Single sex spaces

Standing at the sink in my underwear rinsing blood out of my workout pants I felt a presence behind me. I turned to acknowledge the person behind me and was very surprised to see a 6'4"+ 240lbs+ TW completely naked with a giant uncircumcised penis.

I felt panicked, my heart began to race, I was feeling vulnerable, weak, and in a lot of pain for my period started while working out. I put my very wet workout pants back on and began to gather my things - and the TW was still standing there completely naked except now staring at me.

Since they were staring at me I felt it necessary to tell them "when in Rome do as the Romans" and "in the ladies rocker locker room that means avoiding full nudity as much as possible". This individual began screaming at me while naked calling me a Terf with penis swinging and I started crying like a little fuckwad. I left the locker room as fast as I could - the individual followed me out in a towel into the main gym area still screaming Terf and bigot at me.

The general manager treated me very poorly and told me that since I am a transphobe I should either use my home bathroom facilities or do a check of the locker room before using it to ensure that I wouldn't offend anyone with my presence.

Nothing crazy happened the TW didn't touch me or do anything to me beyond yell but they did chase me out of a space that was supposed to be meant for me - a biological woman.

I am still seeking recompense for all of the fees they have charged me since the following incident and refuse to refund (including $1,500 in personal trainer fees specific for hip/shoulder rehab paid in advance as they require a bank of money to be submitted before commencing training). I have a small claims case filed against the gym but as they changed their policies of access to the facilities I will likely lose and they will get to keep all of that money that they required be paid up front for services they never rendered.

Tell me again how transwomen and any man claiming said status presents zero safety concerns to me. Tell that to the women seeking refuge at the Downtown Eastside Women’s Centre (DEWC) in Vancouver, CA. Tell that to the numerous women and girls that have had a terrifying (or violent or sexual assault) experience with a transwoman (or otherwise identified male) in their space (public bathrooms, changing rooms, etc.). The fact is, you have all the benefits of a male body - regardless of surgeries and/or CSH. Your body, your hormones, your vulnerability is not like mine - it is equally important and worthy of compassion but different from females and requires a space away from females for everyone's dignity/safety/comfort.

You need your own space, I respect that 100% and agree that it would be the best outcome for trans individuals. I need my own space, respect that or don't but I won't stand idly by why you try take over spaces made for me by people like me (adult human females that campaigned and fought for my sex-based rights).

I presonally don't give a shit about men's spaces - if they want them, fine, whatever. It's not because they're scared of being raped, or recorded, or stalked, or spied on, or are concerned for the safety of their children, or are a Muslim woman being excluded from things that they used to be able to do, is it?

I know @Antibles, we're really unreasonably picky, aren't we?

I don't know where this obsession with males entering women's facilities comes from.

Ooh, I don't know. Probably only the entire human history of male voyeurism, sexual harrassment and assault. Women, eh, what fusspots they are about this.

but if a male bodied person is a member of the Masons and decides to identify as a trans person, they can stay. Female bodied people who identify as trans, can’t join

That, together with the fact that a transman could not inherit a title, rather gives the game away doesn't it?

do you think it would be acceptable to set up a women only equivalent of the Garrick?

My club, the University Women's club was set up (if I recall correctly) at a time when women had extremely limited opportunities to go university (my grandmother graduated from Oxford in the early 1920s - only the second cohort of women "allowed" to take a full Ox degree), and they were subject to harassment and exclusion. So of course they banded together to help each other.

The Equalities Act talks about a policy to achieve a proportionate aim.

Is organising in the face of male entitlement, male privilege, male violence, male sexism and misogyny good enough for you?

Actually, it's not for you to say. It's for women.

Oh yes, I found a store online who makes your goggles - you just send your prescription and they were about £17 (not a 'simple' prescription - quite different in each eye). You can't wear them in the shower though!

You can’t really avoid them when swimming and I’m blind as a bat, so showering is a bit of a pain as there aren’t any hooks or shelves outside the row of cubicles in my local pool, so I have to leave my glasses on the other side of the corridor on a bench.

Off topic, but you can buy prescription goggles relatively cheaply - especially if you go for the off the peg, same script in each eye option. It’s life changing! There are several online providers & Specsavers do them for about £30.

Alternatively, is it fundamentally unhealthy to operate sex exclusive spaces at all unless there is a really good reason for doing so?

How many women & girls raped, sexually harassed, perved on (a clear form of sexual harassment), violently attacked therefore needing single0sex safety of a refuge - HOW MANY women is "a really good reason" ?

And Fionne Orlander is a legend and a star. With fantastic taste in frocks rather than emulating a drag queen

Clearly there are some reasons why this might be asymmetrical; men are likely to have far fewer reasons for feeling physically safer in a single sex environment, for example. But if a group of men want to create an all male space because they feel happier there (for whatever reason), does it do any more harm than an exclusive female only space?

