Transmen

How surprising that this should appear in the Guardian. Was someone practicing?

www.theguardian.com/society/2023/apr/11/glaring-flaws-in-the-idea-of-excluding-trans-people-from-single-sex-spaces?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Yeah, you are missing the point. There isn't always a cop. The speedo doesn't always fire. The speed reading may be borderline and the cop not sure enough to act.

Nevertheless, we have speed limits. The fact they are not enforceable 100% of the time in practice is not a reason not to have them at all.

How does it work for single sex spaces? Like every other law/rule.

Most people are decent and respectful and comply because they want to.
Some don’t really want to comply but do so anyway out of social conformity.
A handful don’t comply.
Some will be caught in the act because they were obviously in the wrong and asked to leave.
Some won't be caught at first but their behaviour betrays them.
Some will never be caught.

How does it work for single sex spaces? Like every other law/rule, and like it did with no one asking "but how can this work without a chromosome test?" right up until entitled men (original male meaning) decided to ignore it and take what they wanted.

You might be the sort of person who thinks those men should be rewarded by throwing up our hands and saying "if we can't stop all of you, we won't bother stopping any of you". I'm not. Women (original female meaning) are worth more than that.

How is it enforceable?

Same way it's always been enforceable.

Someone in control of the venue tells the person to get out. Person gets out. If person refuses to get out, person is told to leave the venue altogether.

If they refuse to leave at that point, they are trespassing, and the police get in to deal with the trespass.

The ultimate enforcement can simply be based on simple trespass law. The law does not need to be involved in the venue's single-sex policy.

The person telling them to get out does not need to prove their sex (just as a venue doesn't have to prove someone's age to tell them to get out). The onus would be on the person wanting to stay in to prove they were eligible.

Unfortunately there seems to be no way an individual can easily prove their sex any more, as all main forms of ID now let people put false sex info, so whatever your ID says proves nothing.

So it's ultimately the same as any "no ID" case - if you appear to be the wrong sex, you're out, just as if you appear underage, at the venue's discretion.

Why are all these theoretical trans people devoid of care or respect for female people and female spaces and trying to deceive their way in?

This seems really transphobic to me. It's a very negative generalisation.

Good comparison between using the wrong loo and speeding. There are very few police patrol cars in the UK and there are warnings on roads that have speed cameras so the chance of being caught is very low. And yet, there is very little speeding. This is because the vast majority of drivers recognise that it's wrong so don't do it.

I was just asking a question about the practicality of enforcing it. If you can't tell someone is trans...but maybe suspect they could be....so what do you do? Go tell a police officer? And then what does he or she do? Ask the suspiciously gendered person to prove they have 2 X chromosomes somehow? How is it enforceable?

With speeding, a cop witnesses the offense and then pulls the violator over and issues a ticket. Now sure, if the suspiciously gendered person is rocking a beard it's a bit easier. But what I was asking is how do you enforce this when the trans person passes?

Why is this theoretical male devoid of respect or care for females and trying to deceive their way into a space?

And why is it then the fault of the females for noticing the deceit rather than the deceiver? It's almost like males have no responsibility for their actions and females are supposed to just be excluded and harmed quietly.

Males in all female only spaces doesn't work for females. Yes, some males like it a lot and prefer having choices. But that leaves many females with nothing at all.

Excluding females to benefit males and give them more options is fundamentally not equality. Equality would be accessible options for all. If you're into male supremacism, then it's an opinion, you do you. But own it.

This.

"Screeching". But not anti-woman. Just so steeped in everyday misogyny you don’t even notice.

How does it work? Like every other law/rule.

Most people are decent and respectful and comply because they want to.
Some don’t really want to comply but do so anyway out of social conformity.
A handful don’t comply.
Some will be caught in the act because they were obviously in the wrong and asked to leave.
Some won't be caught at first but their behaviour betrays them.
Some will never be caught.

I don't understand why the people who want to deny women the right to single sex spaces seem to think that means women are responsible for enforcing it, and if we can't do that 100% we don't get to have them at all.

We don't scrap speed limits because some people get away with breaking them.
We don't legalise shoplifting because some people get away with it
I'm not going to elaborate on DV or rape because fucking hell the conviction rates make me furious but at least we don't go as far as actually legalising it

We accept imperfect delivery of a perfect ideal because better than nothing is a hell of a lot better than nothing.

