What right to a single sex space do I have and how?

I'm not really that interested in whether someone has a GRC or has had surgery, to be perfectly honest. I don't make the same distinctions as others. As I said, I don't support the idea of a group of male people, however small, accessing female only space.

I value the consideration of male people who have respect for women and girls in not using female only space, even when they probably could override my lack of consent. I am not alone in this need for female only space, it's a feeling shared by very many women.

I am highly unlikely to change my mind, but people are fully entitled to disagree.

It is not inly about safety. It is about privacy and dignity too. I am getting increasingly fed up with the almost exclusive focus on safety. It is a very male perspective; if they are not raping you, what is the problem?

I do not want to sleep or take my clothes of in the company of any man, regardless of his legal sex/gender status and regardless of any drugs he may be taking, and regardless of any amputations he may have had.

The answer is NO, and no one else can consent on my behalf. And it is not my responsibility to think up some other way of catering to the desires/needs of men who prefer to think of themselves as women.

The tell for me personally, is that anyone who is demanding to get in my space against my will, is already raising a red flag. For me, personally.

I was talking about the feedback I have had literally hundreds of times from women that they felt able to make an instant instinctive decision over whether or not they felt safe around a trans person.

With all due respect, they would say that to you, as a trans person, wouldn't they, especially if they know you personally and feel you are a decent person?

*From what I have seen women can generally spot a mile off who is a risk and who isn't.

I can't take this seriously any more. Blue, you know nothing about women's lives.

Not only can women not tell who might assault or kill them, they regularly fall in love with, and marry them.*

This was not te context I was referring to.

I was talking about the feedback I have had literally hundreds of times from women that they felt able to make an instant instinctive decision over whether or not they felt safe around a trans person.

If men arent allowed to speak for women why is a former pre op trans person with a GRC allowed to speak for me?

I'm not allowing Miranda to speak for you. I've already heard, several times, your side of things. As I said, it isn't a competition.

What was in it for men when women stood up for their rights? Its about equality. Throughout history a majority always opposes the minorities. Back in the 80s look at what happened when gay marriage was introduced? There were protests and riots on the streets declaring the ruin of society.
Women standing up for our rights has never resulted in the removal of any men's rights. Men were not made to take a pay cut when women campaigned for equal pay, men did not lose the vote when women gained the vote. Gays campaigning for and achieving same sex marriage did not remove the rights of any other group. Trans ideology requires the dismantling of women's hard won rights. What's equal about that?

From what I have seen women can generally spot a mile off who is a risk and who isn't.

I can't take this seriously any more. Blue, you know nothing about women's lives.

Not only can women not tell who might assault or kill them, they regularly fall in love with, and marry them.

Excellent point, Datun. And now we're being expected to put aside our discomfort and ignore our instincts for the benefit of others, "to be kind".

*As I have pointed out Miramda is a detransitioned PRE OP transsexual without a GRC.

Who respects women enough not to use female spaces. That's all I care about. It's not a competition.*

We are talking about post op transsexuals with a GRC and protections under the law. Miranda is not part of that group. If men arent allowed to speak for women why is a former pre op trans person with a GRC allowed to speak for me?

It will take years for things to change and none of us know how that change will go. Self ID could still get in - there's enough money behind the agenda.

The moral thing to do. The right thing to do flies out the window. Protect the vulnerable. Sweet coercive words out the window.

The minority who have the power and the pounds to ride roughshod over women. Women who are the vulnerable and relatively powerless demographic majority.

Can someone tell me where these riots at the introduction of same sex marriage happened in the '80's? I can only remember the miners' strike.

The compromise, in the absence of a third space that you could use, would depend on the situation and the facilities on offer. I don’t think there’s a blanket answer to that.

If you look back at my earlier post, you’ll see I add TW after men when I’m talking about the biological sex class of males. You’ll also see, I hope, that I’m trying to choose my words with thought so as to cause you minimum distress. I don’t see you as a man. I see you as a TW. I do see you as a member of the biological sex class of males. Usually your membership of that class is not something I would refer to or need to mention, or even need to think about really, but with regard to a small number of cases I would.

As I have pointed out Miramda is a detransitioned PRE OP transsexual without a GRC.

Who respects women enough not to use female spaces. That's all I care about. It's not a competition.

Do you really think after decades the law will revoke all transsexual laws? Will my birth certificate by changed back?

I have no idea and I don't see what it has to do with female spaces when the law already allows an exemption. I don't see this future speculation as a productive line of debate. You have your views, and I have mine.

She said quite clearly why she supports Miranda. I think it's perfectly reasonable for a woman to support a male transsexual who understands women's concerns and respects our feelings.

As I have pointed out Miramda is a detransitioned PRE OP transsexual without a GRC.

To be honest had a been asked a few years ago I'm sure I would have cheerily voted for trans people to do whatever they want.
But now I have a child, with a disability. It makes me consider the vulnerable in society, who, I am ashamed to say, in the past I dismissed because I wanted to be seen as liberal.

She said quite clearly why she supports Miranda. I think it's perfectly reasonable for a woman to support a male transsexual who understands women's concerns and respects our feelings.

And some discrimination is legal. We will all have to see how it pans out in court eventually. I do accept that there is a higher bar to exclude male post op transsexuals with GRC, but it is provided for in law.

The law provides for it in certain exemptions - not as a rule.

Do you really think after decades the law will revoke all transsexual laws? Will my birth certificate by changed back?

Its also possible those exemptions could be removed- some are campaigning for that.

It will take years for things to change and none of us know how that change will go. Self ID could still get in - there's enough money behind the agenda.

I absolutely support post op transsexuals like Miranda Yardley.

You know Miranda isn't post op right? Miranda now identifies as a gay man.

You support transsexuals that don't inconvenience you in any way is that it?

Its not a valid argument. "Person A doesn't need X so person B doesn't either." As quite clearly stated trans people are very diverse.

Miranda understands that having an operation doesn't change anyone's sex. Miranda makes a point of using male toilets and has never had any trouble.

However, Miranda is kind enough to actively campaign for third spaces for people who feel that they need them.

Indeed. I've met Miranda several times.

Why on earth should women compromise, what’s in it for us?

The compromise is already in law. You clearly don't agree but the law permits a legal change of sex - fact.

The compromise was that a change of legal sex was a strictly controlled process that means only those transsexuals who followed a certain process would be protected by the law. Stonewalls bad advice his distorted that but the law is clear.

What was in it for men when women stood up for their rights? Its about equality. Throughout history a majority always opposes the minorities. Back in the 80s look at what happened when gay marriage was introduced? There were protests and riots on the streets declaring the ruin of society.
As a society we protect those who need protected. We support the vulnerable. What's it it for you is that it's morally the right thing to do.

I absolutely support post op transsexuals like Miranda Yardley.

Miranda understands that having an operation doesn't change anyone's sex. Miranda makes a point of using male toilets and has never had any trouble.

However, Miranda is kind enough to actively campaign for third spaces for people who feel that they need them.

The needs of women who need strictly female only spaces are not met by spaces with any males in them at all.

That different accommodation in the eyes of the law is discrimination. And what I need is not met in male spaces.

And some discrimination is legal. We will all have to see how it pans out in court eventually. I do accept that there is a higher bar to exclude male post op transsexuals with GRC, but it is provided for in law.

What is spot on is the statement that my goal is to blend back into society as much as possible as women. That does not mean I see a toilet as a therapeutic facility but simply the one that best serves my clinic needs.*

Does this mean that you are limiting access to transsexuals, who are post op, with a GRC but also they must 'pass' too?

Otherwise what does 'blend back' mean in this context?