Labour’s trans guidance ‘poses danger to women’

The woman pictured does not look like a man, so she is unlikely to be challenged by other women; and as it says in the article it was a man, not a woman, 'a male voice shouting across the vestibule: “The men’s toilets are on this side!' who challenged her.

My experience is at most the occasional 'Oi, this is the ladies'. No heckling, No wrestling. Certainly no spitting, and it's awful that any woman experienced that.

Spitting is not only a horrible thing to do , it is also considered assault or battery.
I suspect the spitters were already nasty pieces of work, and were not hitherto conspicuously law-abiding women who were suddenly prompted to start spitting at other women by a ruling of the Supreme Court.

The article you quote is from 2025 and the absence of anything more recent would suggest that the outbreak of spitting has been dealt with - possibly by the perpetrators being charged with assault, or battery?

Communism is also a philosophical belief.

So by your logic, if I take another's property under my philosophical belief that all property is theft and I am therefore righting a crime not committing one, no one can check the fact of ownership in case it exposes my philosophical belief that a thing that is not mine should be mine 🙄

Oops, looks like Sex Matters are already on the job! I'm late to the party.

So you want sex to be a special category only for trans-identified people? Well, that's hardly fair, is it? Every human being has a sex.

Besides, the argument is academic. Sex is not a special category under the law, doesn't matter what the guidance mistakenly says. I suspect there are knowledgeable people working right now to remove the mistake.

Exactly this.

Anyway, no-one needs to be 'outed' as trans. If someone is asked about their sex, there is always the option to answer 'prefer not to say'. Of course, that will mean that you cannot use that particular facility, but there will usually be a universal option. No biggie, surely.

Although, it only ever seems to happen to people already involved in transactivism in some way. So maybe a kind of 'reap what you sow' vibe.

That's 9 months old. We had a thread about it at the time. That, and JM's wife. It was part of a post-SC ruling 'moral panic' from the TRAs. I don't recall seeing anything more recent. Certainly not 'numerous incidents'.

Claire Prihartini is Jolyon Maugham’s wife. She has two “trans” daughters. She is also very obviously female.

Is this what you mean?

Willmott explains: “I’m the best part of 6ft4in, short hair, don’t wear makeup or skirts. Barely a week goes by that I don’t get a double-take. Women glance in, see a 6ft body with short hair and think: ‘Aah!’. But after the second glance they think ‘Oh OK, it’s a woman.’”

For Willmott, “it’s just something that happens. It used to bother me because we do need to broaden the bandwidth of what a biological woman looks like”.

Caz Coronel is very clearly female.

I'm not sure what happened to Claire Prihartini, but a woman who has had a bilateral mastectomy just looks like a woman who has had a bilateral mastectomy. The scars are a bit of a give away. Also, often, the lack of nipples.

When you pretend that homophobic and misogynistic abuse is genuine confusion about sex, you are just aligning with the abusers.

It surely cannot be beyond the wit of man to come up with customs that make it possible to keep sex private except in those limited circumstances where something depends on it.

In a structured environment, such as a gym, admin can record sex, and make the use of same-sex or gender-neutral facilities a condition of service. No-one else needs to know. Anyone concerned about 'outing' will stick to gender-neutral. Anyone spotting an apparently opposite-sex person in single-sex facilities can complain to admin, who have options such as asking passing trans to stick to gender-neutral, or blackballing rule-breaking non-passing trans.

Unstructured scenarios like public toilets are harder because they've always operated on a basis of superficial appearance + politeness, with the 'politeness' rules being the main thing that's actually changed. It needs to become normal practice again to challenge people who look out of place. They can't be required to provide proof of sex, but they also cannot insist they have a right of entry without it.

This is hard on people with XY DSDs, but it always was, and would be even if trans didn't exist. Trans ideology has just made it harder.

I suspect it's more the combined decades of experience of gender non conforming women on this board.

Interestingly it was man that called her out, not the other women in the queue. Male sensitivities are generally far less subtle and clued in than women's.
The woman ( in the swimming pool changing room) was just aggressive and prejudiced. Thankfully most women are not quite so aggressive.

Exactly @Datun- a problem entirely created by men pushing their way into spaces for women in the first place. I’ve been saying this for years.

Bloody transactivism. This is what it does. You're so on the wrong side of history.

