to think this is sexism, when no-one asked women, yet women are negatively affected?

[TruthOnTrial]

I am trying to understand how rules in schools, gyms, public toilets and sports have been rewritten, negatively affecting women, without reference to women?

Does it even matter what women think? Does society not care?

Or am I just being incredibly naïve to expect to be asked about things that impact my life and possible risk for me and my DC?

Was there meant to be a link in your post? I don't know what you're talking about.

Is this another trans thread?

Could you not join or even just read one of the 800 million others saying exactly the same thing? Or did you just fancy a wee bit of attention?

If you want another rant about how (you claim) trans people are taking away women's rights there are already numerous threads on the Feminist Chat board.

I suppose it could be said it negatively affects men and boys too seeing that in many schools they have just decided to do away with separating sexes and lumped everyone in together.

I happen to agree with you OP. No consultation of the people it actually affects. Just a load of PC tosh, pandering to a tiny minority of people.

If it's only a tiny minority of people, then the impact on others is going to be even more tiny.

But that reality doesn't make for a good old hateful rant...

This is an example:

A clothes shop has separate changing areas for men and for women with individual cubicles. The shop concludes it would not be appropriate or necessary to exclude a transsexual woman from the female changing room as the privacy and decency of all users can be assured by the provision of the separate cubicles.

Where a transsexual person is visually and for all practical purposes indistinguishable from someone of their preferred gender, they should normally be treated according to their acquired gender unless there are strong reasons not to do so.

Where someone has a gender recognition certificate they should be treated in their acquired gender for all purposes

the equality human rights site

I am thinking this conflicts with the Equality Act though. Am I wrong?

This also:

disadvantaged women in sport?

Or did you just fancy a wee bit of attention

Wow! How hateful from some!

One person can affect many, and although its been a small minority, I am asking because it can and obviously is affecting whole swathes of policies that impact on women.

The OP is whether it's reasonable for decisions to be made on women without their consultation.

It's not an attack on anyone unlike some comments

Please don't make this about trans, it's about the principles of telling women what they can or can't do, what they are expected to accept, and not challenge.

The equality act says this is illegal

I am thinking this conflicts with the Equality Act though. Am I wrong?

Yes, you are. What you have quoted demonstrates a carefully thought-through, reasonable policy that accords with the Act. If someone is indistinguishable from a person of their preferred gender, you won't know or care that they're in another cubicle in the changing room, and you will be in no more danger from them than you would be from anyone else using the facilities.

Yanbu. I don’t want my daughter to share facilities with someone with a penis and potentially in a communal changing room have to see that penis. I also don’t want her to compete in races against someone who is biologically male and therefore has all the physical and strength advantages that entails. End of story. Sorry not sorry.

I think that it is a combination of sexism and homophobia

1. safety of women and girls is secondary to the feelings of men. Their identities being validated is the most important
2. this suits other men, because it’s uncomfortable for them to extend the “man box” to include gender non conforming men
3. isn’t it the job of women to be nice, budge up, shut up, put others first etc?

It seems to be a toxic mix of all of the above.

If someone is indistinguishable from a person of their preferred gender, you won't know or care that they're in another cubicle in the changing room, and you will be in no more danger from them than you would be from anyone else using the facilities.

But that isn't true - there is no evidence to suggest that transwomen have any different offense profile to any other male, which is significantly higher than a female's.

In fact, there's a fair bit of evidence the other way - although it's not known if these are predators taking advantage of the option to trans rather than people with diagnosed gender dysphoria.

In any case, someone coming into the wrong sex facilities is already breaking societal boundaries, which is a red flag for breaking more of them.

Apparently, for women, there is no space between being endlessly nice, endlessly selfless and accommodating and being a bigot. It's like the Madonna/ Whore complex but tweaked and weaponised for politics.

You say ‘no one asked women’. How do you know that? Are you assuming that there are no women on the boards of the companys who have implemented mixed changing rooms? Or no women representatives on the local councils who have decided public loos should be unisex?

I think when you say ‘no one asked women’ what you actually mean is
‘no one asked me’.

And remember that even if they did a poll and asked every woman for their opinion, not everyone would agree with you. I certainly don’t.

yes, you are. What you have quoted demonstrates a carefully thought-through, reasonable policy that accords with the Act. If someone is indistinguishable from a person of their preferred gender, you won't know or care that they're in another cubicle in the changing room, and you will be in no more danger from them than you would be from anyone else using the facilities

I don't buy that at all. If I am in a state of undress behind a curtain with other women and young girls, and a predatory man decides to gain access without my knowledge, we are potentially at risk, we do not know this and are vulnerable, and this is happening in changing rooms, with men filming and posting online, same with accessing women's toilets and posting it on line of women's intimate bareness when lowering themselves on a look with a camera hidden behind the look.

How can we be protected.

I want to see where the women's consultation was?

I mean, all this has been a surprise to me. How can such huge changes not require a public consultation with the parties affected, women and children?

*loo

It isn’t a surprise to anyone over on the Feminism boards - same old patriarchy telling women what’s best.

I think male bodied people in female sport is what will finally make the general public wake up to this, but yes, male bodied people in female only spaces also has the potential to cause serious harm (and in fact already has done, but mostly to women who society cares little about like prisoners).

I went to an event held at a St Johns Ambulance training centre, the loo options were male or unisex.

To me it looked like they had decided thy wanted unisex toilets but didn't want to do any building work, so they left the facilities with urinals as male and opened up the women's to everyone.

To me this is an example of unintentionally negatively affecting women by not thinking things through. I don't have a problem with the situation described by the OP.

Some women are particularly vulnerable and especially need single sex spaces, refuges, hospital wards, prisons.

Separately but related, has anyone actually consulted with non-trans men? My dp recently spent the day at a different office for a meeting. He was not happy about the unisex toilets. A superficial reason and nothing to do with safety but he felt uncomfortable nevertheless, he felt embarrassed about possibly making noises or smells (sorry if tmi) when women were around. He's also said he wouldn't like unisex changing rooms because he's a bit insecure about his body after gaining weight.

St Johns sounds pretty ignorant from what you've said!

Ignorance is no excuse. As an organisation they have to comply with regulations. Equality being a very obvious one.

So, no-one consulted. Only the needs of the few!?

I understand the need for any with physical impairments for specialist facilities, or equally to share their same sex loos, it doesn't raise safeguarding issues, or any issues other than logistics of space potentially. This is different and definitely raises issues

No OP you are not being unreasonable.

If it's only a tiny minority of people, then the impact on others is going to be even more tiny.
// Not really. Changes to GRA could potentially affect many women at some point.

. If someone is indistinguishable from a person of their preferred gender, you won't know or care that they're in another cubicle in the changing room, and you will be in no more danger from them than you would be from anyone else using the facilities.
// This is irrelevant. We know that not every man is a predator but to make things safe we currently have sex segregated spaces by law. A transwoman who "passes" is no different to one who doesn't but as they're both men they should use either a unisex or men's space. Just to maintain the safety of women and girls.

OP there was a consultation last October regarding the Gender Recognition Act however I've no idea what the next steps on that are and when they will happen in England. Things have moved on a bit in Scotland I do believe and I think some proposed changes have been put on hold for the time awaiting further consultation. My knowledge of this is scant however I'm sure another poster will be along soon.

I was consulted, in the sense that there was an open review by my govt about a year and a half ago, and a question form. I found that plus the subsequent paper really useful as it outlined a little more about the potential options.

tellmewhenthespaceshiplandscoz the last update i saw was that there is to be a second consultation. This is to include a focus on how any proposed changes would impact women.