"Our customers won't do this because they aren't DECEITFUL" ??????

[SuitedandBooted]

Yes, it is in the Daily Mail, but

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5565999/Row-female-compartments-transgender-people-pits-Churchills-grandson-against-Mumsnet.html

Just how the hell can Serco vouch for everyone who uses this service?
Women will be perfectly safe sharing a sleeping carriage with ANYONE as there is a button they can press?

Hello Mr Soames, Real World calling!!

alline them with groups who would deny their very existence.

No. We just pay attention to their sex. As males. Because we don't believe in gender. That's all.

How is that even an argument - you can't remove all risk so why bother at all?

"We can't prosecute all rapes successfully so let's just make it legal"! Which seems to be the way it's going.

We can't test for sex in loos and, even if we could, it's no guarantee of being safe.

So women, give up, roll over, open up your safe spaces to every pervert there is and don't even TRY to protect them, because every 10 years you might run into someone that you can't twig as trans.

That's what you're saying. You're saying "one in four women gets raped anyway, so we might as well let any man who wants to have sex with us even if we don't want it"

You're saying we shouldn't even fucking try, we should just lie back and think of England.

Well bugger that for a game of soldiers. Not over my dead fucking body.

No one wants male sex offenders given easy access to victims but throwing the entire trans community under a bus becasue of the 'indignity' of sharing a space with them is unacceptable

But throwing the entire female community under the bus because some men have disordered thinking is fiiiiiiiiiine.

The issue here is that the entire “community” of women and children are having their rights thrown under the bus. Again.
It’s been happening for thousands of years, and we have learned what happens if we don’t shout for our rights. The problem is that people don’t like it when women aren’t nice and compromising. We have been demonised for ever for fighting back.
I have no problem with any person leading the life they want, so long as they don’t harm others. People with penises, even if they are friendly, do harm when they invade the private space of a group who have been harmed by penises. Because those people, with good cause, are frightened of what can be done by a penis, and wish to control the context in which they are exposed to that risk. So, would I share a sleeping room with a transgender women, who I knew, and who I had judged to be a friend? Yes. A stranger with a penis? No, not in any context, ever.
So that means I can’t use a sleeper train. Or stay in a youth hostel for that matter, or stay in a hospital ward over night. My rights are definitely getting trampled.

Just shown my DH some of what passes for reasoned "arguments" on this thread.

He says he will tell his employers that he won't need to bother with an enhanced DBS check, as they don't catch everyone, so he'll just tell them he's nice...........

Stillscreaming am I right in thinking you aren't on Twitter? I am sure I've seen you write here that you don't go there.

I think if you aren't, you are missing a large part of this debate. It comes across as if, in your mind, there are a small number of TRA trolls on there being aggressive and that they count for nothing in this conversation.

I don't have an account Twitter but I do go and look at what people are saying to keep abreast of things. There are large numbers of TRA's on there. A scary proportion of them are aggressive and threatening and demanding. There is also a very large number of young women and some right-on socialist lefty dudes who are serving as their very vocal supporters. If you haven't been on there you have absolutely no idea how huge this is. You have no clue about the strength of feeling or about how extreme many of their threats and demands are. It's a huge movement, it really isn't just a few toxic individuals.

Your posts on here quite frequently seem disingenous, only because you seem to ignore a lot of what is said to you and repeat the same arguments over and over. I told you about the sex attacks in Target in the US where changing rooms are now gender-neutral on another thread recently. Your response was that had nothing to do with trans people but was everything to do with predatory men, this despite person after person on here trying to tell you that that is precisely our issue with self-id. It isn't that we think all trans people are perverts, far from it. It's that some will be and equally some predatory men will take advantage of self-id and access their victims with greater ease.

Between 2006 and 2015 there were 878,707 reported cases of rape in the United States. The YouTube video that attempts to correlate transwomen with violent sexual offenses against other women in restrooms depicts 26 trans women and 2 trans men over 40 years.

You know perfectly well that it's only in the last five or so years, that organisations have started to introduce gender neutral spaces, let men go into women's spaces etc.

You think women can't see what you're doing when you post about 40 years?

More pressingly, this isn't just about the actual rapes and assaults that have taken place. This is about the fact that now women will have to be prepared to accept that this is yet another space where we have to anticipate that we may be raped / assaulted or subjected to other male sexual boundary-trampling; and where we will have to psychologically and emotionally (and sometimes physically) arm ourselves against it.

