Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

A point about the "exclusion" of masculine-looking women from female toilets

31 replies

MyAmpleSheep · 30/12/2025 09:38

It is sometimes cited in the press that FWS will or must lead to the lawful exclusion of women of masculine appearance from women's facilities, and that therefore FWS was an own-goal for women.

This is based on 221 of FWS:

Moreover, women living in the male gender could also be excluded under paragraph 28 without this amounting to gender reassignment discrimination. This might be considered proportionate where reasonable objection is taken to their presence, for example, because the gender reassignment process has given them a masculine appearance or attributes to which reasonable objection might be taken in the context of the women-only service being provided.

I believe what is reported profoundly misunderstands what the Justices wrote in that paragraph.

What they are saying is that there may be places where merely having a masculine appearance or attributes will reasonably be objectionable. That might (for instance) be a rape crisis centre or counselling service. It would not necessarily be (and in my opinion would not be) a generally provided women's toilet. Women can cope with women of masculine appearance in a women's toilet. It is not people (women) of masculine appearance in women's toilet that are an issue. It is men, of all appearances, in women's toilet, that is at issue.

The law does not, therefore give "permission" for women of masculine appearance to be excluded from women's toilets. It does give permission for women of masculine appearance to be excluded from (eg) rape crisis centres or counselling services.

That seems to me to be appropriate.

OP posts:
KitWyn · 30/12/2025 11:45

It's very clear to me that this paragraph in the Judgement specifically refers to women who actively choose to take testosterone with the intent to appear male.

It's not referring to the clichéd lesbian with short hair, no makeup and baggy trousers. These women are typically very, very obviously of the female sex. Any extremely rare confusion will be quickly resolved with a short conversation. The female voice and the female response to being challenged will clear everything up quickly.

The Judgement is referring to women with a heavy beard/moustache, possible male-pattern baldness, and a deep masculine voice due to taking testosterone. These women may also have 'packed' their underwear to give the illusion of male genitals. (Or in rare case even have had monstrous 'bottom' surgery to create a flesh tube for urination using arm skin).

Women are very good at spotting trans women; much, much better than men are on average. But some trans men are difficult for other women to clock. The beard and deep voice mean these women's presence in women-only spaces can cause fear and unease.

Yet, men are also entitled to their men-only spaces.Trans men aren't a physical/sexual threat to actual men, but their presence can still cause discomfort and shock. And the trans man is putting herself in danger of assault by using the men's room.

This is an obvious example where single room unisex toilets (such as the typical wheelchair-friendly toilet) are very helpful.

Seethlaw · 30/12/2025 11:19

Edit: the quote disappeared. I was quoting @OpheliaWitchoftheWoods

💯

Our choice, our responsibility.

And I wish TRAs wouldn't remember our existence only when they need to use us as bludgeoning tools 😡

Helleofabore · 30/12/2025 11:10

It has always been bonkers to extrapolate this to women who dress in unisex attire and have a haircut that some people might call ‘masculine’.

There is a difference when exogenous testosterone is involved. It is just bonkers to make points in ways that conflate the two or denies that difference.

Pingponghavoc · 30/12/2025 11:05

gender reassignment process has given them a masculine appearance or attributes

Isn't the key phrase here gender reassignment process.

TRA can't say that GR is meaningful if women can accidentally go through it.

OpheliaWitchoftheWoods · 30/12/2025 09:48

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

Helleofabore · 30/12/2025 09:46

I always thought the wording ‘attributes’ was deliberate (although vague) and referred to female people with surgically created phalluses.

I also thought it referred to female people who had taken testosterone and had those visible effects and the voice. The misusing of that paragraph always seemed rather weak to me like those doing so were grasping at straws.