"Trans people have always been here!"

I've yet to have a clear definition of what ‘living as a laydee/woman’ actually means

This is the ultimate problem with confusing sex with gender. Because of the shift in language in the last decade or so, where gender has started to “mean” biological sex. So they want their body to match their “gender” which is a meaningless concept because gender is a social construct.

Imagine if I was on a Downton Abbey thread and rathered to them being in Downview!

That would put their tensions in a whole different light.

I sometimes think it could be dealt with simply if any politicians had the guts to do it..
If you've had surgery and are no longer sexually functioning male then you are transgender and have legal protection
If you are not, you are a transvestite and you don't.

Can you imagine the howls?

Note, I am not saying that women don't choose to live as men. It's just they're not a threat to most males because men tend to be stronger than women. That's why a lot of women don't want to be vulnerable near men. Women who've been lucky enough not to be harrassed or assaulted and who can be confident that the police will be on their side probably don't feel it as strongly.

I expect they're still doing it now. Look at the Sandie Peggie judgement to see evidence of that.

What possible conclusion can be drawn from this except that women matter less than any kind of man and should facilitate any kind of man? Watch the way the Lib Dems and labour grovel to a tiny minority. We let them do it. I think it's time we stopped doing it and started a campaign to write to our MP's and local councillors and say we will NOT be voting for any party that does not respect our rights. Remembering the Darlington Nurses where they said the women were concerned but Rose might complain, so he mattered more, it's time to show the world that we matter too.

Helleofabore: Besides which, Downton built a special wing just to accommodate those male prisoners and they refused to move to it. The lobby groups actively protested having that wing.

I've now got the giggles picturing Maggie Smith's character having a fit of the conniptions at the idea of part of the estate being used as a prison. I assume autocorrect did you dirty when entering Downview?

The same bloke popped up on an Adam Curtis documentary the other day as if his ability to live as a laydeee even though he’s not very convincing as one was some great mark of progress. Was cringing for Adam, who is normally very astute. Gullible.

ANg totally standard in North America as well as the UK, and apparently, France.

This was totally standard, I don't really understand why you are doubting it. Many people, patients and doctors, have been open about this.

This one www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p04frl4h/a-change-of-sex-3-julia-my-body-my-choice

Im sure there was a bbc documentary quite a few years ago now about 'sex change operations' where the participant talked to his doctor about about he could prove he should be treated which included using women's facilities 🤔 Ill see if I can find it

Shakespeare was very good at this; he did a pretty good job of legitimizing the claim of Queen Elizabeth (the first) to the throne of England by making Richard III into a monster tyrant who was "properly" overthrown by Henry of Richmond (Henry VII, Elizabeth's grandfather) - and various other ways too.

Shakespeare knew well which way his bread was buttered!

I don't believe men when they say they had to use the womens spaces to get the treatment they wanted.

Why would the NHS impose a condition that they couldn't check? Its the same with clothes, too.

All it could ever be is a name change and thats why name changes (along with the therapist diagnosis) are all thats required for a GRC.

If its vital that men have to use womens spaces to get the treatment they need, why would it be secret? Wouldnt the government have mentioned it in the last ten years?

The confusion with single sex spaces was always men with a GRC, not those waiting for diagnosis and treatment.

I think if someone said this to me, my first response would be "please define "trans".

I am yet to hear a coherent definition.

I think all of this is TRA trying to bargin with women using an imagined time when we all got along.

Remember the time when we knew instinctively when a man was a transsexual and was only using the ladies because he needed to to get healthcare? And he was lovely anyway.

Dave Hayton is one of those lovely transsexuals. If he is so lovely and only doing it because he had to, and we accepted him, why did he have to rewrite the rules to make his colleagues accept him?

Men were never accepted, we dont know the difference between a transsexual, a transvestite and a transgender, because there isnt a difference. And if we wanted them in our spaces, we would allow all men in, making single sex redundant.

Its just men retconning.

Could very well be! I do feel like I'm missing something here.

He asked questions as to how they "lived as women": did they use the women's toilets? Did they wear "feminine" clothing in public? Did they introduce themselves under a female identity? All that stuff. Of course, the therapist couldn't check that the trans women weren't lying, but that's not the point here. The point is that they were expected to "live as women" in order to get hormones and surgeries.

The very fact that it had to be written into law demonstrates that safeguarding wasn't happening "naturally". If it had been happening, there would have been no need for a judgement to restate it.

And yes, a therapist has no authority to overwrite that now - but they totally did under Stonewall law.

Yes. That's exactly what trans women were told to do if they wanted to get hormones and surgeries: they had to "live as women", which meant being accepted by women in their spaces.

How did the therapist ensure this vital part of the process happened?

Why dont you think it happens now?

What do you think single sex spaces written into law means?

A therapist hasn't the authority to overwrite that.

We are expected to believe that in the dark ages of the 1980s and 1990s, there was no awareness of safeguarding. Or therapists ensuring that they arent in the firing line if a man attacks a women in a toilet.

I don't get it. Those things don't happen now, so why would it be surprising that they didn't happen back then either??

We are expected to believe that in the dark ages of the 1980s and 1990s, there was no awareness of safeguarding. Or therapists ensuring that they arent in the firing line if a man attacks a women in a toilet.

Also that every women knew about the difference between a transsexual and a transvestite, and we welcomed the transsexuals into toilets and into the WI. We felt sorry for them and protective of them.

But we had to be educated via corrie and an actress about trans people?

And the story of eddie izzard being bullied by girls in a public toilet was feasible, too.

Whats going on?

You arent a man who has been told to use the womens toilets.

True, but I read the official protocol in place at the time. It definitely talked of "an observation in real life" during which the person (male or female) had to "live in the desired sex" before there was any consideration of medical treatment.

Everyone is forgetting that if a therapist tells a man to use womens toilets, hes telling a man to follow girls into toilets.

Yes. That's exactly what trans women were told to do if they wanted to get hormones and surgeries: they had to "live as women", which meant being accepted by women in their spaces.

And it's not just therapists who said it: it's judges too, since you had to justify, again, that you were "living in the desired sex" to obtain a sex change on your papers.

Nobody had a problem with that, because nobody cared about women and what they might want or not want. They still don't, for that matter. I'm encouraged by official statements to use the toilets corresponding to my "gender", and so are trans women.