Please help! Gender not sex on a school 'protected characteristics' poster, just spoken to the Head!

do you not think, though, a utilitarian strategy based on achieving the lowest net amount of assault, trumps one based on accommodating feelings?

No it isn't tiny. It happens. Once is too many. Just the presence of TW is humiliating and intimidating to women too.

Go on, show us the data where we benefit from males in female only spaces.

The metric that matters is that not one woman was raped in a woman's prison until they stopped being single sex.

That is why single sex spaces are important.

For the safety and dignity of women.

You don't give two hoots about women. We are just human shields and collateral damage to your 'tiny minority' of males who you believe to be oppressed but it is blindingly obvious they are the opposite of that by the way they are prepared to trample on the rights of those that they claim to 'identify as'.

‘Bold claims’ completely supported by easily sourced data

This. If we adopted a utilitarian starting point, most women don't want male bodies in female spaces, and there are many more of us.

It’s not true that males in prison have “more often than not” been convicted of sexual offences. Sexual offenders are not a majority of imprisoned male offenders.

Some bold claims. I'd say it benefits women not one iota placing a TW in a woman's prison and opens them up to harm they were not previously exposed to. I don't believe your assertion about TW in male prisons and I find your dismissal of the harm done to women as offensive in the extreme. Even if your claims have any basis in reality, it is the prison services duty to protect vulnerable prisoners and tw should be assessed and treated like other vulnerable male prisoners. They DO NOT belong in women's prisons.

There's no such thing as "cis", it's an ideological in-group label most of the world doesn't use.

To adopt a utilitarian starting point, allowing trans women to be put on women’s prisons delivers the greater good for the greater number.
Are you sure? You'd have to weigh up the unhappiness of the large number of women in the prison who didn't like having a man there as well as the happiness of the trans woman (or any bloke claiming to be trans). In fact utilitarianism generally isn't very supportive of any minority interest, as more overall happiness is created by making the majority happy not a small minority.

Are we just talking about "transsexuals" then? I thought that was outdated?

But the cases of transsexual women assaulting cis women when placed in women only spaces are tiny. That is the metric that matters.

Yes. The right side of history. That would be the side where MRAs actually respected women and didn't trample all over womens rights, I take it.

I note you haven't answered the question. Everyone will note you haven't answered the question. Please answer the question.

And to yours: Rape can only be committed, in UK law, with a penis. To whit, by a male. In a women's prison, adding in some males (more often than not convicted of sexual offences) raises the rape rate from zero to more than zero. This is 100% avoidable by NOT locking males in with females.

Trying to go to the other extreme of isolation is pointless whataboutery.

Why is male on male violence a problem that women should solve?

Why should women accept males, who might rape them, in prisons because males assault other males?

Small men and gay men are also a risk in prisons, should women also welcome them with open arms because they are at risk?

99% of sex crimes are committed by men. That is all the reason you need to segregate by SEX. The case of sexual assault by women are vanishingly rare. 'Women do it too' is not an excuse to open the floodgates to male sexual assault.

Per capita many more transsexuals are assaulted and raped when placed in male persons, for instance, than women are when m2w transsexuals are placed in women’s facilities. To adopt a utilitarian starting point, allowing trans women to be put on women’s prisons delivers the greater good for the greater number.

There are assaults in women only spaces, such as prisons, for instance. Should everyone be kept in isolation?

Just 1 is enough to tell me who the real minority is, clue it's not the same one that you believe it to be.

The fact that you think women are the bottom of the heap shows that you know, in reality, who the women are.

This is about a primary school. Nobody has any business gaslighting children into believing that sex isn't real, that unidentifiable gender is reality or that they can change sex.
Vulnerable children confused about which sex they are or believing that their growing bodies are wrong and need fixing with drugs and surgery that lead to infertility, life long use of drugs and surgery, are entitled to thoughtful informed professional support. Not the attention of adult activists seeking to misrepresent the law, reality and to enable the transitioning of young children

Oxford Languages dictionary definition of sex for the terminally confused:

"either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and most other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions"

Yes it’s no coincidence that animals don’t have genders.

More than one. I say that's too many.

Perhaps you would like to indicate how many rapes and assaults you feel would be acceptable collateral damage to women, in order to keep males from being sad. Is there a number at which you'd say the price was too high?

I've often asked TRAs this and never had an answer, so would be v interested in yours.

Did you really just plop that utter bollocks here?

Every word is disinformation, incorrect, wrong.

You really should do better.

Oh, and that meaningless word 'cis' is not welcome here. We do not accept it and MNHQ will delete posts that use it if it is reported. So please, do desist, there's a good, erm, person?!?!