Transwoman in the changing room at school pool

As @Artichokeleaves says the third option could cover a whole variety of needs that are currently not being met, it's a positive solution. However, TRA's don't like this idea they want to be in with the women who don't want them there for reasons of power, control and validation.

Even if we had to fight for them (ridiculous!), the purpose and designation of them is very black and white.

Who is 'we' though? Because this isn't women's burden. If trans people and TRAs believe trans women are unsafe in single sex male spaces, the onus is on them to fight for change, just as the onus was on women to fight for change.

Male. Female. What is the third place? It just feels like instead of it being male, female, neutral, in practice it would be more like male, female, also male but not explicit. I don't know if it would be any safer.

Well yes, they would be male, female and gender neutral. All the women who say they have no issue at all sharing a space such as a bathroom with a trans woman are welcome to show their solidarity and allyship by using the gender neutral space as it would be open for all.

If single sex male spaces are an issue and the reason trans women feel unsafe using them, why on earth wouldn't it be safer to offer gender neutral toilets for them to use?

Are you meaning because natal men who are dangerous could use them and we can't tell which are dangerous and which aren't?

Because that's exactly our point. You can never tell. Why should natal women have to take that risk and not trans women?

Which is I suppose why the law exists to discretionarily allow trans people to use facilities made for the sex they identify as.

Nope it doesn't in the case of toilets and changing rooms. The below is info from this year:

Legitimate reasons for excluding trans people from single-sex spaces include enabling privacy, preventing trauma or to ensure health and safety.
The guidance is intended to help organisations such as hospitals, retailers, hospitality and sports clubs.
It is the first time guidance on this issue has been released and comes in the wake of calls for more clarity from women’s rights groups.

Transgender women can be legally banned from single-sex toilets and changing rooms, the equalities watchdog has declared.
The equalities watchdog found it is legal for organisations such as refuges and gyms to legally exclude transgender people from single-sex services in certain scenarios, such as to prevent trauma and enable privacy.
Organisers of a group counselling session for female victims of sexual assault could exclude trans women if they judge that those attending "are likely to be traumatised by the presence of a person who is biologically male", it says.

Very true. I remember one of the lead newspapers covered this evidence, the very high proportion of assaults in mixed sex spaces compared to very low statistics for assaults in single sex spaces.

However plenty of women say that they are fine with mixed sex spaces and would use them (Layla Moran in the lead), and at least then female people who cannot use mixed sex spaces are not being excluded from everything, and those female people who use the mixed sex spaces are consenting to use them and taking the risk making an informed choice.

This would also help with other societal needs such as parents with opposite sex children who don't feel comfortable taking them into their own toilets or changing rooms, carers with opposite sex clients, the many other groups of vulnerable males who may feel safer with female people around rather than in an exclusively male place, NB people, etc etc.

It is the only obvious answer that meets all needs as opposed to one group win and the other group loses, which is hardly inclusion. What those third spaces would look like is obviously something to be considered, it's an opportunity to produce something positive and an improvement on the existing facilities.

That's really interesting, I'm now reading an article about the first public female toilets in Britain.

It is amazing to see how much work it was.

But while I'm not dismissing your point at all, it's not quite what I meant. Even if we had to fight for them (ridiculous!), the purpose and designation of them is very black and white. Male. Female. What is the third place? It just feels like instead of it being male, female, neutral, in practice it would be more like male, female, also male but not explicit. I don't know if it would be any safer. But hopefully there are people who do and will know.

I was doing a bit of googling myself last night (before my big switcheroo on opinion) and I did find that the vast majority of people do think spaces like toilets should be single sex. So I wonder how a third space would be even broached to the public. It doesn't necessarily mean it's not the right solution, just that I see flaws in it. Sounds like there's flaws to all the solutions though to be honest.

That's interesting and sad to hear. Do you have a link to those studies by any chance?

Society wasn't sure how female single sex spaces would be marketed or end up being used practically.

The powers that be were overwhelmingly against them and thought the idea of public toilets for women was disgusting. Women were therefore less able to be out of the home which contributed to the being not seen, not heard and not represented.

Yet still, brave women tirelessly fought for them, even when men literally drove into them to destroy them, and their hard work finally paid off.

Why can't TRAs put in the same effort to fight for and secure the implementation of third spaces rather than standing on the backs of women who fought for single sex spaces?

