Ed Davy on R4 Today - there should not be safe places for women

Oh well, Ed thinks he's had patience when listening to women. Good for him. Ed's problem is that we were the ones listening to his job interview pitch with patience. I don't know about anyone else but my personal patience with him has long gone. I'm not interested, I've moved on. He's after a role as a public servant but thinks he can be a dictator. Nah, NEXT!

Of course vulnerable males need safe spaces. They must not take them away from vulnerable females, though.

Ferring pharmaceuticals. Make puberty blockers. What are the odds?

They do...

Didn't I read that they have taken large donations from pro trans/big pharma? Isn't that true of the SNP, Greens and WEP too?
I believe Labour have lost the plot of their own accord pushed on by beardy wokies, SWP and the unions

Ah Paul Jenkins CE of Tavistock.

Who’s the bloke...

R4 now - just wandered in. Whose the bloke?

I think there's a lot of misrepresentations here about what he said. I don't think he ever insinuated it was OK for the perpetrator of abuse to follow a woman into a safe space.

I think you might be confusing single sex spaces and ‘safe spaces’ which is a different concept.

However, he did not make any distinction between vulnerable men and rotters. (How would you tell the difference?) He just said that biological males should be able to enter women’s spaces. They therefore become unisex.

Nothing stopping any old bloke coming in cos gents is a bit of a walk/ him and his mates think it's funny.

Sigh.

Ignored is the very large number of creepy/ aggressive men who enjoy making women and girls uncomfortable/ scared but keep just the right side of the law. We now have zero to be done. Those type of incidents have always been seen as trivial/ a misunderstanding etc. That is now being supported further. And that's a worry.

He only talked to you!
It's usual for women to discuss makeup/ bras/ sanitary protection in the ladies!
If a woman is hanging around so what? Maybe she's feeling ill.
There's no law against staring/ standing very close.
Etc etc

We are back to putting up with weirdly men. Again.

How do you tell the difference between the perpetrator men and the victim men? Do they wear badges?

Why is is women's duty to provide the solution?

OK, that's actually three questions, but...

It's not the case that there are a whole bunch of "safe spaces" around and that women have bagged them all. It's that what makes women's safe spaces safe is an absence of men.

I don't think Ed Davey has been misrepresented. I just think he's not very bright.

It's always rape raised in this argument. The most extreme sex crime. All the other stuff is totally ignored.

So points like

• If the approach is for women to give benefit of doubt and to do otherwise is hateful/ maybe even a hate crime in some places? Then we have essentially lost the power to police our own spaces.

Now apparently they must be assumed to somehow be a woman and action can only be taken if they attack someone etc. That's a bit sodding late! But oh yeah men will attack us anyway so it's fine.

The issues that are never addressed.

• There is no way to tell which males are trans and which aren't

• The segregation by sex in some circs is due to reasons directly related to sex. Facilities, the large number of creepy men about, comfort etc. If there's no reason to separate by sex in some cases then surely there's no reason to separate at all in any circs. I don't think that's what trans orgs want though. Why not?

• as ever the reality for women and girls of the range and frequency of weird men being creepy is entirely ignored despite it being raised over and over. No matter how much we go on about it. Men don't want to hear they don't want to know. In the end they don't care tbh

Contd in a sec

I see the 'women and girls are going to get attacked anyway so what's the point of saying female only' argument has come up.

It's a very popular one. Lol OJ has retweeted a post saying that very recently.

If this argument is the best one then well shows how weak the position is.

I also note Davy said biological men full stop. Not just ones with trans IDs. That's going a step further than currently being pushed.

Anyway.

Telling women and girls that they are vulnerable to sex offences from males is hardly news to us. Telling them that because of this vulnerability, there's no point keeping males out at all is just so utterly crass it's mind blowing.

You're going to get raped anyway is such a positive message isn't it! Thanks!

If a safe space is available to all, how is it safe?

He was asked if women should have single sex spaces. His answer was "no".
There is no dillydallying around that..
The reasons he has for saying it may be up for debate.
Id rather not waste my time wondering about the motives of a halfwit misogynist.
I just wont vote for his shitty party which is neither liberal or democratic. Its a scam. Not a good one.
Everyone knows why we segregate by sex and if you're old enough to be on mumsnet, kids or not and dont know, count yourself as one of the very privileged women on the whole of this planet.

I think there's a lot of misrepresentations here about what he said. I don't think he ever insinuated it was OK for the perpetrator of abuse to follow a woman into a safe space.

I don't like Ed Davey and think he's bowing to the politically woke on the trains issue but I would tend to agree with him on the issue that if there are safe spaces, they should be available to all.

There are all sorts of vulnerable people and just because more women are injured due to DV shouldn't mean that the smaller number of vulnerable men who may be in an equally traumatic situation shouldn't have access to these spaces because of the actions of those men who are rotten.

Ed Davey is my local MP. We've had conversations about this before and he's set in stone. Is there anything I can do to help him see the other side of the debate? I've been shot down in flames so far.

I think it's more likely that they are appealing to disenchanted Labour voters.

"Maybe he's going for a new brand of politics when the aim isn't actually to get in Governement but just talk useless platitudes and look completely out of touch with society."
Hardly new, Labour have been pretending to be the oppostion for 11 years.
If men can go anywhere, how does that help transwomen?
The argument being the mens are so unsafe, why? Who is making them unsafe?
If men are gonna rape us any way, what is making the mens more dangerous than the ladies?
Cant transwomen just call the police if they are assaulted?

At this point I don’t understand why we don’t just make everything mixed sex. Because just because a man thinks he is a woman doesn’t make it so. So go mixed sex and be up front about it. Because this is the logical result of what the t r a s want. Or would it be less attractive than transwomen being in a female sex space?

The only time he felt able to utter the word women was in the context of saying TWAW. The rest of us are clearly chopped liver.

Not once in my entire life has someone told me that men should be allowed in the ladies. Not once. And I'd say I'm in a Liberal bubble. Not once has a real life person told me a man can turn into a woman. Not once. Whenever the subject has come up, at best a get some garbled nonsense about moving away from the binary. But no one has ever asserted that TWAW to my face. Even my ridiculous woke workplace would never actually say it.