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.

because he's not a woman.

So, what is a woman?

A woman has breasts and a vagina/vulva - so does a fully post-operative m-f transsexual.

A woman can be unable to have children owing to infertility or being post-menopausal.

A woman doesn't necessarily have periods.

A woman can have XY chromosomes if she is intersex.

Seriously. Not another of these threads. Yawn!

And to those with rigid definitions of females, you are factually incorrect. Not all females have 2 X chromosomes. Look up up Turner's syndrome for example.

Hibble - I'm more bothered about definitions of men. Working penis? Greater strength and mass? Statistically far more likely to commit a violent or sexual crime against women?

Then yeah I'm bothered by it.

Basta, a male trans does not have a vagina for starters. He has a surgically altered penis, or has a hole created by adapting his colon.

A woman is an adult human female. Human males cannot become human females. They can only become surgically created facsimiles.

Intersex people are adult human males or adult human females with a medical condition. They are not trans, they are not like trans, and most of them are becoming pretty vocal about being fed up by having their condition and language stolen by the trans cult.

beep because that's the way things are going. They will have to invest if they want to keep their customers, the same way that others have. Both of my local pools now have unisex changing villages, which were actually designed to accomodate families, but it also has the effect of removing the self ID problem before it began.
There are already problems with communal changing rooms - boys over 8 being taken into women's changing rooms, the odd woman that thinks her male partner doesn't count. Shops found out that communal changing rooms weren't popular way back in the 80's, because they weren't private enough so they installed cubicles.

I really don't get all this hand-wringing about loos. I've lived and worked in places with unisex facilities - just individual floor to ceiling cubicles or rooms like a normal house bathroom, and the sky didn't fall in. I don't actually care whether the person in the next cubicle is male or female and all this agonising seems incredibly stupid to me, as well as cruel to those in transition. Historically, more abuse and sexual activity has gone on between cis males in male lavatories so I'd be more worried about sending a small boy alone into a male lavatory than fretting about who's in the next cubicle in the female lavatory. This whole thing is vile and ridiculous.

You may not care TooManyPaws, but there are plenty of women whose life experience give them a very good reason to be wary, afraid or even terrified of men, or for who their culture, upbringing or spiritual beliefs means they do not wish to/are not allowed to share wtih men and by removing female safe spaces you are denying them access to the public sphere.

Intimate safe spaces for women were fought for for a reason: it was to give them access to the public sphere and to keep them as safe as possible from assault by men in that public sphere.

Many of us were taught, as a young girl: if you're scared by a man, go to the ladies, you'll be safe there.

Just because you don't care, doesn't mean other women don't care either and as long as there is one woman on this planet that is unable to access the public sphere because there is no intimate safe space for her to take care of her needs, I will be opposed to any male, surgically altered or not, in female space.

I haven't read the thread, so sorry if I'm not the first with this.

As far as I remember from previous threads on here, there's no law in England against someone of any sex using public toilets of a different sex, as long as they are using them for their intended purpose.

So it doesn't matter what signs you have on the toilets, people are free to use whichever one they prefer.

Given that, heated debate about this is pointless. (It's also my excuse for not caring enough to read the thread before posting.)

@Basta

Biology isn't 100% watertight. I don't think anyone has ever claimed it is, take any animal or organism on the planet and classify it according to typical features - there will be some who don't quite fit in.

That being said, this is just obfuscating. People who make the argument that we can't define a woman biologically because of women who don't have periods, are CAIS etc aren't interested in offering a solid alternative definition of woman. Biology, despite not being an exact fit for a small number of people, is still a vastly better system of classification than an unmeasurable subjective metaphyiscal belief in gender identity. Either women exist as a distinct class of people with distinct biological features that are common to us. Or we don't exist as a distinct class of people. Take your pick.

Fireasuit
There's no law in England against someone of any sex using public toilets of a different sex, as long as they are using them for their intended purpose. So it doesn't matter what signs you have on the toilets, people are free to use whichever one they prefer.

Yup. That just about sums up the position of most moderate people.

Perfect solution

I couldn't even finish this thread. It is shocking how horrendously bigoted so many responses are. Cubicles for all - no need to separate toilets in anyway

A beautiful mess - fwiw I agree. Now then: where do you stand on prisons?

@ItsNotUnusualToBe I feel that the whole prison system needs reviewing massively and much more money spent on modernisation and appropriate basic facilities (and much, much more spent on proper rehabilitation and prevention).
Where do you stand on prisons?

I agree with all that. But until then: Penises do not belong in women's spaces.

Sorry, having not read the thread, I thought this was about toilets. And then I thought your question about prisons was about prisons. Actually it seems you were expecting (goading) me to talk about 'penises in women's spaces'. Exhilarating to give my first

No probs. I was thinking about the OP mentioning toilets, swimming and changing rooms. As I said, those things don't particularly bother me though I can understand why others feel differently. Prisons was the first thing that I thought of that does bother me though that doesn't affect me. Maybe sport would have been a better area for me to consider. Maybe somewhere else!

My apologies if you feel goaded and a biscuit is always welcome.

And then I thought your question about prisons was about prisons

Well it is. Do you agree with sex segregation in prisons? Sport is also another interesting one to ask.

Loos are such a red herring really. If businesses could be arsed to pay out, we could have unisex loos, all single unit enclosed spaces. But prisons and such, are where it gets much more complicated.

Yet again, another absolute disgrace of a transbashing thread allowed to exist and flourish on mumsnet.

I can only assume the site owners and moderators are anti trans due to the number that are allowed to be started

Completely agree @Bobbydeniro69 reported the thread earlier saying almost exactly that. I can not see what there is to be gained from rehashing the same thing again and again

@TheGoalls unfortunately I do not think there is any point trying to respond to your question as I feel as if the agenda here is too heavily loaded

My suggestion is for men’s loos to be turned into trans loos, disabled loos and women’s loos. Men can go to the loo at home until they learn to behave.

You know, I believe this would actually solve the problem.

Perfect solution...unless you are trans of course in which it is absolutely not perfect because you have to use a bathroom that doesn't reflect your day to day identity.

But this is the norm for MN as the majority here seem to think trans people are 'out for women'. I agree, there are some fucked up examples of this, but all the focus on biological determinants of difference is a bit Victorian.Shall we next start to look at the shape of our heads to decide who is trustworthy?

People who make the argument that we can't define a woman biologically because of women who don't have periods, are CAIS etc aren't interested in offering a solid alternative definition of woman.

That may, generally, be true; however that was not my agenda. I much prefer the OP's opening suggestion as it is at least inclusive of women with most intersex conditions, unlike definitions relating to chromosomes, fertility and/or menstruation.

But what about all those violent, predatory men who won't even be changing a single thing about themselves, so looking and dressing like full-on MEN, who stroll on into the vaginas/xx toilets claiming to be FTM transexuals??

Nope, I won't be happy until there is mandatory genital and genetic testing at every public convenience, and a criminal records check.