Single sex toilets and muslim women

Pointing out the hypocrisy of a religion so obsessed by kindness and diversity (GI) iexcluding women who are actually diverse and marginalised is not aligning with patriarchal religions, @Fishwishy. I have no love of those cultural limitations, but I do have love of plenty of Muslim women who have those beliefs and I will defend their right to have safe and dignified access to public life as much as any other woman's. Especially given that many in that community are far more marginalised than any middle class white boy identifying into oppression.

I feel I have a glimmer of insight into how the tractor porn MP felt ...

I knew what you were talking about zombie. 😉

If we align ourselves with the patriarchy to get to the end goal we require then that is a sacrifice worth making.

It's called being a grown up.

Fucksake, wrong thread. Excuse me!

'The ‘torque’ just refers to the force applied. We call them ‘socket wrenches’ in my house if that helps.' - aha! Thanks. Yes. I think of these as ratchets.

She was asked why she lives in Britain, if she wants to be part of specifically Muslim groups. That's islamophobic, regardless of reasoning. The UK upholds the right to practice religious faith. It's exactly the same as any other call for someone percieved to be the 'wrong' colour or religion to 'go home'.

Religion is an awkward area for many feminists, myself included. That doesn't mean personal faith based attacks should be ignored. My feminism includes all women, including those of faith.

No. I think questioning why a woman who is British remains in a country she was born in because she sends her child to activity groups set up for her religion crossed over a few lines for me.

There is no minimising what was written last night.

man alive

you don't have to 'align' yourself with patriarchal religions to want to preserve freedom of movement for the women who live under them

heavens to betsy some people are blinded by self righteousness

I do not allign with any religion. I dislike many/most for their patriarchal acts and beliefs. I support their right to exist however (along with my own right to believe none of it), along with the right of all other philosophical beliefs to exist. I will support the right for women within the UK to have the ability to take part in public life, especially where a patriarchal religion (or any other aspect of patriarchy) would prevent it otherwise. It's not bowing to patriarchal religion, but supporting the women who might be excluded by it.

Many trans people are ordinary, law abiding citizens who do not wish to tear apart women's rights.

Then they need to take it up with those transwomen whose behaviour brings their trans position into disrepute. Not ask women to solve it for them.

I mean, I'm sure my neighbours lock their doors but if they didn't I wouldn't be in their houses nicking their stuff?

This depends where you live. We can get away with leaving doors unlocked and not expect anything to get nicked. A cousin in Manchester wouldn't dream of leaving doors unlocked.

It didn't look like islamaphobia to me. It looked like object criticism of the situation. We cannot allign ourselves with our requirement for single sex spaces based on safety with those fighting for the requirement for single sex spaces based on patriarchy.

@FunnyTalks Muslim women who observe their faith can't ablute before prayer (an absolute necessity) in the same space with men that aren't of family, a young boy or a male servant. Gender identity is completely irrelevant.
So no matter how lovely kind adorable the transwoman is a Muslim will be unable to use the bathroom (even with contained cubicles) if it's not an absolute certain single Sex space. This os scripture from the Koran.
Read the link to a previous thread I've posted below.
A decent transwoman who wishes to live their life as a woman will respect those wishes and find alternative facilities for themselves in respect of those women.
Otherwise I'm afraid they are just repeating male pattern dominance over women.

There was a thread on this a few years back which should be useful @peonyred

Muslim women and trans policies in the workplace www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4175451-muslim-women-and-trans-policies-in-the-workplace?msgid=-4175451#-4175451

See this is the type of comment that is in my opinion genuinely transphobic. No idea if that was the underlying intention or whether it was simply a parroting of a supposed "gotcha" without any critical analysis.

Transphobic because it implies that transwomen are out of control and unable to follow rules, laws or social norms without direct policing. Many trans people are ordinary, law abiding citizens who do not wish to tear apart women's rights.

Don't most of us generally go about more or less doing the right thing without constant, individual policing? I mean, I'm sure my neighbours lock their doors but if they didn't I wouldn't be in their houses nicking their stuff?

There has been lots of outrage posted when male Muslims don’t “shake hands” or over female Muslims covering their hair/faces in public. On MN the majority found both expressions of their beliefs offensive. It seems odd now to be using them in this argument for single sex spaces.
Discussions about Iran “embracing transitioning” and “if” that means Muslims do are just odd. Muslims are not one race and certainly don’t support all cultural practices. Many Muslims will not have tattoos let alone remove breasts or penis. Certainly the ones I know would never use a mixed sex toilet, stay in a room where someone (if not their mother or wife) was breast feeding or encroach on womens spaces. Single sex spaces are common in their religion. I’d like to think people are beginning to understand that this isn’t inherently bad and in fact is empowering. More nuanced thinking is always to be encouraged.

