Has there been an influx of TRAs to Mumsnet recently?

Damn I've been deleted. 😉

A man almost certainly wouldn't believe he was in the right place in the ladies' loo.

A trans woman could genuinely believe (erroneously in my view) that they have a right to be there

Your two statements contradict each other. A "trans woman" is a man. So you could just as easily have said the "man" could genuinely believe (erroneously in my view) that they have a right to be there or the "trans woman" almost certainly wouldn't believe he was in the right place in the ladies' loo.

Which is it?

Care to explain the contradiction?

If they 'just want to pee' why do they need validation?

They can just pee in the gents without using the women in the ladies in the process.

They can legally pee in the gents. If they are harassed they should take it up with establishment.
(Note women are expected to deal with males harassing them in the ladies so they can suck it up).

Women are not support humans who are there for validation purposes.

And feign innocence.

Bangs Head.

I’m entitled to a single sex spaces

Why do the trans woman’s misunderstanding of their rights trump my sex based rights?

Most of them really do 'just want to pee'.

No. They can pee in the gents. They just want to pee in a place adjacent to women, and lacking the urinals that they can use cleanly and conveniently.

They are unwanted. Women's loos are unsuitably equipped for male urination. Witness the mess in train and plane loos, and in homes where the women are not able to instill proper behavior in shared space.

SIT DOWN.

It's a bit more complex than that, isn't it?

A man almost certainly wouldn't believe he was in the right place in the ladies' loo. If a man is there with a particular purpose (helping his very young daughter use the loo, helping his wife who is miscarrying) then they would have an ordinary risk of being an offender at population level. A man in the ladies loo with no reason is probably statistically more likely to be a worry as they would know they have no valid reason (having a wee) to be there.

A trans woman could genuinely believe (erroneously in my view) that they have a right to be there, and in their mind therefore could have a valid reason (a wee) to be there.

One might argue those transwomen are knowingly defying women's boundaries (assuming they are aware of some women's discomfort) and therefore automatically higher risk; however I don't know if the stats bear that out. Most of them really do 'just want to pee'.

What I do suspect is that a trans woman who does not use the women's loo (or other spaces) is likely mindful of their impact on others, doesn't wish to cause worry or upset, and is therefore probably less likely than the statistical average for their cohort to be a sex offender.

Eh?

I’m scared of any man in women’s single sex spaces. I don’t care if he is trans or not - it’s irrelevant to me.

And now we are into the being facetious and deliberately ridiculous.

About rape and sex crimes.

Slow handclap.

When you have to resort to personal attacks, you are pretty much losing the argument. Sure I have read that on here.

How come the statistics aren't bullshit when they are posted by Henrietta Swan, but when I extrapolate those exact statistics to population level they suddenly become bullshit?

It is important to remember that most of the sex offenses women are exposed to are never reported, certainly never prosecuted or recorded.

That report that said 97% of young women experience harassment or assault was probably an underestimate.

We do not want men in our spaces.

Leaving aside that men peeing on the seat or the floor in loos wouldn't even be counted as harassment.

"Sex crimes appear at around double the rate in transwomen"

So I should be twice as scared if a trans identifying man comes into a women-only space, than if any other man enters?

Ah, the question that we never get an answer to, because none of you have one. 'Knowing you are male but saying you are a trans female' is completely devoid of meaning.

The cause seems to have gone from No Debate to If you can't baffle them with 'trans' science bore them with complete bullshit.

I'm having that, thanks, just because it's succinct, funny, and it's too hot for me to think my own thoughts today! 😁

It's just on here with those same faces (such as Bryson) being shown over and over a casual reader could be surprised to discover that only 1 in 1000 transwomen is likely to be a sex offender.

Most people consider that a man using a women's space is crossing a boundary and is, therefore, more likely to be inclined towards sexual offences. The proportion of trans-identified males using women's spaces seems to be much higher than 1 in 1000, your child notwithstanding, so that will add to the perception, rightly or wrongly, that many of them are a danger to women.

Wherever did you get that idea from?

Pointing out that the VAST majority of trans people are law abiding and not sex offenders, whilst continuing to acknowledge that women are entitled to maintain single sex spaces, and that imo trans people need to acknowledge that they are valid but different, doesn't anywhere suggest that I want to do away with "any safeguarding" for women.

It's just on here with those same faces (such as Bryson) being shown over and over a casual reader could be surprised to discover that only 1 in 1000 transwomen is likely to be a sex offender. For example, early in the thread someone suggested that transwomen just want to rifle through the sanitary bins and masturbate. Stats show that almost all don't in fact want to do that. Which doesn't mean that transwomen should access those spaces, regardless.

I have been through this many times on previous threads. I don't have the bandwidth to do so again. Sorry.

@Diverze seems to want to do away with any safeguarding for women, whether the men are trans or not

The percentage of men committing sex crimes is high enough to exclude them without being called sexist.

So if the offending rate for transwomen is higher per head of population then men, then we absolutely should not be allowing them into women spaces either and shouting 'transphobia' if we do, is really grossly unfair.

The issue comes down to the fact that we greatly increase the risk to women by allowing either into women's spaces.

And that it turn comes down to either men budging up to accommodate transwomen or third spaces being available because this is a male issue and not one for women to expose themselves to being potential collateral damage because we point of the risk to women and girls and want it mitigated.

How about an answer to this @Diverze ? I asked nicely, using trans-english.

So whilst one might argue that a transperson committing crime is more likely to be committing sex crimes than a man committing crimes is likely to be committing sex crimes

Sex crimes appear at around double the rate in transwomen

Yes, that's precisely what was being argued: transwomen are far more likely to commit sexual crimes than non-trans men, let alone transmen. So I don't understand what your protestations are about?

So overall both males and transwomen are overwhelmingly not criminals. Sex crimes appear at around double the rate in transwomen, and thankfully that is still incredibly rare and 999 in 1000 transwomen are not being convicted of sex crimes.

Hmmm...but the issue is that the rates of sexual offending for men, including trans-identified men, are way higher than for women, and no-one can tell in advance which men will sexually offend. Which is why women are safeguarded against men in situations where they are vulnerable.

Well, that's a classic tactic of TRAs, isn't it? Ignore anything and everything that doesn't agree with your opinions. Facts are just suggestions for that lot.

Mind you, I like sticking out like a sore thumb in the threads where TPA appears. It's a statement to lurkers in itself.