space in many places is tight and funds are short. The money is not there to pay for all this, and in many places there is no room eg old theatres

You'd need 4 spaces not 3. Gents, ladies, transwomen, transmen. Where do no gender people go?

Essentially. Not going to happen. The money, space, will is not there, in many places.

Initially there were a lot of suggestions about using the accessible facilities. Many issues with that. The trans people (the loud ones) said no, that sets me apart. People with disabilities quite rightly said wtf we have campaigned really hard for YEARS to get this and now they're a free for all?

And it's too late. If we're talking bogs. All over the place, women's are now 'all gender' (unisex) and the gents is the gents. Changing rooms in shops too. Fucks me off. Women and people with disabilities, who were under served in terms of public facilities, have lost provision. Men have gained. Patriarchy right there.

When it comes to prisons, no male should be in with the women. Full stop. I don't think they put transmen in male prisons in UK (for obvious reasons) , happy to be corrected on that. Violence in prisons should be addressed. Males at risk should be protected. But not by putting them in the women's estate.

Ditto males should not be in women's wards in hosp.

DV refuges. Women built these, got the funding, volunteer. Nothing stopping men and male trans people doing the same. I see zero from the trans lobby about doing this sort of thing. Men do a bit which is great- their situations with DV are important but the situation is usually different so it makes sense to raise funds for the sort of support that is suited to them.

Women's toilets even, we had to fight for in the first place.

The general trans lobby seems to have no interest in setting up new stuff (apart from children) but piggy backing onto/ demanding a share of what women and LGB have fought for years for.

Reminds me of how a lot of men get arsey about 'special treatment' for women, minorites etc but they NEVER seem interested in setting up their own stuff. They are used to other people doing stuff for them.

the trans person who has no nefarious intent and truly just wishes to pass and live as the opposite sex?

A common GC view here is that nobody should be trying to ‘pass and live as the opposite sex’. Firstly you can’t live as the opposite sex unless you are the opposite sex.

Secondly toilets are divided on the basis of biological sex, therefore males should use the male facilities regardless of what clothes, makeup, medication or surgery they have had.

Thirdly is the (rather uncompassionate in my opinion) view that if someone wants to have surgeries or treatments or present in a way that causes problems (eg a passing trans woman in the male toilets or trans man in female toilets) then that is their problem to deal with. Their choice, their complex consequences, their problem to solve.

Fourthly Old Crone will be along to tell you that allowing people to use the toilets opposite to their biological sex is colluding with their mental illness and supporting a lie - that people can change sex or live as a sex they are not. Apparently that isn’t helping anyone.

I have literally never heard the suggestion that unisex provision be designated 'trans'. It has always been assumed that unisex or gender neutral would include all kinds of users, trans and non-trans, and that the provision would be self-contained in order to be safe.

The fact is OP that when it comes to a literally completely passing trans person, no one would ever know they use opposite sex provision, so the point raised by the Twitter-er is a bit silly.

A third space is needed because some people will either 1) not feel safe in the male provision and/or 2) will make others feel unsafe in the female provision. IMO Trans men might fall into both categories.

Women’s provision needs to be protected from the presence of male people and male appearing people. Trans people as well as at risk men however need a safe place to go. The third space is for them and anyone who wants to use it like say if the line is shorter or whatnot.

If unisex toilets are available then I assume some women would be happy to use them alongside transwomen. Ditto for some men and transmen. If they are well designed.
If not, then that would just show that ALL women object to sharing spaces with someone who is biologically male. While I have sympathy for the feelings of a transperson can it be right to force women to do something that makes them feel bad in order to stop someone else feeling bad?

And if the unisex toilets were only being used by transpeople. Surely the only people they would be outing themselves to would be other transpeople, who would hopefully be sympathetic. Or, if they all passed, unaware.

how does that provide any dignity for the trans person who has no nefarious intent and truly just wishes to pass and live as the opposite sex? Wouldn’t that be really quite humiliating to have to go, as a passing man or woman, into the ‘trans’ toilets and ‘out’ yourself?

There is a distinction between wishing to pass and passing. If a transsexual passes then the point is moot- they aren't going to be challenged. What women want is the right to expect a male to leave a female only area.

And if the third spaces are for everyone, how is the safety of trans people any better protected than if they used the bathroom which accords with their biological sex? Surely a trans woman who passes poorly or not at all is just as likely to be assaulted in the free for all third space by a man, as in the men’s bathroom?

