Rosie Duffield thank you

Sophocles, did you ever get an answer for why it was okay for trans activists to negotiate with conservatives, but not for women?

Yes, I would still like an answer to that question.

#istandwithrosieduffield

Amazing thread from Rosie. I loved this observation.

Ths is my local newspaper. They feature this Conservative Cllr every week. His political interests seem mostly to involve concreting over our green spaces and he became leader recently after staging a coup against a fellow local Tory cllr...(long 🧵) ^t.co/ueDC5HFxlY^

This same Tory councillor was happy to support, work with and campaign for our last Tory MP for several years. An MP who actively sought to outlaw equal marriage and was openly against gay rights for which he cited his conversion to Catholicism...

twitter.com/RosieDuffield1/status/1436276237765332996?s=19

Reminds me of a point Sophocles made on this board the other night. Sophocles, did you ever get an answer for why it was okay for trans activists to negotiate with conservatives, but not for women?

Bloody well done, Rosie!

Let’s not get diverted down the U-bend again by people whose worldview of women’s reality is so limited that they can only think of using loos as an example.

Bloody well done, again, Rosie!

Such brave, honest tweets from Rosie , we need more politicians like her, she is brilliant. I don't think Keir can go on ignoring this issue for much longer.

@Passmeamenuatthetottenham no point at all asking @CatherinaJTV questions. She will simply ignore them if they don't fit her narrative. You'll see examples of that all over this board, including silence on the Wi Spa incident and silence about aligning with Tories for the GRA while calling women shameful for inviting their elected representatives to a protest for women's rights.

Self ID and ‘TWAW’ just render ‘trans’ and ‘woman’ completely meaningless. It’s the kind of thing you say when you only care about affirmation and don’t care about equality or rights.

Thank you, Rosie. If only the rest of the Labour Party were as brave as you are.

At that point the number of males wanting to use female loos, changing rooms, services etc would have been tiny. Most women coming across one would have recognised them as male but out of sympathy, or a feeling that they were probably professionally assessed as safe to be there, or fear, or a combination, women largely haven't challenged these transwomen. It was widely believed these transwomen were mostly gay males with a need to cross-dress - so not a sexual assault risk, although still a problem for sexual assault survivors, women from certain religious groups etc.

It was never a requirement that people who got a GRC had to have sexual reassignment surgery or any other medical treatment at all, but in spite of this most people who aren't clued up about this assume all trans people will have had medical treatment or are on a waiting list for it. I doubt this ever was the case, but nowadays only a minority will fall into that category.

Based on this assurance that gender reassignment was essential for mental health reasons to a tiny group of people who had been professionally assessed, gender reassignment was included as a protected characteristic in the Equality Act in 2010. Even so, single sex exemptions were preserved.

But activists never intended to stop with the GRA - the Dentons report makes that clear. As soon they had a foot in the door with that protection in law, they announced that the GRA conditions for getting a GRC were too restrictive and needed to be relaxed, and they're still campaigning on that now. Plus, in the last few years the Stonewall umbrella arrived, and almost anybody can now declare themselves trans and Stonewall will support them - acceptance without exception, even for sex offenders.

As gender ideologists believe gender trumps sex, if self-ID were to become law, we'd be in a position where potentially unlimited numbers of male people could claim to be eligible to use single-sex services and spaces. There would be no gatekeeping at all, so sex offenders could take advantage of this and there would be no way to challenge it. Activists say this is OK as any criminal activity can be reported to the police after the fact.

Only someone who doesn't care about the safety and privacy of women, children and other vulnerable people could regard this as progressive.

Spectator article on Dentons report: www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-document-that-reveals-the-remarkable-tactics-of-trans-lobbyists

Vulvamort's Twitter threads about Hansard debates on GRA: twitter.com/HairyLeggdHarpy/status/1177699186361458688?s=20

Stonewall umbrella: www.stonewall.org.uk/help-advice/faqs-and-glossary/glossary-terms

Trans: An umbrella term to describe people whose gender is not the same as, or does not sit comfortably with, the sex they were assigned at birth.

