GC views not valid because the majority are "bad actors"

I do get (and respect) what you are saying, but as an old bloke you did make me laugh!

I meant "any old" in the sense of "any random bloke" rather than specifically the chronologically challenged I don't appreciate being lectured on "trans rights" by young men with little skin in the game either.

I know perfectly well that in the real-world people are being forced to play along with this. I have never said otherwise.

My point has always been that having gender reassignment as a PC in the Equality Act only stops people from discriminating against trans people. It does not force everyone else to believe they have actually changed sex.

I have to "play along with this" at work. My employer isn't completely captured, but I've seen enough to know that if I talked honestly about my GC views, it wouldn't go well for me. My views are protected under the PC of Religion or Belief. But in practice they would be frowned upon if I expressed them at work, and could affect my career, so I keep my mouth shut.

Going back to the OP’s question about whether / how to change this man’s mind….

You’re wasting your time with this man.

He told you everything you needed to know about his character when he accused you of lying when you talked about your experiences of sexual harassment.

This same male friend denied that harassment of females was a common as I made out.

When he did this, he was accusing you of lying.

What he also did in that conversation was show you clearly that, in a discussion about male sexual violence against women, his sympathy and concern was for the males not for the women.

He’s a man who believes that men shouldn’t have to face any negative consequences for their sexual violence against women, that other men should protect men who are perpetrators of sexual violence against women, that women also should protect men from the consequences of their sexual violence against women by shutting up about it, and if they don’t shut up about it then he’ll accuse them of lying.

A decent man, who is unaware of the extent of sexual harassment and violence against women, would be shocked and appalled on hearing how bad it is. He wasn’t appalled by it. He wanted you to shut up about it.

Ask yourself this: who benefits from women being silenced about sexual violence? Your friend is “one of those” men.

I am convinced that he thinks he is one of those "nice guys that would never do anything like that", and also that pointing out that women have to take measures to protect themselves against men is the equivalent of a personal attack against ALL men.
^^
If I am correct, how can I re-broach the subject of "women need single-sex spaces" without making the exclusion of trans women from those spaces seem like a personal attack on all men (including him)?

He’s not going to change his belief that males who want to access women and girls in a state of undress should be entitled to access women and girls in a state of undress. It won’t make any difference how you broach the subject.

I do get (and respect) what you are saying, but as an old bloke you did make me laugh! I've been discovering how my views aren't worth anything any more, because I'm not in the generation which is right about everything any more. Especially my views about trans issues! I have an inkling of what it must be like to disappear from view as an old woman ...

@Zita60 now I know you're not discussing this in good faith, in the real world people absolutley are being forced to play along with this fantasy. You're being wilfully blind if you don't see it, or you're just lying.

Do catch up.

He thinks that people that accept humans cant change sex shouldnt exist?
Does he think the same of those that think that Earth is a globe that orbits round the sun?
What strikes me about this is it is you that are seeking reassurance for your sanity and grasp of reality.
This is both a central issue of this idealogy and most tellingly, how women 2nd guess themselves in the face of male manipulation.
In fact if this imbalanced dynamic didnt exist where women routinely give away their power without mindfullness [ I include myself ] then perhaps this ideology would never have existed.
I apreciate all the reasons both historical and current as to why that is, but at some point we need to grab the reigns.
In a nutshell, perhaps you could tell him that he is a se xist fo ol and just f off, afterall he is clearly not a real friend or he would never advocate such an obviously misogynistic movement that tries to strip you of your rights dignity and safety.
You absolutely can do better.

I didn't say that anything about brains not matching sex. I'm aware that research that claims this has been debunked.

What I referred to was research that found differences in some trans peoples' brains in an area relating to self-perception. In other words, that would mean the person was perceiving themselves (their body) incorrectly.