Oh dear…
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/aug/12/ive-been-spat-on-gender-non-conforming-women-tell-of-toilet-abuse-in-aftermath-of-supreme-court-ruling

I said "in my experience", though I've also suggested what could happen should a woman be challenged in a women's toilet or changing room .

That this could possibly happen on occasion is down to the heightened awareness of the issue, and with time and proper implementation going forward, incidents would gradually diminish.

Though, no doubt, activists such as Joss Prior will continue for as long as possible to flout and flaunt ( and photograph) his presence in women's facilities.

There have been numerous incidents reported in the media of cis women being hfor being men including cancer survivors.

Reported in what media, though? Most of these 'incidents' sound very makey-uppy, and the cancer survivor one - was that the wife of a prominent figure in this debate who, despite not looking in the slightest bit like a man, was allegedly challenged because she had had a mastectomy?
That was so unlikely it was tasteless.

Please give a link to a verified incident in the UK where women were 'heckled, wrestled & demanded they leave public toilets'.

There are times where gender non conforming women like me are challenged - 'This is the ladies!' but a second glance reveals what women are very good at picking up, i.e. a person's sex regardless of how they present, so a second glance and a friendly 'It's OK I'm in the right place' from me, and all's well.

Any discomfort or distress barely lasts a minute, and is well worth it to make sure that men are not using women's spaces.

No wrestling, no heckling, no being driven out with pitchforks. Women have made sure that their women-only space is being respected. That's fine. The sky doesn't fall in. Nobody gets wrestled. Nobody threatens litigation, because the whole incident involved women, legitimately using a women-only space. Life goes on.

Stop catastrophising, EmilyinEverton, believe me, it's no big deal when it happens!

'This never happens & I know this because I'm omni present AND its inconvenient to my narrative….'

Having skim read that Sex Matters letter, I really do thank God that we've got Maya, Helen and Fiona on our side.

They're absolutely on it. They can quote chapter and verse of the law and other laws that this might affect, all the context and all the background.

Their brain power runs rings around the government.

Bloody rings.

What is wrong with being discomfited, offended or upset?

If GC's actually believed that they wouldn't be demanding single sex spaces on behalf of women who feel that way being around trans women.

What do you mean by 'being around transwomen'? Passing them in the street, sitting in the pub with them, having them as work colleagues? In any of those situations then being discomfited, offended or upset would absolutely be my problem.

Being forced to use spaces that are specifically for women because of the potential for harm from men, sorry, transwomen, (notwithstanding the body of evidence that women do get harmed in these spaces)? Having opportunities taken away from me in the workplace or in a sports competition by a transwoman? I would have every right to be discomfited, offended or upset.

Obviously there will be many Labour MPs who are pushing for this addition...but as with the Andy Burnham obession, it could well back-fire on them by drawing attention to the obvious fault-lines. Plus, there would be even more public scrutiny and questioning and it would open up the huge divide within the Labour party, and with the 'progressive left' more generally.

I see that there are now voices within the Labour party calling for an actual Left wing candidate to stand in Makerfield - because they don't trust Andy Burnham to actually follow through on many of their ideological demands. Should they do this then they will be handing the crown to Reform.

One of them, and I think the one the pp is referring to, is Claire Maugham - who a) is completely biased and b) looks nothing like a man unless you really need to get to Specsavers, so to say I’m sceptical regards her anecdote is an understatement.

The letter from Sex Matters ended with the unequivocal sentiment that if you think we won't challenge this, you're completely wrong. All the way.

Honestly. You can't ever get around it if it's a single sex service, that's the criteria.

They're trying to say yes, yes we know, but you really shouldn't ask them if it's just a toilet.

There's absolutely no grounds for that, what so fucking ever.

Plus, talk about fucking stoke it right up. It's practically inciting violence.

Creating a situation where both sides think they're absolutely right.

It couldn't have been more fucking stupid and dangerous.

A man stands there, with a woman saying you shouldn't be here, the man says I should and there's fuck all you can do about it luv now piss off.

It's rubbish.

It relies on the idea that for over a hundred years organisations have gone to the expense of providing single sex toilets, but that until now, nobody cared who used them.

Also that it's inherently difficult to judge sex, but that women have somehow been denied the ability to vote, and access education and work.