"Misandry is the root of all trans fear. Men’s fear of other men. Women’s fear of all men."

But, by definition, sex alone is the only qualifier for a single-sex space! It has to be. That’s the whole point.

Um there is. Its this thing called 'anti discrimination law'. Women can only get exemptions under the conditions mentioned above. Being a women without meeting these conditions isn't enough.

27
(1)
A person does not contravene section 29, so far as relating to sex discrimination, by providing a service only to persons of one sex if—
(a)
any of the conditions in sub-paragraphs (2) to (7) is satisfied, and
(b)
the limited provision is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.
(2)
The condition is that only persons of that sex have need of the service.
(3)
The condition is that—
(a)
the service is also provided jointly for persons of both sexes, and
(b)
the service would be insufficiently effective were it only to be provided jointly.
(4)
The condition is that—
(a)
a joint service for persons of both sexes would be less effective, and
(b)
the extent to which the service is required by persons of each sex makes it not reasonably practicable to provide separate services.
(5)
The condition is that the service is provided at a place which is, or is part of—
(a)
a hospital, or
(b)
another establishment for persons requiring special care, supervision or attention.
(6)
The condition is that—
(a)
the service is provided for, or is likely to be used by, two or more persons at the same time, and
(b)
the circumstances are such that a person of one sex might reasonably object to the presence of a person of the opposite sex.
(7)
The condition is that—
(a)
there is likely to be physical contact between a person (A) to whom the service is provided and another person (B), and
(b)
B might reasonably object if A were not of the same sex as B.
(8)
This paragraph applies to a person exercising a public function in relation to the provision of a service as it applies to the person providing the service.

But then no transperson has any evidence they “pass” apart from anecdotal instances either….

There's no discrimination if there's no disadvantage being the argument. And as yet, men claiming discrimination as a result of trans women been given special treatment is yet to be tested in law. We simply have not got this far yet.

There's no discrimination if there's no disadvantage being the argument. And as yet, men claiming discrimination as a result of trans women been given special treatment is yet to be tested in law. We simply have not got this far yet.

Well there is. Either you allow all males in or you are discriminating against those who do not claim a gender identity. You can’t say a service is mixed sex but exclude some members of one sex. What criteria would you be using? Gender identity? Then you would need to prove a definition of gender identity that would be coherent and able to be applied consistently.

Most “trans people” can be clocked from space so there’s zero “privacy concerns” about them being “outed” as the opposite sex.

You have no meaningful evidence to prove that other than anecdotal instances.

Any context where there's no justifiable exemption.

Any context where there's no justifiable exemption.

I'm simply making the point that sex on its own isn't a qualifier for single sex spaces rather context is.

Most “trans people” can be clocked from space so there’s zero “privacy concerns” about them being “outed” as the opposite sex.

You have no meaningful evidence to prove that other than anecdotal instances.

And in what context do you believe men can use women's spaces?

Most “trans people” can be clocked from space so there’s zero “privacy concerns” about them being “outed” as the opposite sex. In the hearing for the failed challenge by the GLP that argument was thrown out by the judge. It’s not a reason to discriminate against or harass women and girls. It’s not discrimination against a man to say he can’t use a space that’s for women only.

I don’t get people who say gender doesn’t exist.

Gender is a word developed by feminists in the 70s to describe the behaviours commonly associated with each sex. Like wearing a dress, or painting your nails, are feminine behaviours. But you don’t have to be a woman to do them (and doing them doesn’t make you a woman).

Feminists wanted the term “gender” back then because they wanted a way of talking about how women weren’t limited to some of the negative (patriarchal) stereotypes about women. We are not innately obsessed with being pretty, not innately less intelligent or capable, not only suitable for domestic work and childbearing etc - the word “gender” allowed feminists to talk about how masculinity and femininity are shaped by culture. It allowed them to point out that women have a lot of potential to be more than feminine stereotypes.

So while you can’t change sex, you specifically can perform the gendered behaviours associated with with the opposite sex. And obviously sometimes the line between nature (biology) and culture (gender) is unclear.

So women have had to go from arguing that they are not limited to their biological function, to now arguing that their experiences in the world are in fact shaped by their biology (and how they are treated because of their biology).

In other words, women just cannot catch a break.

I still think gender is a useful term though. Men can dress as women all they like: that’s what the word gender makes visible. They are just doing behaviours commonly associated with women.

So again, how will making a service mixed sex benefit those males who say they cannot use male services? Any male would be able to use that service.

Depends on the individual I don't speak for all trans people. Rights wise I believe the concern is a privacy one for trans (the right not to be outed).

There aren't any justifiable reasons why all males should be included because there's no disadvantage to them which anti discrimination law demands.

I'm simply making the point that sex on its own isn't a qualifier for single sex spaces rather context is.

So again, how will making a service mixed sex benefit those males who say they cannot use male services? Any male would be able to use that service.

Depends on the individual I don't speak for all trans people. Rights wise I believe the concern is a privacy one for trans (the right not to be outed).

There aren't any justifiable reasons why all males should be included because there's no disadvantage to them which anti discrimination law demands.

So what exactly are you arguing for?

They don’t believe we are our acquired gender inside,
They still don't understand that a lot of us do not believe in gender at all. It does not exist so it cannot be acquired outside, inside, or both. You may as well be trying to explain that some men have superpowers like Spiderman, it's just a fantasy in their heads albeit a mass produced one (can't think of the proper word).

But services are covered by the equality act in uk so therefore, as the SC has designated for the purposes of the EA woman is a biological female, services can restrict woman only services to females only. If they want to make a service mixed sex, they cannot call it women’s and must allow any member of either sex who meets any other of their joining criteria to use that service. So again, how will making a service mixed sex benefit those males who say they cannot use male services? Any male would be able to use that service.

And when is it justified for a man to be on say a women's ward? Or go in the female toilets? What exactly are those criteria?

As I said being in a state of undress is considered one of the justifiable reasons for special exemption so its depends if the context calls for it.

And what if women (or men) just want a single sex group? Should that be banned, even though there are plenty of places where both men and women are welcome?

I imagine it depends whether its a social group or a service. I doubt it applies to social groups but services available to the public are a different matter.

It’s this, isn’t it? We’re ordered to believe men, no matter what bizarre thing they are claiming. No matter how dangerous it might be to us. We must obey their wishes.

So you think males with a trans identity should be allowed into some female spaces but males without a trans identity should be excluded, or do you think all males should be allowed into some female spaces? If you are only allowing males with a trans identity into some female spaces, what is the reasoning for excluding males without a trans identity?