Darlington nurses win their employment tribunal

Funny how I never feel supported when people remember my existence only to use it as a Gotcha...

Why would a woman be distressed by my, or some other transman's, presence in her changing areas? Sure, she might have a few seconds of alarm if we happen to look particularly male (which is very much on the rare side), but she would very soon realise that we're female, at which point she wouldn't care anymore, neo-penis or not.

Moreover, we were socialised as women, so we know how to act politely and respectfully in order to put others at ease. Also, we would possibly be the ones most upset by the situation, the ones who least want to be there, the ones who want to get out as quickly as possible, and the woman would pick up on that too.

So yeah, very little cause for alarm all in all.

Sky news report on it. Refers to "a transgender colleague" and not a transgender woman.

Victoria McCloud on the report now. Says the supreme court thing is a poorly written judgement.

Moot point as to whether transmen are safe in male changing facilities or loos. Adrian Chiles of all people wrote an article about how using a cubicle instead of a urinal leaves you open to ridicule BC it means other men know you're having a 💩. If shorter males, feminine males or younger males aren't safe in them, why would female men be left alone

And according to whom?

Well I have never heard of The Transmen Gotcha, perhaps I WILL read the SC ruling, hoping it makes more sense than some of the posters on here. @Namelessnelly I never said I wanted transmen to use a male facility, I was asking if the ruling worked both ways( like I clearly said)

i think Kermit must be a closet terf. Or a little challenged. .

If you're on The Right Side of History you don't have to worry about collateral damage. Women, children, whoever, they're expendable if the cause is just.

Why's Kermit talking about never having had a penis? Why is that relevant, if women can have penises?

I don't have a problem with a woman who pretends to be a man in a female changing room - because she's a woman.

I've been in many changing rooms in the NHS and I don't remember seeing someone's sex organs in that time. Changing tends to happen pretty quickly and people keep their underwear on.

Whether a woman has had a mastectomy or other cosmetic surgery or is wearing a packer it's okay for them to be in women's changing room.

So you’d rather females with a trans identity used male facilities? A TIF was raped after being put in a male ward. So by insisting people use the facilities that align with their “gender”, you’re actually putting females with a trans identity in danger.

You know, by this point I'd turn the Transman Gotcha into a drinking game but then I'd lose my job and my family because I'd just be completely pissed out of my mind all the time. I'd never do anything except take a shot.

And I'd still be talking more sense and more honestly than the people who say the unit with the knob and balls is a woman and any female staff who don't want to undress with him are just bigots and phobes and whatever. What a fucking era, eh.

<hic>

Why don't you try reading the SC ruling, which comprehensively addressed the well-worn Transman Gotcha?

Bullshit. Your views of feminists have been made clear - we are 'transphobes' (which is just a new misogynistic way of calling feminists 'misandrists' and 'feminazis'), for advocating for women and girls and rape survivors like me to have female only single sex spaces to get undressed. You attempted a gotcha. Haven't you learned by now? We are not stupid even though you think we are. We've seen your type come and go literally thousands of times over the years. So cut the faux innocent act. You know what you're doing and you know that we know what you're doing. You don't make your agenda half obvious.

What a time to be alive. Well done the Nurses. So pleased for them and all of us.

Jesus, how many times do I have to repeat myself. I was asking if transmen would have to use female changing areas, because I thought this would distress some woman. ( I was using the example of a woman with a 'penis' to explain what could be offensive) I personally do not have, and have never had a penis, or anything pretending to be a penis

Assume I got deleted for saying Kermit is lying, which I half expected. Everyone does know men aren't women, though, so 🤷

You think a woman can have a penis, the word is meaningless when you use it. Anyway, since you think man and woman is just a matter of belief, I believe you're a man. You say you're not, what's the difference?

It is going to be very interesting to see how this all pans out. Because the judgement does allude to the fact that there may be discrimination against another ‘Rose’ if ‘Rose’ was required to undress with other men.

Employers were happy to implement Stonewall law because there was no cost to them, the cost was borne by female dignity and safety. And they got brownie points for doing it in terms of Stonewall ‘good place to work’ awards. Now workplaces will have a number of trans people and support groups vocal about their ‘rights’.
Employers would probably be happy to go back to ‘male’ and ‘female’ facilities because that again is no cost to them. But it is unlikely that trans rights groups will let them do that.

Well, considering you keep saying people can't change sex, why the hell do you insist on referring to me as 'He'? I was born a woman and still identify as a woman. It's getting boring now.

Great news. Bethany was v good on C4 news.

1. A surgically-constructed phallus made of repurposed arm, back, or thigh flesh is not "male genitals".
2. Very few trans-identifying women have crotch surgery. Most of them stop after the double mastectomy.

A judgment can be a landmark judgment even if it doesn't strictly set precedent. Landmark means that it has significant impact across legal, social or political spheres or clarifies a complex area of law.

A judge saying that there is no legal scope to argue that people can access single sex spaces based on gender identity is a landmark judgment. Particularly the analysis of ECHR rights, and its application of the 1992 Regs and For Women Scotland.

This judgment will have huge practical implications for employers even though it is not binding on other tribunals.

I hope that the NHS (and all employers) absolutely shit themselves if a TiM asks to use the female changing rooms/toilets, or actually just does so.

Complete turnaround from bending over backwards to facilitiate TiM and advocating re-education for those who didn't agree isn't it? Hopefully!

Great result today. We owe the Darlington nurses a huge debt of gratitude for all they have done for women.