'I have no problem with trans women using women's toilets'

[CGF]

https://metro.co.uk/2023/06/19/i-have-no-issue-with-trans-women-using-the-loos-im-in-you-shouldnt-either-18978018/#metro-comments-container

Just seen this article and had to share - I can't believe the hateful language used by the author:

'High profile people, who I consider transphobic, like some politicians and former role models – who aren’t even worthy of the term ‘TERF’ (meaning trans exclusionary radical feminist) as it has ‘feminist’ in the name, and that they most certainly are not – have made it their mission to stoke a panic over trans people'.

Contrary to evidence.

That colleague is a woman. If you weren’t told you’d never know she wasn’t born female. She’s been to hell and back and goes out of her way not to attract attention of any kind. She’d stick out like a sore thumb if she went into a male cloakroom. There’s no nuance in your vile views, let alone compassion.

Floor to ceiling cubicles are not the answer in public spaces, people shoot up / have sex etc in them. If you pass out in one no-one can tell. And if an attacker pushes you into one there is no escape.

@grapehyacinthisactuallyblue you're still not getting it. You're still putting the feelings of males, 'genuine' trans or not, above women, who have the right to use a bathroom without a penised male there. Whether or not that person intends to cause them harm is irrelevant.

I don't think any of the nice males in my life would ever cause a woman harm, yet I still don't think they should be allowed to use a woman's bathroom as I realise that could make any women in there uncomfortable.

So what if shes ok with it? I'm not. I don't want men using women's toilets so how does she get to over ride mine and other women's wishes?

No matter what modifications they've done to their body, they are still a man. If they feel uncomfortable in the men's campaign for a neutral safe space. It's not a woman problem to solve.

Living in a fantasy doesn't help anyone.

If you weren't born female, you're not a woman. Sex isn't nuanced, it's binary.

There are male people (men) and there are female people (women). The fact that a small number of them suffer from dysphoria and believe they should have been born the opposite sex to the one they actually are doesn't change that.

Where is your compassion for women who are unable to share single sex spaces with male people?

Ignoring the fact that 95% of them do have a penis, and since we don't carry out genital inspections on toilet doors so it's safest to assume that 100% of them have penises, it is cruel and inhumane to force women to share intimate spaces with members of the opposite sex against their will.

So what is your solution for women who cannot use mixed sex facilities? You feel compassion for the transwoman but not for any women who now have no place to go?

Why not campaign for a set of mens, womens and mixed sex solutions for example?

Totally agree. I think it's much better to address why this TW would feel unwelcome in the men's. Men need to change if that's the case, not women. The TW was born a man and so will always be a man. If anyone has led the TW to believe differently then they've done the TW a huge disservice.

Totally agree. I think it's much better to address why this TW would feel unwelcome in the men's. Men need to change if that's the case, not women. The TW was born a man and so will always be a man. If anyone has led the TW to believe differently then they've done the TW a huge disservice.

Is it splitting hairs to say that a TW will not necessarily always be a man even if they were born one, especially if they've undergone surgery and/or treatment, but more accurately a TW.
Some TW support the preservation of safe spaces for women, and the non admittance of men, and remaining so. For the same reasons many women object.

It's absolutely not splitting hairs, it's a fundamental definition issue.

If this person is a woman, then I'm not.

Either woman is simply a biological fact (then I'm a woman) or it's a matter of identity (then I, and many, many other women, aren't women),

The mock up of female body is simply a mock up, even if the TW has had any surgical alterations and is taking artificial hormones for life. They still don't have a body like mine and can't experience what it's like to live in a body like mine.

Yes it is splitting hairs.

There is a clip of Professor Lord Robert Winston, who should know, explaining how sex is not only about the external genitalia , which immediately show who is male and who is female at birth , but about every cell in the body containing the chromosomes which identify your sex ( even in the very rare situations where genital malformations makes this problematic) , about the chemicals and hormones your body produces according to your sex which govern your body physically so affecting skeletal growth and development and proportion, muscular development, the distribution of fat within your body, the way you speak, the way you move ( female pelvises are designed for pushing out babies, not running) and so on.

