That inviting armed men into women’s spaces to ‘defend’ us is a batshit idea

The sex discrimination exceptions in the Equality Act therefore apply differently to a trans person with a GRC or without a GRC.

YY. Which gives the lie to the "GRA reform doesn't affect anyone else, it's just admin!" claim.

In the case of UK bathrooms, trans folk aren't the ones with the agenda, as we have the law on our side.

Nope.

And you obvs know that. You've been on here for yonks.

Toilets are not bound by a law. And women are saying no.

That's no.

I think is where I got it from:

EHRC explanatory notes:

Under the Act, the protection from gender reassignment discrimination applies to all trans people who are proposing to go, are undergoing or have undergone (part of) a process of gender reassignment. At the same time, a trans person is protected from sex discrimination on the basis of their legal sex. This means that a trans woman who does not hold a GRC and is therefore legally male would be treated as male for the purposes of the sex discrimination provisions, and a trans woman with a GRC would be treated as female. The sex discrimination exceptions in the Equality Act therefore apply differently to a trans person with a GRC or without a GRC.

In the case of UK bathrooms, trans folk aren't the ones with the agenda, as we have the law on our side. Those seeking to evict us are the ones with the agenda, and Posie Parkers latest stochastic terrorism is just a natural next step to that

The law allows for single sex based provision which can and often does exclude transwomen. Not only that, but the vast majority of transwomen do not have a GRC. Thus the vast majority are not entitled to used women's sex based provisions anyway. Hope this helps.

I'm sure I read what I thought somewhere, though - and that it had been misrepresented to the trans community by a number of bodies which is how we have got to the situation where TW believe they have the right to use single sex facilities provided for females. I'll see if I can find it.

Yes. The EHRC is currently facing a legal challenge about it.

You have got that wrong

No she hasn't. Males without GRC are legally male. There is no special access to women's spaces for them guaranteed by the EA. The general principle is that all exclusion of opposite sex people (trans and others) from single sex spaces should be done only when necessary. Interpretations of what is "necessary", vary.

I'm sure I read what I thought somewhere, though - and that it had been misrepresented to the trans community by a number of bodies which is how we have got to the situation where TW believe they have the right to use single sex facilities provided for females. I'll see if I can find it.

Sorry @MadBadDaddy but of all your examples, I can only believe the first Daily Mail one, and actually think that probably happened because someone ‘woke’ saw the HRT and did 2+2=5. She certainly looks nothing like a man.

I don’t believe a word that comes out of Ruth Hunts mouth (and didn’t she decide she was trans at some point?), nor Mairi Black. They have their own agenda.

I’m also surprised that any of the others were mistaken for men, they are obviously women (even the one that went on to transition!) There must be some really stupid (or shortsighted) security guards in the US!

MadBadDaddy

What law do you have on your side? My understanding of the equality act was that someone with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment cannot be treated less fairly than another member of the same sex. So a TW cannot be treated any differently than any other adult male.

Or have I got that wrong?

Interesting, mind you, to see that women attempting to uphold the law as it is are the ones described as having an agenda.

As ever, I'm curious why posters critical of Posie Parker don't message her on Facebook. She answers you know.

The law in the UK allows single sex spaces when they are a proportionate means to a legitimate end.

@HettieMillia *I do question people's account of things when trying to push an agenda."

Depends on the agenda, surely?

In the case of UK bathrooms, trans folk aren't the ones with the agenda, as we have the law on our side. Those seeking to evict us are the ones with the agenda, and Posie Parkers latest stochastic terrorism is just a natural next step to that.

I'll say this again: Trans people are not, as per the OP, "jubilant", we are horrified

The hypocrisy is breathtaking when advocates for underpinning and concreting visual gender stereotypes, across the board, try to undermine women's arguments, by claiming it works!

There's more if you want.

intriguing. With the possible exception of one, all those people do not look like men in the slightest. I would be very surprised if other people interpreted them as men 🤔 I do question people's account of things when trying to push an agenda.

What others do you have.

some over-zealous security guard dragging yet another butch lesbian out of the ladies (too many to post)

Just post a couple then. Obviously if this is happening so often it's important that people are aware of it.

grandmother booked into jail as a man: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6450005/Grandmother-visiting-Miami-55-mistakenly-booked-jail-MAN.html

www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1291857/Woman-mistaken-transgender-rants-bathroom-discrimination.html

Baroness Hunt: twitter.com/ruth_hunt/status/923475727533699072

www.advocate.com/business/2015/06/17/detroit-woman-kicked-out-restaurant-bathroom-looking-man-sues

www.newstimes.com/local/article/Woman-mistaken-for-transgender-harassed-in-7471666.php

SNP MP Mhairi Black: www.heraldscotland.com/news/17873346.snp-mp-mhairi-black-ive-challenged-going-female-toilets-not-leaving-transgender-people-behind/

www.gaystarnews.com/article/lesbian-kicked-out-of-bowling-alley-because-she-used-the-womens-restroom/

There's more if you want.

who do suffer stigmatisation for needing sex-based healthcare

So why do TRAs push for the use of gender based language, rather than sex? You can call yourself whatever you want, but your sex never changes. Therefore medical needs should be sex based and named as such.

some over-zealous security guard dragging yet another butch lesbian out of the ladies (too many to post)

@MadBadDaddy - post just one. Women know what women look like, even butch ones.

"TRAs" (aka "transgender people")

TRAs are transactivists. Not all transgender people are transactivists and not all TRAs are transgender.

The intention is to humanise and include (clue is in the name!) trans men and non-binary ppl who do suffer stigmatisation for needing sex-based healthcare

Sex-based healthcare? So you agree that sex matters. Don't you think it would be healthier for these female people to admit that they are female and need the same healthcare as other female people? They'd do better to come to terms with the fact that they are women and that they will always be women and there's nothing wrong with being a woman.

No-one employs inclusive language in campaigns to 'explicitly dehumanise women' - that is a self-victimising interpretation.

Re-read what I said.

What do trans activists do to distance themselves fromtrans inclusivecampaigns that explicitly dehumanise women by referring to us as "people who bleed"?

The words that and to have different meanings and substituting one for the other changes the sentence.

I really don't care what gender ideologues or the lefty brotherhood think, and includes not caring about their double standards. My concern is: do I think Posie has made a mistake?

Having read the transcript (in full as far as I know) I think she has. I also imagine she thinks so too, which is why she's taken it down. I don't think it's just a case of expressing a different opinion, I think it's a shite idea - for the reasons already outlined on this thread - and also clumsily worded.

We all talk shite sometimes but when you do so and put it in the public domain, I think it's sensible to say so. I don't see acknowledging your mistakes as a weakness, I see it as a sign of confidence.

I can see YT jumping on this for hate speech and closing her channel.😟

No-one employs inclusive language in campaigns to 'explicitly dehumanise women' - that is a self-victimising interpretation. The intention is to humanise and include (clue is in the name!) trans men and non-binary ppl

But that is entirely what is happening. Trans men and NB are allowed to dictate what words we use to describe them/us but women aren’t? There’s such double standards throughout gender ideology, I’m not surprised PP is now being held up to the same double standards.