The Equality Act says the following about discrimination:

Types of discrimination ('protected characteristics')

It is against the law to discriminate against anyone because of:
age
gender reassignment
being married or in a civil partnership
being pregnant or on maternity leave
disability
race including colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin
religion or belief
sex
sexual orientation

These are called ‘protected characteristics’.

You’re protected from discrimination:
at work
in education
as a consumer
when using public services
when buying or renting property
as a member or guest of a private club or association

You’re legally protected from discrimination by the Equality Act 2010.

https://www.gov.uk/discrimination-your-rights

There is nothing there about you having to believe that a person's gender reassignment is actually a valid belief - it simply says that you must not discriminate against them for that reason.

If we got rid of all protected categories and dealt with employment cases simply as unfair dismissal

It was actually you who brought up the "dealing with it as unfair dismissal" thing. I responded to ask why "gender reassignment" couldn't be dealt with like that. I'm not convinced by anything here that a specific category needs to exist for it.

Then you really don't understand the issue at all. That, combined with your weak reference to "brains not matching sex" earlier in the thread, which is nonsense by the way, means you've got plenty of catching up to do.

It's as obvious as gravity that people are being forced to pretend that people have changed sex, and you're not speaking in good faith to deny it.

I disagree. The PC of gender reassignment isn't forcing a belief onto anyone else. It's just saying that people who believe they have "reassigned their gender" can't be discriminated against. on those grounds. We don;t have to beleive they have actually changed sex.

That seems to me to be exactly the same as the PC of religion.

This isn't a gotcha, religion is indeed a fantasy. Beliefs under the EA are always balanced against other rights, and it doesn't force a belief onto everyone else like the protected characteristic of gender reassignment (note no "trans people") does. It's totally different.

@Ereshkigalangcleg and @OldCrone

What Cassie says above seems relevant to me.

If we got rid of all protected categories and dealt with employment cases simply as unfair dismissal, what about discrimination in housing? I don't think there would be any other law that would protect people against that - it's part of why the Equality Act was created.

In my opionion religion is a fantasy, but it's given the same protection as belief that one is trans.

Colleague, not friend.

I don't think trans people are getting more protection than anyone else. The Equality Act stops discrimination against people on various grounds, and that includes trans people.

If we were talking about TW demanding entry into women's sport, that would be a different matter, because they are demanding the right to enter a category they feel like entering and disadvantaging women as a result. They are demanding more rights than other groups in that case.

But as I understand it, the Equality Act isn't specifically about sport. It allows for single sex exemptions where sex matters, which would include sport. But the definition of sex is being muddied by TRAs, so it's not clear at the moment whether "sex" means "biological sex". I wish the government would make that simple change to the Act so it works the way it was intended to before the TRAs came along with their demands.

Yes, exactly.

Look, you can’t fix this guy and I doubt very much you’ll find the magic words that will make a light bulb go on over his head. If his daughter is 19 then I will lay odds that she’s already experienced sexual harassment, late teens early twenties was the peak time for me and many of my friends. If he truly wanted to know about it, he’d talk to her.

I know other posters have already commented but here are my thoughts too:

I know a number of men who've been genuinely shocked to hear about the everyday harassment endured by women and whose initial response has been 'not all men' (Yes guys, we know.) But to deny it's even real or widespread is, I think, a whole other level.

I think your concern for his daughter is admirable but I also suggest you should be realistic about how much you're likely to change his view.

And frankly, you don't mention whether he's a work colleague but, if he is, then I would watch my back.

I see it regularly on Mumsnet, Twitter, and other social media platforms.

If he can't understand why a 54 year old bloke in the same changing room as his daughter might be an issue, tbh I don't think you can reason with him.

If he's that blinkered to not be able to understand why that might make his daughter feel uncomfortable and her privacy and dignity violated nothing will. And even if she's ok with it, what's his inclusive view on how it might impact those from religious grounds. And whilst he's a good guy that won't violate and misuse the opportunity why does he think all blokes are good people? If they all are why are so many locked up for sex offenses?

