Giggle v Tickle Friday 15th May 2pm AEST

It’s always fun to see the predatory pregnant woman argument being deployed.

But the point you are missing is that its contestable that trans women are a safety risk. It wouldn't be the first time a law was unjust because of erroneous public pressure panic campaigns. Of course you can defer to law but that doesn't make its premise true. Civil rights resistance was built on unjust laws.

In any case, this thread is about Australian not UK culture & law with no such broad resistance regarding safeguarding & consent concerns. So enough of the 'colonising'. You don't hold any cards here.

Mate, if a female chose to negate the consent of those male people who needed that male space to be male that is your burden to come to terms with.

Sorry, a typo

Mate, if a female chose to negate the consent of those male people who needed that male space to be male that is their burden to come to terms with.

I'm surprised that your 9-month pregnant self wasn't ushered to the front of the ladies' queue. I hope you weren't using the single cubicle that's often all there is in the gents for the use of those of us with IBS, but apart from that inconvenience, I think very few men would be that put out by an obviously pregnant woman avoiding the queue. Men don't generally have much reason to fear women, though there are exceptions.

Edited to add: If my IBS was at its worst, I would be very angry to see even a pregnant woman exiting the cubicle I had been desperately waiting outside.

Mate, if a female chose to negate the consent of those male people who needed that male space to be male that is your burden to come to terms with.

The predatory nature comes from male people being considered a safeguarding risk in general to female people for the purposes where female people need female single sex provisions due to female people being in states of vulnerability.

A female person using a male single sex provision without consent and without authority of the providers of that provision is indeed showing behaviour of not understanding safeguarding or consent.

I'm asking you to name the behaviours exhibited by men as a sex category. Can you do that or do you need help?

"A lot" does not equal "every".

"Many" does not equal "every".

HTH.

And you 'know' this because you have met every trans person on earth?

Deluded alright.

In terms of trans identities using the ladies I imagine some will continue to do so because they sufficiently pass

If men are going to continue using women's toilets because they think they "sufficiently pass", that will be a lot of them, as they are deluded. Many seem to think that if they have never been challenged it's because they pass. It's really not.

If male people think that it is merely protesting when they enter a female single sex provision that they are excluded from, then I suggest that they inform themselves of what the law supports which is safeguarding. Safeguarding is also based on consent.

When a male person enters a female single sex provision when they know that they are excluded, it violates consent and safeguarding principles.

There is no excuse or philosophising that can frame that conscious and deliberate violation of consent and safeguarding principles as anything other than a predatory act.

Like no man consented to my pregnant peeing in the men's & therefore I was guilty of being predatory?

'Man' is a broad category where differences in categorisations apply when it comes to threat levels. So you will need to be more specific.

No offence, but but cherry picking instances of a stereotype doesn't do your 'supposed' anti stereotype stance any credibility.

That's not what I asked. Can you answer the question please - I'm sure you are capable of doing that.

By all means report me for 'wrong think'.

Objecting & rebelling against injustice however illegal is hardly 'predatory'. If it were protesters who illegally cause a public nuisance would be considered as predatory too & they just aren't.

Your’e only using the word 'predatory' to invoke emotions of women's abuse but interestingly, a trans man using the men's for the same reasons wouldn't be considered as 'predatory'.

The bad faith framing is breathtaking.

Hi, on this forum Cis is a slur.

When you use Cis you are saying that women are a subset of humans that includes men who say they are women.

We are not. We are just women.

No offence but maybe go look at the pictures these men take whilst in the female toilets. If you really think they are doing it for 'comfort' then I cannot stress how utterly naive you are being.

We understand that you don't understand consent or safeguarding.

I believe that there is a high likelihood that there will be a female person who will correctly identify a male person's sex category regardless of how much extreme body modification that male person has invested in and how they present. It may not happen every single time that male person accesses a female single sex provision, but that is not the point.

I don't consider being more comfortable using a preferred toilet as 'preying' upon others. It might be predatorial of resources/providers but not of individuals. If it were, my 9 month old pregnant self could be accused of 'preying' upon men for using their toilets to avoid the queue in the ladies.

Your usage of inflammatory language of course could be considered as 'preying upon' the ignorant to manipulate their views.

I am sure some male people will outwardly be sufficiently feminine that women won't care in toilets and let them be. I am also sure that most male people will be noticed but women will still not challenge because of the possibility of an extremely aggressive reaction from the male person.
What I am left with is the sour taste that these male people KNOW they shouldn't use the womens, still CHOOSE to use the womens and still berate women when they do object to their presence. Really nasty behaviour and yes, the sign of a predator. If these male people just wanted to pee in peace, they could use the mens. Most men are really nice, namalt and such

“I don't think its necessary to exclude trans women because I don't believe they are a threat to women's safety.”

And yet, they are a potential threat to cause female people harm. As supported by the Labour government of the UK.

Because the law in your country says so. Not in mine.

What behaviour from men do you think makes it necessary to prevent them from entering women's spaces?

I don't think its necessary to exclude trans women because I don't believe they are a threat to women's safety.

Any male person who deliberately chooses to act in a way that ignores female people’s boundaries (in this case as clarified in the EA2010) is acting in a way that harms female people. That seems to be a very good fit with the meaning of the term predatory.

A male person deceiving people about their sex category when their sex category matters is a violation of the consent of those female people needing to know that male person’s sex category.