Hmmm. I've been to the Garrick quite a few times - both socially (good friends of mine are members) & professionally.

There is a whole universe of difference between lunchtime at the Garrick, and a woman's refuge, or a changing room, or a rape crisis centre.

Frankly, it's places like the Garrick which maintain the social and political conditions which require places of safety for women, as well as reams of anti-discrimination & anti-sexism law and policy.

I mean the food is delicious, but it's not worth the social cost.

I thought Yaniv did that not because of being trans but because of being a racist arsehole.

There are a million reasons why predators predate. The point is he was allowed to do it, because of laws that say women aren't allowed to exclude him.

Men everywhere, obviously, will explore any law they possibly can. He has targeted those women twice. First of all on the phone to trick them into sexual touching without consent, and secondly by forcing them to go to court.

And, as far as I recall, the judgement only found in their favour, because they hadn't been trained in waxing male genitalia. Not because they don't want to touch the genitals of a man who wonders, all over social media whether or not he can help 10-year-olds with their tampons.

Talking of circles, OP.

I'd love to see those stats that show that transwomen don't want to access women's spaces.

I'm going to be waiting ages, aren't I?

I thought Yaniv did that not because of being trans but because of being a racist arsehole.

Milady - you say that trans women on the whole don't want access to women's changing rooms. That may be true, though the evidence suggests otherwise. But the point is that there are plenty of sexually predatory men who do want access to women's changing rooms (why wouldn't they?) and if they can get that access by claiming to be trans women, then of course they will do that.

But if a group of men want to create an all male space because they feel happier there (for whatever reason), does it do any more harm than an exclusive female only space?

I'm a bit confused by this question OP - what harm is done by exclusive female only spaces?

Interesting thread though. I suppose when I think of male equivalents to female only spaces, I tend to think like-for-like. But, as you say, it's not really like that is it? It's not the same.

Some of these males are sexually motivated, but all these males need the women in that space to remain there irrespective of whether they want to or not.

Whether it's for sexual reasons, validation reasons or ostensible safety. The women are the tool that these male individuals are insisting on utilising.

Hadn't thought about it like this before. Great stuff as usual Datun

I think it might be easier to draw the biggest possible circle on an A4 piece of paper to represent trans women, and then use the tip of your pen to make the tiniest possible dot to represent trans women who expect a female beautician to wax their testicles.

The transactivist approach to impact analysis!

With female spaces seen by males - as discussed on several threads today - as unused, unoccupied space for males to spill over into as needed as extensions and alternatives to the existing male space.

Indigenous people in those spaces? Not important enough to consider, and nothing they have to say about it is worth listening to apparently. The focus should solely be upon the needs, feelings and requirements of male people.

Women are entitled to single-sex spaces. That excludes transwomen.

We say NO.

Wouldn't it be nice to start a campaign directed towards men to accept all men in their spaces, irrespective of how they identify or what they're wearing.

Not just so that gender nonconforming men have a place to pee, but also to start implementing the challenge to the idea that people are split into two, men who fit a certain idea of what men should be, and everyone else.

The people who really appear to be ring fencing the sexes are men. And that category is very strict.

But I'm afraid it's a waste of time to deny that for many within the political lobby the main goal is the right of males to enter female spaces with females in them,

This is right.

Some of these males are sexually motivated, but all these males need the women in that space to remain there irrespective of whether they want to or not.

Whether it's for sexual reasons, validation reasons or ostensible safety. The women are the tool that these male individuals are insisting on utilising.

It's not about the space. It's about the women in that space.

Fionne Orlander & Miranda Yardley have a campaign for third spaces.

mirandayardley.com/en/a-plea-for-third-spaces-for-transmen-and-transwomen/

Renata if you wanted to begin a campaign for 3rd spaces to be included in all facilities, I suspect you would have a huge following and support from GC feminists. This is the only fair way forward that meets all needs, and how/what those third spaces would look like is something that needs a lot of public input, whether all gender neutral or all individual cubicles etc. With government and lobby funding, put into equality law, the time from requirement to provision really wouldn't be that long either. It's a very practical, achievable and female friendly goal.

But I'm afraid it's a waste of time to deny that for many within the political lobby the main goal is the right of males to enter female spaces with females in them, regardless of how those females feel, regardless of the consequences to females, regardless of the distress or removal of safety to those females, and regardless of excluding some females from spaces altogether.

This isn't a windmill we're tilting at. And it doesn't matter how tiny the dot on the paper is; we're talking about changes in law, being seriously considered now, that remove sex based rights from females. This is not a drill, if you care about female people and the equality of their rights.