Especially as ironically doing so will mean that many women will no longer feel safe using those spaces that once again they will be excluded from some public spaces that are currently single sex.

Again, you're not comprehending me. I did not say trans women should have access to female spaces. That wasn't the point of my post.

There definitely does need to be a switch in focus.

But as we've discussed as a risk factor toward women, if 98% of sexual crimes are perpetrated by men, and we know culturally and societally there is a lot of abuse aimed at trans people, then a solution does need to be made because practically it's not going to be fair or safe. Which is I suppose why the law exists to discretionarily allow trans people to use facilities made for the sex they identify as.

The point for us should be that the solution to problems for trans people shouldn't come at the expense of women. Not that there should be no solution for them. It doesn't make it a woman or feminists problem to solve. But it obviously in the real world needs to be something we are aware of as the default position so far has been to decide to allow the mixing of spaces that are usually defined as single sex.

You mean, for females to use as well? Because the evidence has shown that where mixed sex spaces are rolled out they are already acknowledged to be more dangerous for females. In this short space of time since they started being implemented.

@Dreamwhisper

Also, I'd fathom that someone presenting female would still be at plenty of the similar risks a woman would experience if asked to use a single sex male space in terms of unwanted attention and harassment

I'd fathom that natal men presenting as female (though would argue the majority are identifiable as trans women) would still present plenty of the similar risks to women as other natal men who are not trans, including when using a single sex female space in terms of the unwanted attention and harassment the women in that space could experience, as there is no evidence whatsoever that trans women commit crimes at a lesser rate than other natal men.

Why is the safety of trans women in your first statement more important than the safety of natal women in the factual example I've provided?

I'm confused.

I didn't say they should be in female single sex spaces, I specifically said they should not be in female spaces.

I said they should also not just be chucked thoughtlessly into male spaces. The fact that women have a right to female single sex spaces doesn't mean that we shouldn't make provisions from trans people. That was what my point was.

Also, I'd fathom that someone presenting female would still be at plenty of the similar risks a woman would experience if asked to use a single sex male space in terms of unwanted attention and harassment, with the additional issue of homo and trans phobia putting them at increased risk of abuse and violence.

And what about the other males that are still using the male facilities that are just as vulnerable?

This is where there really needs to be a switching of focus.

If the male provisions are so dangerous to other males, then something needs to be done to make them safer.

And wouldn't it be better for people to be able to live how they want, and present how they want, while being helped to be comfortable enough to understand they do not change sex.

I am all for third spaces though. These are though some of the issues where dissonance still exists for me. Because if those transitioned males are so much in danger, then something really needs to be done for any other vulnerable male. Why isn't something been done to benefit all males?

I am in favour of single spaces more than a third space because I'm not sure how a third place would be marketed nor am I sure how it would end up being used practically.

@Dreamwhisper

I imagine to ask them to use male single sex spaces would cause them mental harm and would be considered not affording them dignity as they do not wish to be identified as male.

I imagine to ask women to accept male bodied people in single sex spaces would cause them mental harm and would be considered not affording them dignity as they do not wish to be unclothed and / or feel vulnerable.

Why do you believe that the feelings of the natal men (who make up less than 1% of the population) in your statement are more important than the natal women (who make up 50% of the population) in my statement?

I imagine to ask them to use male single sex spaces would cause them mental harm and would be considered not affording them dignity as they do not wish to be identified as male. So asking them to use facilities aimed directly at men does not seem right at all.

Also, I'd fathom that someone presenting female would still be at plenty of the similar risks a woman would experience if asked to use a single sex male space in terms of unwanted attention and harassment, with the additional issue of homo and trans phobia putting them at increased risk of abuse and violence.

I may be able to agree that as biologically male they do not belong in female single sex spaces, but arguing that no provisions are made for them whatsoever regarding their gender identity is a step too far.

So it's no good to say it would be okay to make decisions about who is "worthy" of being in single sex spaces based on whether a person has had hormones or surgery or anything like that.

It's all people who identify as a woman or no people who identify as a woman. And as it's not fair or safe on women to say all people, so the only logical option left is no people. With of course the caveat that male single sex spaces should not be forced upon trans women as I imagine this would cause them both psychological distress and put them at risk of harm.

I agree with much of this.