So why should single sex spaces be different?

Not sure how I'm an "anti-women activist" whatever that is.

In this instance it's making the hyperbolic suggestion that the only solution to women's concerns about sharing intimate spaces with men would be to carry out "genital inspections".

I'm looking for clarification. if you can't tell, but you still want them out of there, and "an upset woman will have the law on her side", I'm just curious how that actually plays out in reality.

Well presumably in the same way it always played out until about 5 years ago. You make a statement that a service is for a certain group of people and then you rely on people's integrity to not use that service when it is clearly not intended for them. Obviously you will always get people who will want to take something that is not for them. There's probably not a lot we can do about those people in reality but that's on them. I think the best thing to do would be to offer additional unisex options and I would hope that most TW with an ounce of integrity would use that option instead of invading women's spaces.

Surely non-passing transwomen will respect the law and stay out?

Not sure how I'm an "anti-women activist" whatever that is.

I'm looking for clarification. if you can't tell, but you still want them out of there, and "an upset woman will have the law on her side", I'm just curious how that actually plays out in reality.

Say some highly passable trans woman walks in. No one bats an eye. But one woman isn't so sure she's a "real enough" woman and starts screeching and harassing her. How's the "law" resolving this dispute in real time?

Those who rabbit on about genital inspections are the ones who believe that being 6 feet tall and in grave need of a shave doesn't diminish their ability to "pass". There may be transwomen appear credibly female but they will still give themselves away by riding up to the loo on a unicorn.

It's DARVO all the way.

The side crying "Fascist" is the side that deploys informants, public shaming, threats to family and work, and media censorship to impose authoritarian controls on what thoughts people can share

The side crying "they want us to stop existing" is the side appropriating and redefining the name of an existing social group so that group can no longer assert its political and social rights or existence

The side crying "literal violence" is the one sharing violent imagery and rhetoric, now escalating to physical attacks on peaceful demonstrations

The side crying "human rights" is the side that thinks anyone opposing its aims doesn't deserve human rights

The side crying "freedom to be yourself" is the side waving banners and flags and wearing masks

The side that claims it wants to free us from gender stereotypes is the one that thinks masculine girls must really be boys and vice versa

The only people suggesting genital inspections are TRAs...

https://metro.co.uk/2023/04/11/if-the-equalities-act-changes-i-could-be-forced-to-use-mens-loos-18592590/

"In order to enforce this in practice, would they have to start stationing guards at every single space that carry out genital inspections and chromosome tests, just to make sure no pesky trans people are using the wrong facilities?"

Lol, why are anti-women activists always going on about “genital inspections”. Where does this idea come from?

Because they are sex obsessed men?

They think it's such a gotcha.

What they're actually saying is transpeople would have no problem breaking the law.

Sounds pretty transphobic to label transpeople lawbreakers like that.

It's because their friends all tell them they totally pass, and no one could ever tell.

Thus "genital inspections" would be the only possible way...

Got it. Sooooo, genital inspections then?

Lol, why are anti-women activists always going on about “genital inspections”. Where does this idea come from?

Hmm, except nobody's actually said that have they @Squanchhouse

Did you actually read and understand the post you quoted?

🙄
Got it. Sooooo, genital inspections then? Quick flash of the vulva for the door guard? Otherwise trans women who do, in fact, pass could slip in molest you with their neovagina or something.

The not-so-subtle difference being that the vast majority of people haven't experienced violence or abuse from Muslim people, while the vast majority of women have experienced violence or abuse from male people.

So while the analogy didn't work in the first version (you'd need something like 10 bad chocolates in a million, which most people would be OK with risking), it does work in the second where 1 bad chocolate in 50 is almost certainly (a) too risky for most, and (b) massively underestimates the proportion of men who are violent or abusive to women, let alone those who don't knowingly hurt us but still unconsciously encroach upon and sideline us, which single sex spaces (physical and mental) provide respite from also.

And more fundamentally, there is no argument that stands for trans women in female spaces that doesn't stand equally well for other men. Either there's an argument to exclude all* males based on male behaviour or there isn't an argument to exclude any.

* other than known men doing a job under appropriate supervision and controls, before someone tries to claim that the existence of male cleaners means there's no point in single-sex spaces

It's a recycled anti-Islam meme from 9 years ago.