EHRC code on single sex spaces comes into force on 5th August 2026

Thank you! I hope this has given you something to think about, and that you've learned a little more about what's really behind the objections rather than that "oh they are all just nasty prejudiced bigots" line that so many orgs like to trot out.

No. Women have been forced to have a good hard look at men who are trans with a GRC and those who are trans without a GRC, men who are trans with a penis and those who are trans without a penis, men who are trans because they cannot bear to be gay and men who are trans because they have a fetish. We have concluded that they are all men, and we do not want any of them in our spaces, stealing our stuff or appropriating our words. There is no wriggle room.

Trans people are 4 times more likely to be attacked than any cis woman.

Even if that were true, it’s irrelevant. The law doesn’t permit us to try to identify a group of vulnerable men and hide them in the women’s toilets. It’s just completely incoherent as a policy.

the answer to violence against trans-identifying people does not lie in making women budge up and accept men in female facilities.

And on that! I will say thanks for the debate and leave you all to enjoy your days

@EmpressaurusKitty

But are you seriously saying that you’re only taking about trans-identifying males who have a GRC and have had surgery? I can just imagine how well that would go down in the trans community.

Yeah, that's kind of amazing how supposedly pro-trans people end up spouting things which are considered extremely offensive by the very people they purpose to defend.

You recognise them as female - so what? The law doesn't, the overwhelming majority of the public don't and fortunately you personally don't get to make the law, remove the human rights of women as a sex class or set the rules around access to female only spaces, services and sports.

The Law is clear, women have human rights that must be upheld. Men, whether trans identifying or not are required to respect and adhere to the above. Are you stating that trans identifying men are incapable or unwilling of doing so because that is one hell of a slur on them.

There’s no such thing as “cis” outside your genderist worldview, and that statistic has been debunked many times on this board and elsewhere - I don’t think your portrayal of it is even accurate, before we even get to the unreliability of the flimsy data to answer that question.

In some cases, companies can be leally recognised as people.

This does not mean companies actually are people. It doesn't mean you can suddenly cuddle a company, or marry it, or reminicise with it over a drink.

It just means in some limited legal contexts, the company can act like a person would and have the same rights, liabilities and responsibiloties that a person would.

Because the law can decide to treat one thing as a different thing if it wants to, but it doesn't actually change the thing. A GRC does not make a man into a women in any real sense, it's just a certificate that says the law will pretend sometimes it thinks he is. And the SC ruling clarified where some of the limites to that pretence lie.

What surgery? Do you mean when they undergo elective mastectomies? Or when they undergo that awful removal of skin to roll into some sort of non functional tubes that have dreadful success rates? And infections, and necrotic tissue. The early menopause, atrophy of the uterus as a result of testosterone as well. Bone issues.

Drug taking might be more of an issue. Testosterone (whilst also destructive for a female body in those high doses) does make a person more aggressive. But that is also true for other drug users like heroin etc. Drug users is a separate issue really.

What is there?

I don’t understand what you mean by “legally recognized”.

Trans-identifying people have the option to apply for and get a GRC in order to change their government paperwork to their desired sex. About 8% of trans-identifying people do so.

The protected characteristic of Gender Reassigment covers anyone who undergoes or is proposing to undergo any process with the intention of changing the physiological or other aspects of their sex. With no further clarification in law this legally recognized characteristic covers pretty much anything (other than people who identify as “non-binary”, and part time trans identifiers like Bunce).

None of this makes any difference as to who would use which single-sex facilities.

What legal recognition do you want in addition to GRCs and the PC of GR

All men are more at risk of man-on-man violence than women are.

And lots of subgroups of men face higer risks than the average man.

Do you want to let them all into the ladies for their own safety? Or is it just the men who claim they are women you think shoudl get extra safety, even through outside their own minds they are no more like we are than any other man is?

You need to realise the only reason it has ever been suggested these men need to be treated differently is that they claimed the word "woman" to label their own self image.

That's all it is. All it ever was. The surgery and all that, for the few who even do, comes afterwards. It's a symptom of their feeling like a woman, not the thing that supposedly makes them "a woman".

Their claim of womanhood is not something that can be empirally, objectively detected. It can't be verified. It can't even, as you yourself I think already said, be described. We have no idea if the feeling that one trans "woman" feels very strongly makes him a "woman" is the same feeling another trans "woman" has, or something totally different that two of them both happened to have projected onto the female half of the species.

All we know is that whatever it is, it's not the same thing as being female and I have never ever ever heard a reasonable explanatiion for why we are supposed to be treating such men as if this fact of their minds is somehow completely the same thing as and interchangeable with the fact of our bodies.

No. My favourite line in the Supreme Court judgment was about lesbians not being attracted to certificates.

But are you seriously saying that you’re only taking about trans-identifying males who have a GRC and have had surgery? I can just imagine how well that would go down in the trans community.

My captured organisation is making the necessary changes. There has been some pushback on some minor issues by some of the networks (woman’s and lgbtq). My eyes cannot roll any further when i read their comments in the network though. Lots of signposting to mental health and how stressful this is all going to be. Compare that to when they changed the policy to allow self id into spaces - no announcements just one day sanitary products appeared in the men’s. Everyone just expected to get on with it.

Regarding toilets.

That’s wrong. There’s no such stat.

Show me the examples which don’t involve anecdotal evidence of being shouted out to get out of the wrong sex toilets. For example verifiable evidence (involving transpeople) that have ended up in court in the U.K. please.

Please don’t ignore it. Prove me wrong.

There are some exceptional spaces, like a rape crisis counselling group, where the presence of a woman who looks so like a man that she will render the group inoperable.

In that case it’s both legal and proportionate to ask her to leave. Because the service can’t operate with her there.

However it’s worth noting that most trans-identifying women are still identifiable as women, so even this situation should occur rarely.

other than those exceptional cases, yes. Even a woman who has had her breasts removed and a fake penis-like thing attached to her groin should use the the women’s facilities.

It really isnt if they want to be legally recognised. Is that the difference? Do you think people would be more open to trans women in female spaces if they were legally recognised?

No, really, trans is literally self-declarative. "I am trans" is absolutely all that's needed. If you insist I'm wrong, by all means, explain what else is needed.

Yes, because they are still women

What more is there to it?

A trans person does not just say one day im trans and thats it in order to be recognised as trans there is a lot more to it

No, actually that’s all there is to it.

I think very few men who identify as women do anything to their genitals. Indeed, the fake boobies may heighten their delight in their male genitals. Some do, but it doesn’t make them women any more than men who have had surgery for penile cancer etc.

Males can have paraphilias (fetishes) in a way that women really don’t. They can have a number of them, and they can escalate as they need more and more to keep the thrill. They can escalate in a way that can be a danger for women and children.

‘So the answer is to treat all transwomen as dangerous predatory men?’

Well, just like all other men really. Although, it appears from the prison statistics that proportionately a higher percentage of men who say they are women, are in prison due to convictions sex offences. In comparison to other men who do not say they are women.

So, not less likely than other men to sexually offend. Or to put that into terms, to be dangerous, predatory males.

Even after surgery you would welcome then in women's spaces?

You know thats not true right? A trans person does not just say one day im trans and thats it in order to be recognised as trans there is a lot more to it