I'm not at all convinced there is some massive issue of transwomen being attacked in mens toilets. There will be some places where non-passing transgender people will be hassled, but I'd have thought going into the womens would be at least as much of a potential flashpoint as the mens. This is solved by the third spaces being single cubicals.

Why should you have to explain why women spaces are important to you? They want to let men who self-identify as vulnerable into the women's. Why is that their preferred option? Why is third space not their go-to option? That would help transmen as well as transwomen and enby so turn it round: why is that not the default? Or why not turn the men's into unisex? If women start using it then the men will be less violent, right?

We're not in the way. Give me a petition for gender neutral provision alongside single sex, and I'll sign it. But I'm not the problem and neither are the other women wanting the retention of single sex provision.

The people firmly standing in the way of trans dignity while peeing are TRA's themselves, and their stupid mantras and power plays. Imagine all that energy directed at women who dare express a need for single sex provision, turned into a campaign for gender neutral provision. There would be a gender neutral loo on every bloody corner!

We are not the problem. People who insist on 'validity' over safety/dignity are the problem.

Oh my God, nobody - and I mean nobody - has suggested having special T bathrooms that you have to wear your T badge to get into.

The suggestion, from women, has ALWAYS been single sex for males and females with EXTRA provision of unisex or gender neutral or whatever, open to all to use, while retaining or increasing disability provision.

Here's how it works in my town. Ds (who I'll describe as gender-confused) and I go out to buy stuff at the mall. I need the loo - I go to the ladies. Ds needs the loo? He uses the gender neutral loo. Nobody's dignity is being sacrificed for the needs of the selfish women.

And if I happen to be on the floor with the gender neutral loo, and I can't be mithered to go up to the next floor, I'll use that one too, thereby helping to 'destigmatise' (not a thing) the gender neutral loo.

The only reason this is hard is because TRA's won't accept it. There's an option for a perfectly safe and dignified provision for ALL, including women, but a whole stack of blokes don't want it.

... any person who is not using the third space or their new identity to gain access to women or for personal sexual kicks... but I don’t relish the thought of the loss of dignity that using a third space meant exclusively for trans people would mean for some of those trans people

There are women who do not relish the loss of dignity that using a space with any man who claimed to identify as a women would mean. And truly I do not intend to sound horrible and hateful. I do not hate anyone I imagine is "genuine trans". But first, how do I know who is genuine and who is using the third space or their new identity to gain access to women or for personal sexual kicks? And second, even the "genuine" ones were born and brought up male. It is still fairly creepy to think of males in a women's space no matter how sympathetic one is.

It’s why I was asking if the third space WAS that or more just as some have said above an extra all welcome bathroom/changing room/whatever the case may be.

There has been no official proposals on what might constitute a potential third space. People are just throwing ideas around. It could mean anything.

It makes complete sense to have toilets for females, for males, and unisex toilets, as PP said. Only the TRAs have a problem with that, which is strange because it would also be the best solution for the NBs and GFs who are, apparently, also valid.

but I don’t relish the thought of the loss of dignity that using a third space meant exclusively for trans people would mean for some of those trans people

Our sympathy, and guilt and kindness female socialisation is what helped get us here. We need to stop it.

They need to take it up with their so called allies. If they had kept their mouths shut and stopped wanting wearing a bikini for a bet to enable them access under the now ridiculously epansive trans umbrella then all those genuine transwomen would probably still be there while women looked the other way as it was less than 5000 people in the UK and hardly every was an issue.

It's the greedy selfish allies that have fucked it. Not women. We dont need to feel guilty

Why would it create a loss of dignity?

If it is a general anyone can use it toilet / changing room then loads of people will use it. When there is a unisex option now I sometimes use it. I'm not unusual. Sometimes one of the people using the unisex space might be trans. Why would they lose dignity?

I understand the point that transwomen won't be any safer in a unisex third space, because the men will be in there too. But how is that solved by removing women's toilets and making them all unisex? Surely it just means men can now go in there too?

Making all toilets unisex puts women at greater risk and doesn't put transwomen at any less risk by this argument. So it helps no one and puts women at risk.

I suppose I was meaning, any person who is not using the third space or their new identity to gain access to women or for personal sexual kicks, but rather because they truly feel they are the opposite sex and live their lives in that way.
So blame the ones who are doing it for sexual kicks. It's not for women to make it better for the ones being shat on.