I still don't understand the logic that they are at risk in the male spaces. We know there are transitioned males who use the male toilets, change rooms etc without incident. How much proof is there and how much is like the mantraing of other phrases that seem to have little evidence behind it?

While that is being researched, third options are the way to go in my opinion , and may well be a permanent solution.

We all have differing opinions on the solutions outside of 'using female spaces is NOT the solution'. That is why there is open discussion on this board about it.

The OP isn't wrong.
No.
In the vast majority of cases we can correctly sex people.
Yes.
No.

You thought you didn't have the words but this is articulated very well and spot on in my opinion.

It’s quite impossible and that’s the difficulty.

And yet here you are insisting that TW are allowed full and unfettered access to female only spaces and services providing they are true trans even though you can't tell if they are or not.

Would you be ok with a trans man in your changing room?

Yes. If single sex spaces and services were upheld as absolutely single sex then I would be confident that the person in there was of the same sex as me.

This is just going round in circles.

Agree you are going round and round in circles and tying yourself up in knots because you won't say what you really want to say and that is that women and girls don't matter, their need for safety, privacy and dignity is to be disregarded and men's wants must take priority, if women and girls are then by dint excluded from using those spaces you don't give a toss because they matter not to you.

This is the problem.

Transmedicalism is something most trans people find offensive and unfair.

So it's no good to say it would be okay to make decisions about who is "worthy" of being in single sex spaces based on whether a person has had hormones or surgery or anything like that.

It's all people who identify as a woman or no people who identify as a woman. And as it's not fair or safe on women to say all people, so the only logical option left is no people. With of course the caveat that male single sex spaces should not be forced upon trans women as I imagine this would cause them both psychological distress and put them at risk of harm.

If by that you mean genital surgery, are you aware that well over 90% of transwomen never have this?

For whatever reason most of them seem to like keeping their penises.

So a "fully" transitioned TW is actually pretty rare.

And we are told, as in my last post, that surgery is no indicator of your "trans-ness".

What are you planning to do? Give them a card they can pull out to affirm they've had full SRS surgery?

Who is going to ask to see this on the door of women's spaces? And isn't this a very gross invasion of privacy and demand for highly sensitive information?

What about those who cannot for whatever reason subject themselves to the very serious surgery involved with all its costs and risks? Why create this pressure to take those risks?

And practically, what are you going to do on the door of a female space when you ask to see a card and the TW says no, I don't have a card and I'm coming in anyway?

These systems don't work for anyone in the situation. What would work are third spaces and good will from the TQ+ community to care about and respect female only spaces and needs, this is the only workable compromise, but that isn't happening right now, is it? So the only answer for females is to push for the Equality Act exemptions to be radically strengthened up and spaces to be sex based, end of, no case by case negotiation.

That is not quite the 'gotcha' that you think.

Many transitioned females who have extensively used testosterone and surgery absolutely know that their appearance may cause other females distress. While many of us would have no issue with these females using spaces, some people will find it distressing. So, therefore, we have seen the conversations around this, and many transitioned females would choose not to traumatise others and would choose alternative arrangements.

Again, while many of us would have no issue if we knew that this was a female using the space, we do not have the disrespect to make this decision for those who will be distressed.

Or are you going to bring up 'butch' looking females or a female who has not been on testosterone as an example? Because we have seen that many times and the answer is, they are females who may not have had the benefit of testosterone to change their body and are not the 'gotcha' that posters seek.

"Because a true transwoman is no more a threat than any other woman! That’s the whole point."

What is a "true" transwoman?
Can you be explicit please?

I really want to know what you mean by that.

Because we have been told that its:

1. Not to do with how long you have been trans


2. Not to do with how you look or what "effort" you put into looking female


3. Not to do with how you act ie in a stereotypically "female" way


4. Not to do with being on cross sex hormones


5. Not to do with having had any kind of gender reassignment surgeries


6. Not to do with having had any kind of counselling or therapy to discover gender identity issues

So what criteria are you using for "true" trans-ness?

Also:

It's not ALL to do with perceived threat.
Don't you get the fact that it is THE MERE PRESENCE of men that many many women just don't want in their private spaces for reasons of privacy and dignity?

That's a separate issue to safety.
If women just SAY NO, WHY is that not enough to exclude the male species from female spaces?

I can't see that this has been answered yet and I've asked it about 5 times on this thread.