Row breaks out over event’s single sex policy: bbc

I disagree. There has to be a way back for these poor women who have been brainwashed by the trans cult.

Women’s services shouldn’t be centred around accommodating trans men. However If trans man does want to attend (which let’s face it, will be quite rare as trans men have been socialised as female and don’t have male entitlement) then I applaud services who will include them. I know Beira’s Place does.

I disagree. If it says it is a female space, it should be for all females regardless of how they look/identify. You can't say that you support sex-based rights then reject some women who belong to the female sex, that is hypocritical imo.

Obviously if it is a passing transman, they would need to show evidence that they are in fact female before they use the service (and the other women would need to be told in advance that the individual was in fact female so it didn't cause distress).

‘These judgments all keep pointing towards the middle ground and way around this is gender neutral spaces’

Unfortunately it is not a middle ground when it comes to toilets. It can be very detrimental to an area.

I haven’t got all the answers but I know from my research what happens when you add a private, mixed sex toilet design into a public space. It creates an opportunity for more misuse. This isn’t just a U.K. phenomenon, it’s worldwide. I have examples from Japan, Australia, America, India, Africa….

I don't know why women who have rejected the fact that they're women would want to enter a women only space in the first place.
We can't help everyone, I would say the priority are the women who have been traumatised by a rape and other types of sexual assaults, if women who have decided they're not women can't access the service because the present in such a way they'll further traumatise rape victims, then they need to make other arrangements.
They made their own choices, they can find their own solutions.

Logically speaking, if it is a single sex space then all women should be able to use it regardless of how they present. Saying you must be femme presenting in order to use it means the space is then only for femme presenting females, not all females.

When it is about sexual assaults in toilets, it does matter that these are by men, regardless of how they present. These are by men who look like men, men who look like women, and men who look like men but pretending to be men who say they are women for the duration of being in the women’s toilets.

Stating you must be female in order to use the women’s toilets means, if obeyed, there are no rapists in the toilets. Stark, but true. Good men stay out so bad men stand out.

Also true is that small girls to women in their seventies have been raped in toilets that are open to the public. However mixed sex designs are overrepresented as a design in these cases, whatever they are called: universal/ unisex/ accessible/ disabled/ gender-neutral/ genderless/ inclusive.

Logically speaking, the safest toilet provision is single sex cubicles within a single sex environment.

Edit: I understand the poster is trying to discuss appearance now. But I am responding to this paragraph in terms of how people present rather than their sex. I worry about all women using unisex toilets, however they present.

I think it was presenting it as not allowing male-looking people means only allowing "femme presenting" women that people took issue with.
But largely we agree I think?

It can cause problems when people have set out to deliberately 'pass' or deceive as the opposite sex, but then need to use services based on sex.

Well yes, it's not like you either look genuinely male or you look "femme" and female with no in-between.

Most women probably look just female bodied but from anywhere to butch, masculine, neutral, feminine, a mixture. "Femme" or otherwise doesn't come into it.

Well, its not just us, that was specifically discussed in the SC judgement. If a woman has made herself look very manly with hormones and surgery she may cause distress to other women. The SC was.specifically talking about rape survivor support context iirc.

No you have completely misunderstood what I said. I said that if someone is a female then they should have access to women's spaces, regardless of how masculine or manly they may look.

I disagree with anyone on here who says we can have a single sex space on the basis of biological sex and then think it is ok to exclude transmen or gender-non confirming women.

'Femme'?? you think you have to be 'femme' if you are a biological woman?

That's the whole point about being gender critical - rejecting gender stereotypes like butch and femme as necessary identifiers -
dressing butch or dressing femme as a fashion choice is OK, though I think most of us probably happily hover around the gender-non-conforming middle

The idea that you have to dress in stereotypically 'femme' style in order to be a woman is as untrue as saying if a man dresses in stereotypically 'femme' style he is a woman.

It's important for young women and girls who may be thinking of 'transitioning' to be aware of these two things:
Firstly, it's likely that no matter what they do to their bodies, they'll still look like women in stature, body shape, gait etc, so they won't pass as men at all.

Secondly, if they do somehow manage to look more convincingly like men than most transmen do, they may be alienating themselves from women-only environments, where they will cause at least temporary confusion and maybe distress because they look like a man.
In most cases a second glance confirms that it's obvious they are not men, they are women, and are entitled to be in a women-only space.
But it's something they need to be aware of, be prepared for, and understand the temporary reactions they may provoke.

I can’t think of any women’s group that has femme presenting as part of the entry criteria. Even Survivors Network in Brighton allows anyone male into the women’s rape crisis groups as long as they have that special woman identity.

Sadly Survivors Network excludes women who identify as non-binary or women who identify as men from their women’s support groups and the TRA groups want nothing to do with these troubled people who have often experienced horrific abuse.

It’s down to volunteers at orgs like Sisters Heal to help these women.

You also have to not be drunk, not reek of body odour or urine, not wear a morris dacing costume with bells on the wrists and ankles, and a few other criteria. Not turning up looking like Wolf from Gladiators is one of them. It has nothing to do with being trans.

This is not the gotcha you think it is.

There has to be a logical position on sex versus gender. And so if we choose to differentiate on grounds of sex, that means that we have to keep trans women out and trans men in.

I was at an event last week where I sat across the table from a young trans man. It was completely obvious that this was a biological girl. I'm sure that in a photo it comes across much more masc.

But this person used the ladies!

In my experience, trans men are much less likely to want/need the props of groups and services to affirm their identity.

So if a trans man turns up, the women would be able to tell it's a woman, I think.

Btw the argument that trans women suffer domestic abuse from men and so should share the women's session makes no sense because lesbians are going to be there too, perhaps ie abused by women, and gay men, abused by men, are not allowed in.

It is a service for abused women. The sex of the perpetrator or gender identity of the victim is not the defining factor.

@tropicaltrance can you explain?

I'm not trying to be provactive but I genuinely don't understand what you are objecting to (and I'm not @PeachyDaisy with a failed name change).

This may well be indicative of my own ignorance around language usage in this sphere as I didn't think the notion that all biological women are welcome in single sex female spaces was controversial.

"femme"? You might be the first GC person I've heard using that terminology.

The Supreme Court judgment explained this clearly and in detail. You're very free to go and read it to avoid posting silly comments from a position of ignorance.

supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2024-0042

It’s TRA logic to claim that women’s groups should be set up on the basis of how women present to the world rather than their biological sex.

TRAs are claiming that masculine women are being kicked out of women’s spaces by feminists for not looking female enough, so it blows their minds when feminists actually welcome and include trans identified females in women’s spaces.

Sisters Heal are opening up the possibility of a way back for these women, who may well have transitioned following trauma as a girl or woman.

As long as the individual is open about their trans status and all the women attending are made aware beforehand so it isn’t a shock then I think this is true inclusivity. Not that it doesn’t need careful and sensitive handling but it definitely can be done.

Logically speaking, if it is a single sex space then all women should be able to use it regardless of how they present. Saying you must be femme presenting in order to use it means the space is then only for femme presenting females, not all females.