No amount of artificial hormone treatment can alter these facts permanently, no amount of surgery can reconstruct a body into the opposite sex. No man can become a woman, no woman can become a man.

This. In spades.

Yep. So you have to choose who you prioritise. That's what it comes down to.

She can spout whatever she likes but when it comes down to it she can't tell the difference between a predator and a genuine trans women. No one can anymore as you just have to take their word that they are not a predator.

Yet we know predators are using this to gain access to women's spaces. It's been reported on many times already. In toilets, in prisons etc.

It is a joke we are even in this situation.

This.

If you redefine the word "woman" to mean someone with a particular gender identity rather than someone of the female sex, that new definition excludes most actual women.

Now yes, some words have multiple definitions. A sole can mean a type of fish or the bottom of your shoe. But we never refer to those things together. You wouldn't, for example, find fish in a shoe factory or use shoe leather in cooking. When you use the word "sole", it is going to be obvious what you mean from the context, and nobody is going to need to clarify whether you mean the fish or the bottom of a shoe. They might use the same word but there is no category of things consisting of, alternatively, a type of fish or the bottom of a shoe.

So why on earth do we need toilets, prisons and sporting categories for female people or, alternatively, male people with a gender identity? What is the point of this category? These are two things with no common features.

But because when we are talking about people, and who has the right to be in which space, there is potential for confusion, and people are going to need to say, "Do you mean female people or male people with a gender identity?", using the same word for both isn't workable.

And the reason they insist on using the same word for both is precisely to create confusion, to pretend that a male person with a gender identity is the same as a female person, and to force team female people with male people with gender identities against their will.

Genuine transwomen will support us in this though, and our right to feel safe in these spaces? I only have one anecdotal, personal example of someone who does.

I can understand genuine trans women not wanting to use the men's loos either though.

But it is already happening though isn't it? I know of one place with unisex toilets and another where they're labelled something like 'toilets with urinals' 'toilets without urinals'

Genuine transwomen will support us in this though, and our right to feel safe in these spaces?

Why would they when they’re shown nothing but hostility, told they’re not women and are simply asking to use the space that accords with their legal status? Support is a two way street.

The problem with that is that it is just a label. It doesn’t alter the basic fact that at least 95 % of TW are genetically intact, and so are physically suited to using a urinal, rather than trying to hit the bowl from three feet away and quite often missing.

But the TW may prefer the non urinal, because they are ‘women’ and women don’t use urinals. So we are back where we started from.

In older loos on French motorways they have toilets which are like a shower tray but with a little footrest to keep your feet of the surface. I suppose they are really unisex ( though unbelievably grim) .

There has been nuance for many years and people like the Transwoman you describe have probably been quietly using female toilets for years, just so you know though we DID notice but as they were few and far between and just went about their business we didn’t really care.
If you want to blame anyone for the lack of nuance now and the perfectly valid views you class as “vile” how about you blame the change that has meant ANY and I mean ANY man can decide he’s a woman now and can access our spaces with no surgery or even a shave.
Feminists aren’t vile, we don’t generally hate or want to kill anyone. We just want them to respect the fact that we want to keep single sex spaces

And to top it all off, any assaults are being recorded as being committed by a women when they are not.

Skews the figures so that eventually they will show that the risk is not with men. Which we know is incorrect.

In most cases, it's the space which doesn't accord with their legal status, since only 5000 GRCs have ever been granted.

And even for the tiny minority who do have a GRC, it's a legal fiction and their presence in women's spaces still compromises those women's rights.

Spaces are segregated by sex not gender anyway. They get a grc not an src. They're still male.

The effect of getting a GRC is that you become legally the opposite sex.

Because gender doesn't exist so becoming legally the opposite gender would have no effect whatsoever.

Yes, that is a total nonsense.