He doesn't give a shit about women including his daughter and he doesn't want to. Because he's a sexist pig who doesn't value the privacy, dignity and safety of women because it's not his fucking problem to deal with.

Why should you have to?

If he's not prepared to listen to the experiences of women, he doesn't respect women.

Or he thinks they are liars.

I agree Miffy, you can talk about a typical man and then say "and what if that man was wearing a wig and female typical clothes?"

I would hope so.

I read about a successful strategy used by a woman to explain and justify her GC stance to her 16-year-old son: "Imagine you are out with your 7-year-old sister and she needs the loo. You take her to the Ladies and wait outside. As far as you know there is no-one else in there. Then a middle-aged woman goes in. Would you be concerned? No, neither would I. Then the woman comes out and a middle-aged obvious transwoman goes in. Would you feel any concern?"

The boy understood immediately. Something like this might help your friend understand, even if you used his 19-year-old daughter rather than an imaginary seven-year-old. You could make them unisex toilets or changing rooms and talk about a middle-aged man entering.

@BigTubOfLard I think inquiring why such spaces exist is a good start. Hiwever don't limit yourself to safety. There are certainly privacy and dignity reasons for single-sex facilities too. Including to benefit men.

Taking safety to one side, intimate care for men can sometimes be embarrassing and I can see why they would prefer someone of the same sex to look after them.

Same for things like councelling/ mental health sessions. Having a woman in such a session could very easily change the dynamics to the detriment of the session.

Exactly this OP. I sometimes think the safety argument is easier to handwave away than the privacy and dignity argument. The safety argument gets "are you trying to say trans women are dangerous you bigot" but saying you're not comfortable changing in front of a male, or his teen daughter might be, is harder to shrug off without looking like a complete misogynistic arse.

Might it help to talk with him about Flat Earthers?

Do "flat earthers" exist?
Apparently 7% of Brazilians are flat earthers.

physicsworld.com/a/fighting-flat-earth-theory/

If we don't share "flat earthers'" belief that the earth is flat, due to the evidence of our own eyes/ experience/scientific knowledge, does that therefore mean we do not want or believe flat earthers (or 7% of Brazilians) to exist?

Do I personally have to go along with flat earthers' wacky ideas because they truly, truly believe it and always have believed it for as long as they can remember and there are conferences and videos and 'scientific' papers which posit their theories etc? Even if they are delightful, wouldn't hurt a fly types, I can respectfully and perfectly pleasantly disagree with them, yes?

I mean I would generally say live and let live, I don't share your views but enjoy your flat earthing, no skin off my nose, have fun etc.

Except

I don't want you teaching flat earthism to 7 year olds in schools in their Space topic; I don't see any value in Flat Earther Story Time at the library; I actually think being a Flat earther should probably disqualify you from a job at NASA or the Civil Aviation Authority.

I also don't think the BBC should prioritise Flat Earthers' views over those of Real Earthers, I wouldn't expect them to write almost weekly puff pieces about you or only mention your flat earth beliefs when you are the victim but never the perpetrator of a crime nor would I expect them to have you on for 'balance' any time they are talking about Space.

I definitely don't want you having the particular ear of government. I would be highly suspicious of politicians who would say that "flat earths are Earth" and a Prime minister who would be prepared to say 99.9% of the time the Earth is spherical except for when it is disc shaped. 🤯

If you are a flat earther, I reserve the right to privately think that you are foolish or deluded or that you have fundamentally misunderstood the Bible or you are just doing it to get attention or to provoke a reaction. I think that there must be something in it for you but literally nothing that benefits me.

Still, other than that, once again, live and let live, knock yourself out flat earthing, no skin off my nose etc. Exist away!

If, on the other hand, I was to find that flat earthers were part of a movement predicated on removing women's rights, invading women's spaces, demolishing safeguarding, casting the language I use to describe reality as 'hate speech' and mutilating and sterilising predominantly gay and autistic kids, well, that would be a whole different matter....