Shocking racism there. I'd report it but I always think it's good for lurkers to see the inherent racism / homophobia / misogyny in this ideology.

As a woman of Jewish heritage living in a town with one of the largest Muslim communities, I can frankly say anyone who disregards the needs of these women, who really ARE the Most Marginalised (TM) unlike men who identify into oppression is beyond redemption. Faith leaders do spout on about inclusion and diversity, of course they do, they are either aiming for modern PR, transing away the gay, or recruiting.

Women in real life, women bought up those communities, living within a religious and cultural patriarchy are a different matter. Not all women, but huge numbers of women in my local Muslim community are being frozen out of public life. Swimming, shopping, shelters. Hospital wards. Women who speak poor English are not accessing healthcare, not allowing their daughters to integrate the way they did a decade ago. This isn't hearsay, it's happening, and these women are beginning to believe their isolation is a good thing, that their men are protecting them from predatory males. That they will be safer with the devil at home than with men who insist on attending women only swim sessions. And likely they will be. That is not inclusion.

How any woman dares to come here and shriek about intersectionality while disregarding those women is 🤯

@itto so many of my friends are in similar situations and it truly saddens me. DDs best friends are all Muslim girls but interacting outside of school is becoming increasingly difficult which is just so divisive. I'm glad your girls have those options. I took DD out of Rainbows and she will not be returning to GG.

^^ same thoughts exactly

Itto, thank you for your contribution, I really value it.
Rogers, spot on!

Ooh look. We've had the racism and the cultural intolerance and the religious intolerance pop along <ticks Bingo card>

Actually if anyone's interested, the reason for single sex swims for women came about because of Local Authorities tracking which groups of their communities were accessing taxpayer funded resources and which weren't.

When it was found that male engagement was pretty much even across the board but that there were groups of women who barely accessed at all, those women were consulted to ask why, and to find out what would let them access those resources. And the answer was: single sex sessions.

So single sex sessions were set up to meet this need, to permit equality of access, and those groups of women began to use those local resources that their taxes helped to pay for. All very successful. It addressed other unmet needs too across all women demographics, such as social isolation and mental health needs since many women reported finding it easier to try a women only session where they didn't feel embarrassed or judged in a swimming costume.

However then a new, shiny diversity target turned up and it involved male people wanting to join those swims, and so now many women who needed those swims and were excluded without them, are back to being excluded again so that male people can enjoy their personal use of a women's only swim validating their identity. And making it a mixed sex swim.

This isn't progress, is it? This is just bouncing females back out of equality to access.

There would be no problem at all in offering two different kinds of women only swims in the week's schedule, one being a mixed sex women's group (I know, but I'll go that far in offering respect in the hope that some might be reciprocally offered back) and one being a single sex female only group. A TQ+ only session is something that most pools I'm sure would consider (and they won't have loud and angry other groups turning up demanding to be centred in that session or else refusing to allow the session to exist the way that female only groups have to constantly endure).

If male people were not accessing community resources there would have been the same actions taken for them. They are not. If male people want male only swims then that's something they need to organise, and I'm sure there would be no barriers to them doing so.

It worries me too that instead of women being able to have inclusive female only activities that allow all females to be together, females are having to retreat in self defense into Muslim run, Jewish run, etc groups to be allowed to escape male people commandeering and wrecking their access without the faintest respect for anyone else but themselves. This isn't a good thing for females. It isn't 'inclusion' or 'diversity'. It makes it very clear the TQ+ lobby doesn't hold any value of inclusion, know anything about it or even understand what the words mean: it's just a Big Word to try and manipulate other people.

If you honestly think that a post pubescent male transitioner is likely to not be identified as being male by females, you must know transitioned males that have worked out how to disguise their gait, and have had some very expensive feminization surgery including their voice.

Even then, there will be other cues.

The latest guidance has clarified that where females have a reason for males to be excluded, those even with a GRC can be excluded.

Might I recommend that you spend some more time on MN reading past threads on these issues (yeah, MNHQ will be fixing advanced search in the future but it still works to thread level so that should help). I have found invariably, the dissemination of those particular issues are good here despite what very entrenched and heavily invested legal professionals working for Stonewall tell us.

*your.

I have reported the Islamophobic attacks towards @itto. I do not normally report MRA's unpleasantness (preferring it to remain visible, showing the vindictive crueltly for what it is), but direct personal attacks go too far. British Muslims (and other Muslims in Britain) have a right to practice their faith without being questioned on their choice to live in the UK.

I note that @Helloahoy has also described a fictional trans person as 'it' (also reported, as actual transphobia. Trans people are not an 'it' any more than I am), so fuck knows whose side they think they're on... Not that of women or the trans community anyway.

I hope you are ok @itto 💐. You did not deserve that attack on your right to live in hour own country.