I think the spell is finally broken...

Absolutely self contradictory.

Th I think some of the worry that people will feel out of place in same sex changing rooms and such is manufactured.

There has been some legitimate worry among effeminate men about "locker room" kinds of scenarios, though I think that is fearless common now. But no one has really cared about whether women in women's spaces were gnc.

I think there is actually a lot of silliness about gnc people being counter-cultural and therefore having issues. Which in part may come from people who are having personal struggles with their self image - they are essentially projecting those on others and seeing disapproval where there is actually indifference.

There is some reason, I think, to consider that people who have already transitioned medically will have some struggles. Most of which are the same ones detransitioners face now. Ultimately people are going to have to come to terms with the medical abuse they have suffered, and in many cases chosen. I would hope others will be kind - by which I mean be sensitive, as they navigate new rules. I would hope the people in the "Psychological community" will be prepared to help them come to terms with the reality that they are in fact male or female, and it's not ok to intrude on opposite sex spaces like change rooms and toilets - it's a violation of other people's privacy. But I am sympathetic that a lot of those people were told, by people who should have known better, that they should expect to be able to use those spaces.

Frankly the psychological community is going to have a whole lot of explaining and apologizing to do to those people.

Sooo let me get this right...

Women won't notice any difference in terms of their day to day life, because most people have never and will never knowingly come into contact with a transgender person.

but also

They will still use the spaces they feel are most appropriate and safest for them.
However they will be persecuted for doing so.

So women won't knowingly notice a trans person (presumably because they pass so well) and yet we will still persecute them for using our spaces?
How will we know they're using our spaces and thus "persecute" them if we don't know that they're in them?
It's not logical.

I hope that is a typo and all men who expose themselves to women, or commit voyeurism will be ‘prosecuted’ for those sexual crimes. That men don’t get special treatment when they claim a religious belief of ‘gender identity’, and can commit exposure and voyeurism against women and girls to their hearts content after that. At the very least. People don’t change sex, and it is mendacious at best to pretend they do. There may be some other more sinister motivations from some people.

Yes, that this persecution of women will stop. The gaslighting that a dude ain’t really a dude if he claims otherwise. That women may have fair opportunities in life and sports again. That they won’t be put in danger, as those men who really want to gain access to spaces where women and girls are in a state of undress or vulnerable will fail to be given carte Blanche to do what they want. And men of any belief won’t get to steal women’s awards, achievements, grants.

Yes, you stupid women. We warned you that if you didn't let men have what they wanted you would just make it worse for yourselves in the long run.

@izimbra that was a lot of words to say "I don't care about women"

Transgender people will still exist.

They will still use the spaces they feel are most appropriate and safest for them.

However they will be persecuted for doing so.

Which many of you here will enjoy.

Women won't notice any difference in terms of their day to day life, because most people have never and will never knowingly come into contact with a transgender person.

But hey, enjoy the 'win'.

Maybe just consider the price a generation of women will pay for it in terms of loss of access to reproductive care, employment rights, access to higher education, protection from domestic violence etc etc.

Generalising to a whole board full of posters is a bit daft.
You're talking piffle

This. DS1 is currently very worried about his teenage, gender-confused, obviously very vulnerable friend who is currently in a constant state of weeping terror that 'the whole world hates them'.

I'm really fucking angry this morning at all the irresponsible zealots who:
*Assured this fragile, confused kid that their preferences and interests meant they weren't a 'proper' member of their natal sex and could change to the other one
*Insisted that anyone who wouldn't play along with the pretence hated them and wanted them dead
*Pushed, bullied and intimidated until women, corporations and even the government had to say NO, we're standing by reality.

And having done that, caused all that damage, have the FUCKING CHEEK now to say it's on the women who said no. Drop hands, walk away, shrug and leave others to pick up the pieces.

Hell mend you, you fucking ghouls. Fucking over confused kids in pursuit of gratifying men with fetishes.

I despise the lot of you.

In which case women won't use them. That's the literal point of the post you replied to. Anyone who wants to offer a neutral space can still do so, they just have to do so in addition to single sex spaces. And people who only want to offer single sex provisions can also do so.(subject to other discrimination rules of course).

