Kenwood Ladies Pond Authoritarians

Lawks! A female raising her voice! Quelle horreur

Transwomen know deep down that they are men, which is why they fight so hard to get into women's spaces (they need the affirmation that it gives them).

If you are truly confident in your identity then you don't need external validation. I'm confident that I'm a woman which is why on the occasions I decide to use a mixed service (like a mixed pool) I don't get offended.

Thats not the same thing at all

it wasn’t a trans conference, it was a swimming pool

would you feel the same if someone wore a kill all terfs t shirt in the ladies only night at the local gym (im sure you would by the way, bearing in mind one is actually properly a threat of literal violence and the other is not)

And again

Really not a good look for you at all…

I suppose if you go through life thinking an assault by a man is somehow worse than one by a woman by virtue of their sex

You do understand that men can, and regularly do, kill women?

Can you think why the inverse is not true?

This is the only rolling pin nutter I’m aware of, though I haven’t read this thread with much attention. A beautiful, feminine person, for sure.

Well that escalated quickly! Amazing to remember how when the alcove username first posted on FWR just a few weeks ago (s)he claimed to be totally gender critical but just very concerned "we" weren't saying the things nicely enough. That persona flipped pretty fast!

This GC-as-they-come-but to angry flip to retired username is such a funny pattern because they always try but always end up losing control and venting.

It’s certainly one of @alcovecupboards bollocks parallels.

We’ve been round this before.

That’s not screaming. That’s raising one’s voice to be heard, over a considerable hubbub.

It’s interesting that when women raise their voices in this way, it’s characterised as screaming. Kids do it in school “the teacher screamed at me”. No, she didn’t. She raised her voice so she could be heard. I taught for many years and deliberately dropped my voice to a lower register when increasing volume. It’s far more effective.

Detrimentally characterising the natural results of women having different vocal cords to those of men is a subtle form of misogyny.

Why should women always be calm and reasonable?

You do seem to have a very controlling view of behaviour that is appropriate for naice ladies. See also your repeated fixation with the Suffragettes methods.

Should women always stifle their justifiable anger? Because it’s not ladylike?

But they’re “as GC as they come”. Honest guv’ner

Yes I was thinking about that. Also wondering whether "Not letting anyone else speak" was in reality more like "Not allowing herself to be talked over". Research shows a strong correlation between sex and how often gets interrupted or spoken over, and also that a woman speaking more than about 30% in a conversation is perceived by observers as "dominating" it.

Why should women always be calm and reasonable?

It is because my views on this are reasonable that I am not calm!

The suffragette comparison has been seized on as some kind of gotcha.
"Look, women do it too"

Strange

Venice Allan is 100% right.
I’m so grateful to her for standing up on a chair raising her voice to be heard in a busy room for women. Thank you.
I don’t understand what power this pond association group thinks that it has by voting to say do they want men in the women’s pond, changing room, communal shower? Fuck off! It’s not up to them to give away other womens rights. Other women feel differently and can’t use that intimate space with men in. they need that clear expectation that it will be women only to be able to go at all.

The pro men’s rights voters still retain all their freedoms if the women’s Pond stays just for women. The man-pleasers are perfectly entitled to open their own private bathrooms and their private changing areas and back gardens or balconies or whatever the fuck else they have at home, for strange men to do whatever in.. that’s up to them. Obviously that would never happen because they’re not stupid and they do actually know what men can be like. Yet they perform stupidity and not knowing in exchange for the warm glow of feeling kind in a performative vote like this.

Thankfully in the real world; these people don’t get to give other women’s rights away. Thank god the law of the land stil agrees with that.
actually bothering to hold a pointless vote, because people so strongly want to destroy other women’s access to a (rare) something reserved for women, when men already have access to their own equivalent is such a perfect example of this male centring. It smacks very strongly of overt or unconscious male dominance over women. Sad to see women promoting that. Infuriating too see too and I absolutely share the anger Venice spoke. Good for her.

Women’s spaces have always been political.
This is a bit about toilets cut-and-pasted from a history website:

This lack of access to toilets impeded women’s access to public spaces as there were no women’s toilets in the work place or anywhere else in public. This led to the formation of the Ladies Sanitary Association, organised shortly after the creation of the first public flushing toilet. The Association campaigned from the 1850s onwards, through lectures and the distribution of pamphlets on the subject. They succeeded somewhat, as a few women’s toilets opened in Britain.
Then a second group emerged called the Union of Women’s Liberal and Radical Associations, which campaigned for working class women to have public toilets in Camden. In 1898 the members wrote to The Vestry in Camden for toilet access for women in the already existing men’s toilets. However, the plans for a women’s toilet were set back by several years as men opposed the women’s toilets being situated next to the men’s.
In some cases, plans for women’s toilets were deliberately sabotaged. When a model of a women’s toilet was set up on the pavement in Camden High Street, hansom cabs (driven by men) deliberately drove into the model toilet to demonstrate that it was situated in a most inconvenient position.

men opposed the women’s toilets being situated next to the men’s

One speculates why. All reasons seem iffy.

I have provided a reference to EA2010 to support my argument that the only exception that a service provider can apply is a single sex exception. Please provide a reference to support your argument?

I know, those unreasonable women, wanting the vote and all. Unseemly.

This doesn’t show a woman screaming at all.

This shows a woman speaking with a raised voice to be heard in a noisy environment.

If you are referring to the video you posted, this is a rather twisted misrepresentation.

Of course she had raised the volume of her voice. She was addressing a large group of people in a large room, she was not addressing a small group of people close to her in a quiet environment.

If she was speaking to a person who was standing right beside her at that volume, it would be a very different discussion. However, she is not and your then point about investigating her, emphasised because she has children, is not proportionate or even relevant.

Such accusations seem to show your own prejudice in your opinion of her than the evidence you have presented would warrant.

Under the present arrangements, women who by reason of religion or trauma cannot swim with men, have no pond to swim in.

Men who identify as women have a choice of three. They are greedy. And the people supporting them are sentimental, not kind.

She was screaming at people for not agreeing with her - and who certainly didn't wish to listen to it. It is deranged behaviour. She has form, obviously. But will be defended because she hates trans people more than she cares about single sex provision.

And you know that how?