Our lives are already heavily constrained by the ever-present threat of male violence. We already take longer, lighter, more circuitous routes, more expensive transport options, less convenient but perceived safer parking spaces, less scenic but safer walking and running routes. Some women do not go running or to the gym or local shops after dark; some don't open their front doors. Some deliberately choose clothes or shoes or make up specially to try and avoid male attention and/or violence. Most of the time, we are so used to going through these rituals of warding off male violence, because we've been doing it since the age of 12 or so, that we're not even consciously aware we're doing it.

That ever-present threat, is why sex-segregated spaces like the train sleepers are so crucial: they enable women to go about the world without a male protector and know that there are oases of safety where we can switch off and relax and not worry about men attacking us. They guarantee our freedom. It really is that simple.

Every time a sex segregated space is taken from us, another option for many women is taken. You can argue that it doesn't matter that much: there are other options, we can go on the daytime train, we can fly, we can drive. But if your feminism is about restricting women's options, rather than expanding them, I'm not impressed by it.

I'm looking for proof

Good. Go look for it. Good luck with that. I don't plan to run around entertaining you by trying to provide it.

(By the bye, I'm not particularly pro self id, I'm mostly indifferent to it, I would just like some facts to back up the claim that it's 'dangerous').

Bollocks. You're sealioning. Classically. It's unbelievably tedious.

There has to be a bit of reasonable ground in the middle

Oh fuck off. Giving away bits of our freedom is not reasonable middle ground. It's pushing women out of public space and it's men's rights activism and as an idea, it can go fuck itself.

It is worth stating that 80-90% of violent crime is committed by men. This is why women need men-free spaces to feel and be safer. There is no reason to suppose that transwomen, especially those who have not fully transitioned, will be any less disposed to violence. While they may FEEL different, their biology is the same as a man's.

Even if you think the risk is small, I wouldn't want to be the person who has to explain this to a violated woman.

Young, kinda irritated trans woman here,

Honestly, all we need here is a little common sense.

If I used the sleeper, I'd use a female cabin. Since I'd be at a far higher risk in a male cabin, and I'd stand out a whole lot more. To make things easier for myself I'd probably just pay the extra and have one to myself, but, being a poor student though, I may end up having to share in order to afford it. Usually that kinda thing goes fine, most people realise that I'm trans, but they realise I'm also a pretty normal person and aren't particularly bothered.

idk, all I'm trying to do is get somewhere, same as you.

If someone isn't comfortable with sharing with me because I'm trans then they're more than welcome to ask to switch cabins. I don't mind, it's not like I'd take it personally. I have no intentions of forcing my presence on anyone.

Some trans women do stand out a little more than others. But I do feel that a reasonable line can be drawn between men posing as women and trans women. It's something less defined by sweeping policies and more a case by case kind of thing.

No-one is going to force you into a situation you find uncomfortable or dangerous. If you find sharing with a trans woman triggering or disturbing then you are welcome to switch cabins. That's an option you have on the sleeper if you feel uncomfortable with any passenger.

"By the bye, I'm not particularly pro self id, I'm mostly indifferent to it"

For someone indifferent, you don't half go on about.

Snowbird totally agree with you.

The current situation is fine as it is. The option for mutual choice to be respected, for individuals in the situation to work on a case by case situation, and for individual differences to be respected.

Self ID would change this, and that's what the debate and concern is about. This is not about all women being upset or disturbed at the thought of sharing with transwomen, this is about self ID. Under self ID anyone, with any appearance, could identify as a woman and no one would have the right to challenge no matter what the warning signs that the person's intentions were not honest. Under self ID a woman sharing that for them, personally, sharing with a male bodied person is something they can't do - or they have serious concerns about the person who just identified as a woman - would be committing a hate crime.

That's the issue here. Self ID, not transwomen.

No-one is going to force you into a situation you find uncomfortable or dangerous. If you find sharing with a trans woman triggering or disturbing then you are welcome to switch cabins. That's an option you have on the sleeper if you feel uncomfortable with any passenger.

