To be terrified about what will happen if the Gender Identity Bill is passed?

[TheWorldAccordingToToads]

I'm a nervous wreck right now

Will it replace sex as a protected characteristic? Does that mean that women will have no legal protection at all?

I'm scared .

Oh dear. Someone else who cannot understand what I think is a clearly stated point. By childrens' toilets what I mean is toilets that children and their parents can use.
As for 'fucking male violence' 'fucking penises' in the gym it is sad that you both categorise people as good or bad based on a single physical characteristic.

Now do you want to have a shot at listing every case of a woman being murdered, raped, or sexually assaulted by a man? The thread will fill up before you get through 1/1000th of them, mind.

Some of us already are fighting to make all spaces safer, as much as we're able to. But as it's predominantly men who make spaces unsafe and men don't seem to be bothered about the issue in the numbers large enough to be safe, our efforts have limited success. Because to point out that, actually, it's male behaviour and male patterns of violence that need to change, you have to get past the outraged squeaks of "but men are victims too!" and #notallmen and people going out of their way to dredge up comparatively rare cases of females committing sexual offences on men to prove we're just as bad. So while we wait for men to get their shit together and realise that change is in their hands, we do what we can to protect ourselves from yet more instances of male-on-female violence. Like standing up against a proposed Bill and the stealth changes preceding it that make it easier for straight predatory males to gain access to vulnerable women - women who are, in many cases, vulnerable precisely because of their experiences at the hands of such males.

Iris

How are you a feminist when you put men's need to be 'included' over the safety and privacy of girls? There is no definition of feminism that I know that does that.

in the numbers large enough to effect change, that should say.

Iris
"it is sad that you both categorise people as good or bad based on a single physical characteristic."

Off you go and please the men. The women here will fight for our rights to safety and privacy

'Nardella himself first became interested in gender-neutral bathrooms after a 9-year-old boy was murdered nearly 20 years ago in a men’s room in Oceanside, California. The boy’s aunt didn’t want to accompany him into the men’s room or bring him into the ladies’ room. She found her nephew bleeding to death in the bathroom, his throat slit by a 20-year-old man who was later charged and convicted.'

There are numerous threads on MN where parents want to accompany vulnerable children into an opposite sex changing room or toilet. There are probably eleventy billion threads about the lack of disabled toilets.

So yes, absolutely, more, safer facilities and plenty of unisex toilets.

However, the only reason to differentiate between men and women is on the basis of biological sex, not gender. Whether or not you think that all toilets should be unisex, there is absolutely no reason to have gendered toilets.

Right, fucking handmaiden talk is making me mad as hell. I'm off to the gym to punch something and will share a changing room with women of all shapes, sizes and sexual orientations.

One sex. No knobs

ahhhbut Mercy Iris identifies as a feminist sothey are.

a very shit one

As for 'fucking male violence' 'fucking penises' in the gym it is sad that you both categorise people as good or bad based on a single physical characteristic.

You have drunk ALL the kool Aid, pal.

Is there any particular reason why you're being so obtuse?

Nobody said that they categorise people as 'bad or good' depending on their genitals. But statistics about male on female violence don't lie I'm afraid.

The ignorance on this thread is making me want to punch something also, Mercy.

But that's the point isn't it, Gah? You can identify And call yourself whatever you want.

I'm a scientist
I'm a brain surgeon
I'm a 3 month old baby
I'm Tom hardy
I'm Jesus
I'm Mary j blige

I identify as a millionaire. Where's my fucking money, please?

Iris Here is my grip. Took me less than 30 seconds on Google.

www.lifesitenews.com/news/sexual-predator-jailed-after-claiming-to-be-transgender-in-order-to-assault

Can I just ask if theyre is no problem letting men in womens spaces, no risk of rape or violence...

Why are transwomen not comfortable using them? Why do they feel threatened?

GOOD. FUCKING. QUESTION.

womanmeanssomething.com/violencedatabase/

You tell us why this is a good thing. Tell us why youre defending it.

That is worth doing I think. So I will.
I think its a good thing that we move beyond categorising people and treating them according to a single physical, psychological, social, cultural, racial or religious characteristic. Especially when this means making negative and derogatory assumptions about them.
I was an RN when HIV and AIDS was identified and was part of the debate about when it was appropriate to take precautions such as wearing gloves when dealing with bodily fluids or using specialised techniques and equipment when dealing with blood. Many people argued for gay people to clearly identified so that we could protect ourselves. I was firmly of the opinion that we should use universal precautions.
Relying on a characteristic to identify risk puts us at higher risk. We later found out that HIV isn''t confined to gay men but is universally infectious. It is similar to abusive behaviour.
If you assume that a man using a female bathroom is a potential abuser then you are negatively stereotyping him. You are demonising a whole sex. You are missing that fact that anyone could be an abuser and so fail to protect yourself.

Policing toilet use according to perceived sex is costly, time consuming and causes upset and embarassment. At what point does a masculine appearance become 'too masculine' to use the toilet? Who makes that judgement? Toilet police? Members of the public?
I think that working towards treating everyone equally, and working towards universally safe spaces is far more important that deciding who qualifies as male or female.
With respect to refuges I have been around some very aggressive, loud and dominating women who have frightened me. I also have that experience in therapy, mental health units and hospitals. It is totally illogical to exclude trans women from refuges and allow these women to stay. If we can live with these then why not with trans women?
We need to use our own, informed judgement when deciding whether to use places and this should be on an individual level not on stereotypes.
Gender is complex and gender identity is highly personal. It can't be decided simply or by others. Asking people to undergo intrusive, painful, risky surgery and treatment to qualify to be called female is morally indefensible.

"If you assume that a man using a female bathroom is a potential abuser then you are negatively stereotyping him. You are demonising a whole sex."

Transwomen say they need to be allowed into women's bathrooms because they are afraid of being attacked in the male one. Are they demonising a whole sex too?

Why are transwomen not comfortable using them? Why do they feel threatened?

Because when they use those facilites they are clearly identified as MENS' toilets. This means that the person concerned is being asked to declare publicly that they are different and are transgender. This raises the liklihood of them being assaulted verbally or physically because they are not conforming to social norms. This applies largely to those who adopt a female appearance. Those men and women who are androgyne in their appearance have a much easier time in general

Gender is complex and gender identity is highly personal

No it's not. It is a cultural construct, specific to geography and historical era, that has no objective reality.

Absolutely treat people as individuals - by not classifying them according to a load of bollocks about gender.

You are essentially arguing for safe unisex spaces, for which there may be many good arguments.

However that has nothing to do with people using facilities, opportunities and services provided on the basis of physical sex on the basis of 'identity'.

This means that the person concerned is being asked to declare publicly that they are different and are transgender.

Which an awful lot about society, and absolutely nothing about whether somebody is male or female.

Stereotyping as a quick and dirty method at assessing situations is normal and I don't apologise for it.

My 6 foot plus son says when it's dark and he has his hoody up some people ( often small older female ones) cross the road, perhaps to distance themselves from him. At 14 when this started to happen he got a bit huffy. I told him straight to get over himself and think why they might be doing that. Now he is mature enough to understand that stranger's point of view.

Trans women are at higher risk of being attacked in general. A man dressed as a woman is more likely to be assaulted in a men's toilet than in a woman's because they are obviously challenging social norms.
In a women's toilet it is less obvious as femininity exists on a continuum. So the breach is less obvious,