The Guardian - Trans Australian kicked out of toilet

But not anyone currently trying to claim that the average trans person is Hayley Cropper and trying to challenge the SC ruling on that basis.

From his internet presence he identifies as gender queer, but his lifestyle is pretty gender conforming.

Pure click bait, I think.

yep.

And are pushing that any male person who decides on a given moment that they are ‘feminine’ should access female toilets.

I suspect that this article will be piquing the interest of those who keep denying that these male people demanding toilet access is about boundary violation and entitlement. I think this person will be not winning support at all.

Oh I only ever use public toilets once I’ve put on a full face of makeup not to mention paint my nails and don my heels. I carry this costume around with me whenever I have to prove my womanhood [another face palm]

So the Guardian Australia have edited this for a very particular purpose then. Shameful.

For those who want the twitter link to the screenshots

x.com/mrsskys/status/1934184269301026832?s=46

😆

These screenshots I got from twitter explain a whole lot more. From his substack.

Liminally. So gender fluid. And uses male toilets very easily.

This was about making a story.

I’m counting down the seconds until social media posts start trending with accounts from the women who had his back and those who saw him crying and thought he deserved it. The ‘stocky bouncer’ will be tagged, with her mates providing friendly banter about her 5 mins of fame.

These days, nothing stays secret, even with super injunctions in place. We’ll have eye witness accounts any minute now……

Trans Australian = a railway line.

If it was a busy or high risk venue there could have been security placed near the toilets to keep an eye out for drug dealing and other risky behaviour.

A friend of mine works in welfare services for various festivals and events. and at some they place staff near the toilet areas to keep a look out for drug taking and sexual assault and to help vulnerable people.

"I was visiting family in London when the British supreme court handed down its unexpected ruling: under the Equality Act, sex was now considered “binary” in law, which meant transgender people could be banned from single-sex spaces of their gender identity. The Labour government, which had come into office promising us “dignity”, capitulated."

The Guardian are failing their readers by publishing this.

The government did not 'capitulate'. They must comply with the law, just as any other government must.

Sex has always been binary in law. Leaving aside trans issues, this was recently confirmed by a different judgement https://www.matrixlaw.co.uk/news/court-of-appeal-rules-that-nonbinary-gender-cannot-be-registered-in-the-uk/ and was not considered by the SC.

The SC considered a different question - whether a GRC can change somebody's sex for the purposes of the EA. However, it has always been the case that a single sex space could be segregated by sex, and it was confirmed in 2022 that somebody without a GRC does not have any right at all to use the facilities of the opposite sex.

Whether or not toilets should be mixed sex is a different question and the Guardian is free to campaign on that or any other issue, through normal democratic processes. However, my tip to them would be find lawyers who understand the law as it is, not as they would like it to be. It gets better results in court.

I don't believe a word of it, absolute nonsense.

What is the name of the venue? I’d like to ask them if they actually have a “stocky woman” guarding the women’s toilets….

And you read the longer version? Talk about taking one for the team, mate…

The writing marks him out as a male aggressor. He sounds like he is, a male wearing an earring and dress demanding access to women’s facilities.

There is a much longer piece on Jack's Substack where the venue is named. It is telling that the Guardian editors decided to omit that.

A dress and full makeup. Don't forget the makeup.

I was once told to stand at the back of the temple with the other women on a cultural visit. I was horrified but understood it was their space so I didn’t make a fuss. Or write to the newspapers to invite bad feeling about members of that faith group. It didn’t occur to me to try to bully my way in. That’s what I consider to be a tolerant society - I don’t like their beliefs but I can live with it. The female sing sex spaces are ours - what is with these intolerant males barging in? Then accusing us of bigotry? It’s the most ridiculous thing

The use of ‘presenting feminine’ and ‘masculine pictogram’ is very telling in my opinion.

This person thinks it is all about presentation and cannot conceive that it is about the needs of having a female sexed body. So… a typical bloke interpretation of the need for female toilets.

"...their stories can be found in science-fiction anthologies and online magazines of variable repute."

Ha ha! Variable repute indeed.

That’s quite telling, isn’t it. We’ve seen on here the tiny number of places that have said they will be going along with the SC ruling — vastly overwhelmed by the number that have publicly said they won’t. I find it hard to believe that a place that is as alternative and accepting would have rolled over as described in the article.

The amount of detail about the "pissing" makes this sound almost fetishistic.

And as a PP said, the writing style is utterly cringeworthy.

So feminine...😐

Why doesn't Jack name the venue? Because if it is an "alternative hub that has always prided itself on being an accepting space" there is no way it would have toilet police. In fact, I don't actually believe any venue in the UK has suddenly newly appointed toilet police?

I am sympathetic to trans people and tbh am not worried personally about sharing a loo, but I take this story with a massive pinch of salt.