Snowbird I don't doubt you're simply trying to go on your journey peaceably. But can you understand that many women would find it impossible to say anything if they felt uncomfortable? They might be shy or unassertive, they might feel very uncomfortable at the prospect of offending you. They might be worried about being thought a bigot.

That you pose no risk to women is actually not the point. The point is that women want safe, sex-segregated spaces. We have a right to that. That doesn't mean you also can't travel safely and comfortably.

Kneedeepinunicorns

I studied self ID, because honestly it would affect me a lot. I'm not quite sure I agree with your assessment. But since it's straying from the topic slightly I'll not wade into it too much. It's quite understandably a controversial topic.

Right now, trans people can access services with the gender they self identify, and they already have legal protection. You're not allowed to discriminate against me even if I don't have a gender recognition certificate. That's been the case since 2004? I think.

Self ID is something of a formality, it'd make it easier for me to get a job without having to explain to my employer why my birth certificate and some of my ID doesn't match the way I look and act. But with things like the Caledonian Sleeper, I don't think it'd make much of a difference.

Snowbird, good for you.

Most women don't want to sleep in the same space as you unless they are with other women.

If there were three other males there, all of them identifying as women but presenting as male, and little old you, how would you feel about that? Would you feel safe? Would you be happy to share with those male-bodied transwomen?

If I used the sleeper, I'd use a female cabin. Since I'd be at a far higher risk in a male cabin, and I'd stand out a whole lot more.

Interesting how you'd be at risk more than a woman with a male in their space.

Why is you being at risk of men, more important than women being at risk of men?

It's like 'trans women are at risk of men' and then 'women, don't be silly. Men aren't a risk'.

I mean, you couldn't make this shit up.

I don't want to discriminate against you or anyone Snowbird . I do think it makes a huge difference to move from the current situation to a legal open door that states anyone, of any appearance, including people who obviously do not dress or present as a woman can simply announce they are a woman and expect to be welcomed into a women's space.

I am concerned that the trans umbrella has moved from people living with gender dysphoria to including people who enjoy cross dressing and are autogynephilic. Not all of those people should be freely able to insist on access to women's spaces whether women feel safe or not.

idk, all I'm trying to do is get somewhere, same as you.

And so are the men in the male sleeping compartments. I can understand why you wouldn't feel safe or comfortable sharing sleeping accommodation with them; can you likewise understand why many women would not feel safe or comfortable sharing sleeping accommodation with any natal male person, whatever they say their internal sense of gender identity is?

FencingFightingTorture35

I do understand, it's rather a catch 22 really. It's also why I do my best to avoid these situations. Sleeper cabins are a rather extreme example since it's a confined space people spend up to 10 hours together in, so I can understand why it's quite an emotive issue.

It's a catch 22, I wouldn't be offended if people decided to move somewhere else. Honestly I'd probably rather be on my own too.

What I find irritating is how tiny issues like this tend to be blown out of all proportion. Being uncomfortable with who you're sharing with on a train is something a competant steward can solve on their own. There's no need for an online row over the whole thing.

What I find irritating is how tiny issues like this tend to be blown out of all proportion.

But it's not a 'tiny issue' to the women who are concerned about it.

snowbird
Say you arrive at your sleeper cabin. There's a young woman already there who has been a victim of rape or abuse by a man (many have, see #metoo). She sees you, and says 'hang on a minute I thought this was a women only cabin, i'm not happy about this'. You respond 'I am a woman. don't be so transphobic. Find another carriage if you're not happy'. Can you understand why she isn't comfortable? Can you understand how you would be prioritising your rights over hers? Can you see that it could lead to her being unjustifiably labelled a bigot because she has legitimate based (as opposed to baseless) concerns about sharing with someone who is not the same sex as her? Can you see that sometimes, it might not be about you?

And also, Snowbird, while I appreciate that you personally would not be offended if your cabin-mate decided to move, that's hardly like moving seats on a standard train, is it? If I'm on the sleeper train I want to get on, change for bed, go to sleep, and wake up at the other end. I don't want to have to go hiking down the train at 3am in my nightie to find a guard.

Why are people still demanding proof that transwomen will attack women?

I dont give a shit how the man next to me in the female space identifies or how likely he is to attack me. Transwomen are men. I don't want someone with a penis using female spaces because it would make me uncomfortable and intimidated. The focus should be on the women using that space, not the men who want to use it.