Active discussions

Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Services and spaces should be separated according to gender, not sex

31 replies

BackToLurk · Yesterday 19:19

Because that’s the argument isn’t it? If trans rights activists and their allies accept that no one changes sex, then what they are really arguing for is that any separation should actually be made on the basis of gender.

As I’m a helpful sort, I’ve started a whole thread for people to make that argument. Off you go fellas. Bring your brightest. Make your case. I really do want to hear it. (And I’m not, for once, being sarcastic).

OP posts:
celandiney · Yesterday 23:36

Boiledbeetle · Yesterday 20:00

Live in Hope. Die in Caergwrle.

Sorry. I'll see myself out.

Show quote history

@Boiledbeetle
😂😊 totally non thread related but I say that all the time! (Kentish person who worked in Wrexham years and years ago…)

Grammarnut · Yesterday 23:39

AimsAndObjectives · Yesterday 22:16

How about this as an example, (from the Watershed Bristol)

  • One block of two cubicle toilets. These are designated as mixed sex. Signage on the door indicates they are suitable for women and they are Trans+Inclusive.
  • One cubicle toilet and urinals. These are designated as mixed sex. Signage on the door indicates they are for men and they are Trans+ Inclusive.

Now why are 'two cubicle toilets' (without urinals) labelled as suitable for women. What about the 'women' who still have penises? Wouldn't they perhaps prefer a urinal, rather than awkwardly aiming in the vacinity of a toilet bowl? They are probably going to have a longer queue here than if they used the urinals in the other block. But the other block is labelled men, so the service provider is adding to their dysphoria if they want the urinal option.

Why is the 'one cubicle toilet and urinals' option labelled as suitable for men? What about the 'men' who decided not to risk the almost inevitable disaster of phalloplasty and kept their female urinary system. They'll all be queueing for the one cubicle, when they could have had a shorter wait in the two cubicle option. But again, that option is labelled women and the service provider is forcing them to wait longer or feel dysphoric.

Why not have a block labelled urinals and a block labelled toilets and let anyone use whichever they want? How is organising by gender a better system, if it is not about validation and/or fetish?

Trans women are men and can use the men's. Trans men are women and can use the women's. Or you can provide a couple of unisex toilets. Most people want sex segregated toilet provision and though they may not complain are going to be unhappy. Some will be unhappy enough never to set foot in e.g. the Watershed ever again.
Off piste, if the two cubicles are labelled 'women' and 'trans inclusive' this is the obvious place for trans men to use, since they are women. Ditto the toilet + urinals labelled 'men' and 'trans inclusive as this is the obvious place for trans women to use since they are men. A lot of confusion would end if we used sensible language e.g. trans women are women who identify as male and trans men are men who identify as female. These two word salads are anyway confused by the general public which is perhaps one reason why there was initial support for 'trans women' in women's sport but now it has filtered through that 'trans women' are actually men and the clarification has led to a loss of support (and one wonders whether this confusion was intended).
Two blocks with urinals in one and cubicles in the other would cause problems since men sometimes need to poo and would therefore need to go to the cubicle option, which most women would prefer they stayed out of. Women must partially undress to urinate and this makes them vulnerable to attack in toilets.

Original poster
BackToLurk · Yesterday 23:42

I probably should have said trans rights activists, their allies and others in the OP, as some of the ‘middle ground’ people, also argue for some spaces to be separated on gender.

I do think my initial optimism, that some of the advocates for these ‘single-gender’ spaces would take the opportunity to expand on their reasoning, may have been premature.

OP posts:
VanillaIceIceBaby · Yesterday 23:45

Octavia64 · Yesterday 19:23

Most services and spaces don’t need to be separated at all.

OK. So this is about the services and spaces that do.

AimsAndObjectives · Today 00:00

@Grammarnut I want single sex spaces, not single gender, not mixed sex.

I'm simply putting forward the argument that single gender spaces don't make any sense at all. Anyone who doesn't want single sex spaces should logically advocate for all spaces to be available to anyone who chooses them. The only reason to advocate for single gender spaces would be for validation of TIMs and TIFs and/or to service a fetish.

AimsAndObjectives · Today 00:04

BackToLurk · Yesterday 23:42

I probably should have said trans rights activists, their allies and others in the OP, as some of the ‘middle ground’ people, also argue for some spaces to be separated on gender.

I do think my initial optimism, that some of the advocates for these ‘single-gender’ spaces would take the opportunity to expand on their reasoning, may have been premature.

I think that they are all busy writing to complain to anyone they can think of about the Welsh Gender Service cancelling surgeries and surgery referrals.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page