Cocks and Vaginas

[ChaosAndPiss]

AIBU to think we should just change toilets and changing rooms from male and female to just Cocks and Vaginas (or vulvas if you want)

No self identifying bollocks. If you have a dick you go in there. If you don't you go in there. Simple.

We can remove the lady in a dress picture and the man picture and just put pictures of genitals on the doors instead

this is all said in a joking manner. Mostly.

You choose to believe whatever melodramatic version of reality fits with your narrative Naice. The fact of the matter is that asking someone, "should that gentleman be in there?" is not a crime, not now and not under anything currently imaginable being passed into law. So asking that question because someone is trans, black, gay, pink or a unicorn is never going to be a hate crime. No matter how many posters on mumsnet will try and scare you into thinking it is.

Fairly sure it would be classed as transphobic to ask if that man should be in here, while that man declares he is a woman.

Hate crime seems a bit strong, however apparently a teacher misgendering a pupil was classed as a hate crime (coming fro mermaids, not the police mind)

Canada, who are a bit further down the rabbit hole than us, have actually criminalized using the 'wrong' pronoun, and as such it is classed as a hate crime though my understanding of hate crime is that a crime actually has to be committed..some transactivists say 'misgendering' is literal violence, so maybe this is how its classed as a hate crime? IDK, seems a bit weird and nonsensical to me.

Need to see what exceptions, if any, are built into this new self-ID thing. Seems the Tories are backing off the idea now though and are leaving things as they are, which is great as things how they are are perfectly fine. There is absolutely no need to remove any 'medical' stuff from the GRC process. Given transsexual people will already have diagnosis of sex dysphoria to start with. And women already have an honour system going on where they accept transsexual women anyway. just not any random bloke.

Worrying that organizations such as swim england are adopting the self-ID stance. And saying women who complain need to be re-educated. And also seemingly not actually believing that sex change is possible, given their rules say transmen must cover up their tops, where if they were actually classed as men, they would not need to do this.

Bullying on the basis of trans status can constitute harassment which is a crime, and being that you're doing it to someone because they're trans makes it a hate crime.

Misgendering is not a hate crime.

It's fear-mongering to suggest it is/will be.

Let's not get off topic with changing rooms, this is about the ludicrous subject of toilets.q

So, if someone does ask "Should that man be in there?". What if they're told that although he looks male, presents as male and has changed nothing, but self ID's as a women...Yes, he should be in there. What then?

Oh Jesus, this is absolutely the same as things are now Naice!!!, or how they would be if toilets were "cocks and vaginas" as in the OP. What if tomorrow a man walked into the ladies' and when questioned said they were a female to male transgender person and so were a biological female? Except you firmly believe they're just a perv, what then? Nothing, that's what!

Misgendering is not a hate crime.

It's fear-mongering to suggest it is/will be.

It is in other countries who are more 'progressive' (regressive IMO) in regards to this topic. No reason to think that transactivists will not get it passed here, given they succeeded there surely?

If the police were called, for a hate crime, because of misgendering, then transactivists clearly do already class misgendering as a hate crime, even though it is not in this country (yet, hopefully ever)

You say

Bullying on the basis of trans status can constitute harassment which is a crime, and being that you're doing it to someone because they're trans makes it a hate crime.

But, the man who is claiming to be a woman could take you calling him a man as transphobic bullying, could he not? As you would not call a woman a man. So its clearly as he is 'trans' (though is not trans, but says he is because..self-id)

I want the Tories to come out and say they have kicked this reform into the long grass, rather than just quietly shelve it as they seem to have done. Means that people only need worry if Labour ever get into power (which in their current state is extremely unlikely)

There is still the issue of 're-educating' women who complain about male people in changing rooms, and then whichever other organizations adopt this stupid stance though. But that is not for this thread, as you say.

But, the man who is claiming to be a woman could take you calling him a man as transphobic bullying, could he not?

I think that definition of bullying would be far beyond any rational person, and I do happen to believe our legal system mostly involves rational people who aren't suddenly going to lose their minds over a few transactivists.

"Re-education" is a patronising and minimising suggestion no matter who it's levied at. I saw it only recently implied that at a mtf posting on here could have avoided transition if only they'd had a bit more info on gender as a social construct. Which is also bollocks. So much bollocks on all sides, which is why I can't stand to see it over bloody toilets.

Need to see what exceptions, if any, are built into this new self-ID thing.

If all proposals go ahead exemptions will be removed:

22. We recommend that the Equality Act be amended so that the occupational requirements provision and / or the single-sex / separate services provision shall not apply in relation to discrimination against a person whose acquired gender has been recognised under the Gender Recognition Act 2004. (Paragraph 132)

Also

23. Trans people are being excluded from the health and social benefits of noncompetitive sport because of a misunderstanding of the fairly limited legislative exclusions. We welcome the Minister’s suggestion that a practical guide be produced to better inform sporting groups, including university societies (Paragraph 143)

24. We recommend that the Government work with Sport England to produce guidance which help sporting groups realise that there are likely to be few occasions where exclusions are justified to ensure fair competition or the safety of competitors. (Paragraph 143)

from publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmwomeq/390/390.pdf (see bottom of pg. 81)

Well jelly, looks to me like they wouldn't be removing the exemptions actually.

That wording looks quite clearly like the sport exemption stays. I would accept correction on my reading of separate services provision, but either way with separate services you can still use the "proportionate means to a legitimate end" to legally discriminate where it is deemed necessary.

...but I don't want to get off toilets.

That wording looks quite clearly like the sport exemption stays.

But everyone needs 're-educating' to be helped to realise that there would be very few occasions where exclusions are justified?

but either way with separate services you can still use the "proportionate means to a legitimate end" to legally discriminate where it is deemed necessary.

I don't see how.

Naice, if transpeople people being able to use the toilet of their preferred gender somehow brings about Armageddon I will happily draw the symbols for cocks and vaginas on the toilet doors myself.

Thing is, it won't be Armageddon will it?

It will be vulnerable women choosing not to go swimming/ to the gym/ to public spaces.

Xulishes, I read most of the thread and your responses and I feel so sad you will not look beyond your own narrow viewpoint and listen to the concerns. Such a shame. But I will not try and convince you, that is a lost cause.

Just to say I love the spanish images upthread, would work for me!

My "narrow viewpoint" is that public toilets will be no more risky for women if they continue to include transwomen than if you somehow succeeded in excluding them - as is the premise of this thread.

But if this or any other thread on transpeople in toilets has succeeded in frightening a vulnerable woman out of using a public convenience, or speaking out about a dodgy character for fear of hate-speak, then that will be a shame on you I'm afraid.

I don't think anyone (or many people anyway) wants to exclude actual transsexual women. Just men.

I actually haven't said anything on this thread, besides stating that you aren't listening. So you are jumping to conclusions there.
Nasty reaction btw. Shame on the people raising concerns and nothing on the evidence provided everywhere that self id is very hard to regulate and is open to abuse? Can I join you on your rainbow cloud with unicorns?

To be honest, I am on the fence on this one, I can hear both sides of the story. Gender neutral toilets are a good alternative, with floor to ceiling doors and walls and wash basins. Plus bins for sanitary towels although I think a lot of men will find that disgusting, tbh.

Now communial changing rooms, prisons, sport and tents/bedrooms on schooltrips, now there i have a huge problem with accepting self ID.

I realise when I said "shame on you" it appeared that I meant you specifically sanluca, which I didn't. I know you haven't written on this thread. It was a plural "you", broadly referring to anyone implying toilets will become a war zone and misgendering will become a hanging offence.

I can only agree to disagree at this point. I'm all done here.