You are thinking about the thought experiment backwards from the endpoint of gender neutral spaces continuing to exist and saying in that case they will still have the same problems because of men, but the story I was proposing as the thought experiment runs the other way (obviously! Time has to run beginning to end not vice versa!) : once single sex provisions are also an option again, we would only get to an endpoint where gender neutral spaces are wanted, used, even preferred if those spaces work for women as well, because the women would have a choice.

Once women, including those who currently do not identify as such, have a choice and can vote with their feet as to whether each individual gender neutral option on offer works for them or not, the only gender neutral options that will survive are ones that work for women.

And again, thought experiment. I'm not saying this will happen, or even that it should happen. I'm just saying the catastrophising about people caught up in genderism having no place to feel they belong is only one possible outcome; other futures are also available.

Neutral places only work if abusers don’t abuse them. Men have always abused women and unless something miraculous happens, that part of culture will never change. Neutral places will always be a place to abuse.

Sure. It's supposed to be. I'm not suggesting this will happen or even that it should. It's a thought experiment to counteract the assumption that restoring single sex provisions means people who have had surgery or just preferred more gender ambiguous environments will be out of place and seen as disabled and damaged.

Time doesn't go backwards. Culture changes. If because of genderism there's a genuine desire now for more shared spaces then more shared spaces can still emerge alongside single sex provisions. And because they are alongside not instead, there is always a place to escape to.

And because there is always a place to escape to, in that world women's participation in "neutral" spaces would be a matter of choice. So if they didn't work for women they wouldn't become a thing. The existence of single sex spaces would ironically make the gender neutral spaces work better.

I think that's quite a utopian vision. The manifestations of sexual dimorphism won't go away so you will have all the same problems in those "neutral" spaces that made people want separate spaces to begin with.

I was a Labour member, leafletted for the council elections and everything.

Joined many other women in leaving on 1st May 2018.

I was exactly the same. Depressing, wasn't it?

If they check out the polls, they won't be touching the toxic trans issue with a barge pole.

Check the Megan Kelly YouTube video posted this morning.

So do I. Otherwise we risk a mess like the American one. Left/Liberal blunders that hand the moral high ground or the obvious commonsense approach to the Right on a plate.

I certainly recognise this. I was previously a member of the Labour Party, though have voted Green in the past. Spoiled my ballot (no Communist Party candidate or suitable independent).

I'm sure some people think I'm letting the Tories or even Reform in, but I just can't support males in female spaces. I very much hope Labour will see sense at some point.

That was rather my impression at the time of the last UK election.

There were some posters who were clearly Conservative or even considering Reform, but a very characteristic type of post was on the lines of being a lifelong Labour/left of centre voter and being pretty sick at having to choose between giving up on that or supporting a party that were supporting gender ideology (Labour, Liberal, Green, Plaid and SNP all being a washout in this respect).

There were prolonged discussions about spoiling one's vote and whether it did any good in terms of making one's opinion visible. A lot of people said they felt politically homeless. I felt much the same - ended up casting my vote (Leftwards) on another issue dear to my heart, but feeling torn.
.

If the original meanings of Left and Right still mean anything, I'd say that the centre of gravity of MN is certainly left of centre, and the FWR folder, probably even more so. Of course, I'm taking no account of the fact that many left-leaning political parties, unions, and so on, seem to have lost their collective minds.

Did I say you?
No, I didn't.
I said this board in general.
Unless you are actually saying you are all a hive mind now.

Yes, psychology 'community' sounds almost comedically euphemistic.

Who claims to be part of the "psychology community" yet displays a startling lack of insight while posting numerous intemperate insults on this thread.
All aimed at women - funny that.

Only in today's world could the election of a black woman to the leadership of the Conservative party be considered evidence of white supremacy and the protection of woman from male rapists in prison deemed to be damaging to women.

This is what you get when you compel people to called bearded Brian in men's clothes a woman, or a double rapist vulnerable because he wants to move to a women's prison.

considering you seem obsessed with these threads

Says the poster who has posted 22 times on this thread to my 20. This will be my 21st post.

As I said, facts.