Trans people may describe themselves using one or more of a wide variety of terms, including (but not limited to) transgender, transsexual, gender-queer (GQ), gender-fluid, non-binary, gender-variant, crossdresser, genderless, agender, nongender, third gender, bi-gender, trans man, trans woman,trans masculine, trans feminine and neutrois.

I bloody love Rosie Duffield. So clear speaking, sensible and compassionate.

We have done the answers to this so many times now. Can you please be a little more creative.

For those lurkers however.
Women, the cunty type, need single sex spaces especially toilets for the reasons of privacy and dignity.
If you are a woman, think about when and why you use the toilet. It's not solely for a pee is it?

We actually need more and better designed toilets because for many reasons we take longer, but that's a fight for another time.
Tw have historically used the womens because we let them. A social contract that can be and now has been rescinded.
It's been rescinded because under self id, any man of any age, of any class, of any skin colour, of any criminal type can now use our toilets and refuges and prisons and gym/swimming pool/wherever changing room. And you can do nothing about it.
So thanks to Catherine I've been able to point this out yet again.
It's so strange that there comments mean we can tell the whole story over and over, as if they never learn or something.

But what about prisons, DV shelters or hospital wards? What is your view on that.

My mother in law was only saying the other day about how she is worried about males being on her female ward (she is ill at the moment and in hospital a lot) and she is only vaguely aware of this issue. Would you listen to her concerns, or would you hurl ageist and misogynistic insults in her direction?

Secondly, no toilets are not officially policed as we have established. However there are social conventions in place, both conscious and unconscious, which mean that generally, its fairly easy to keep blokes out of the women's loos. In a culture of self id, where everyone (including men who want to commit crimes against women) knows that any male can legally identify as a female with no gatekeeping whatsoever, that you don't have to produce a GRC to get into a toilet anyway, and that it is incredibly transphobic to make judgements or assumptions about someone's sacred gender identity, its a lot more difficult to keep males, including predatory ones, out of women's toilets and changing rooms.

And no, I'm not really interested in the 'well ur gonna get raped anyway, because men will always find a way, so we might as well remove the safeguards that are in place and allow anyone in to toilets and changing rooms and if you don't like it then you are a bigot who shouldnt be looking' argument either, so don't even bother trotting that one out.

Thank you Rosie.

It's part of the social contract isn't it? Respecting the rights of others, respecting the law, respecting single sex spaces.
That's why nobody has ever needed to police these areas because decent people acknowledge them. It's only recently that certain types of people who refuse to acknowledge women's boundaries and child safeguarding have managed to position themselves in influential positions and this has become an issue.

And I appreciate those males with gender dysphoria who do respect women. Also, thank you Rosie Duffield. I'm in awe at your courage 💜🤍💚

I think part of what we want is for males to show women some respect and not violate our boundaries because they can.

Yes, some trans women may have used them in the past, but they were there under a courtesy extended to them by female people and acted with courtesy in return because they knew if they made female people too uncomfortable or afraid the social convention would be enacted.

You think because there may at times have been trans women quietly in women's spaces within female tolerance, the social contract did nothing and can be broken entirely so that any male may enter in by right. You believe that that this will have no adverse impact on female people, or indeed the trans people who also benefitted from the social convention.

You are very wrong.

If people are interested, this is your regular 'splendid women' reminder that Prof Clara Greed is available on YouTube for all of your town planning provision of public lavatories and discussion of the phenomenon of the bladder leash needs.

Plus an overview of territoriality in some public lavatories:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3296831-Can-we-talk-about-the-mental-impact-of-being-told-the-definition-of-woman-is-changing?msgid=79810590

Fact is that all of us "selfID" when we use the toilet

I don't assign myself to a sex that I don't belong to, based on my feelings, when I go to the toilet. So no, I don't 'self ID' as a woman. I just factually am one, whether anyone checks that or not. The absence of checking or verification doesn't change the facts.

Rosie manages to be so incredibly reasonable and argues her beliefs strongly but fairly.
We need more MPs like her.

Fact is that all of us "selfID" when we use the toilet (or have you ever been asked to show ID or genitals?) and that is legal, according to the EA2010, no GRC needed. Do we want toilet policing like proposed in the US? An armed guard?