AIBU to think women should not be banned from Social media for asking the question

[Angryresister]

Many women have been suspended from sm for asking the question:
“Do you believe that male sexed people should be allowed access to changing rooms and showers for female sexed people and teenagers?”
Seems like a perfectly reasonable question which we should be allowed to ask

@JoodyBlue

One of the reasons we protect women in society through single sex space is not just to protect against general assault. It is the particular type of assault. Many women can get pregnant. The consequence of pregnancy lasts a lifetime and if a baby is born, then trauma continues into the next generation. It is BECAUSE women have women's bodies that they need single sex space. All other arguments (and there are many) aside. In terms of the vulnerability argument this trumps all for me.

Totally agree. I'm amazed this point isn't made more often in these discussions.

@wildraisins I don't agree that transwomen are more vulnerable for the reason I made above. However, I do agree that transwomen should be protected by society. But protection and acceptance are not what is generally argued for by activist behaviour. Nothing less than complete acceptance of mtf trans people as women will do in the activist lexicon.

What right is denied to transpeople by giving them third spaces?

What rights are denied to women (particularly vulnerable women) by allowing male bodied people into their spaces?

The answer to 1 appears to be based on hurt feelings, the answer to 2 is based on freedoms of minority groups actually being removed because the upshot will be that women and girls who can't use shared spaces have their movement restricted.

I am sorry I can't see this any other way.

Gender reassignment is a protected characteristic

See this is where all that Stonewall gaslighting comes in. They pretend that "gender identity", "gender", and self ID have meaning in the Equality act.

Gender reassignment protection prevents tran women from being discriminated against in comparison to OTHER MALES. Not that they must have female sex based rights, you know because males don't require female sex based rights.

@wildraisins You asked for one example of a TW assaulting a woman in a female toilet, you were given one. In fact the TW in question assaulted two female children, on two separate occasions. Yes wildraisins that's CHILDREN who were sexually assaulted and your response to this was silence, no acknowledgement, no response, nada, proving yet again that you and all those who share your opinion see women and female children as nothing more than collateral damage or human shields for men who must be allowed to do as they please when they please.

Not only do you and others have no understanding or concept of basic, simple safeguarding but you are fully prepared to offer up the safety, dignity and privacy of women and girls to suit and please men.

Ok wild so let's assume all men and TW are equal in their threat level as NAM/NATW are like that.

Shall we do away with segregated spaces totally?

And in answer to your question, research has shown transitioning does not change make male behaviour patterns so a TW has no less chance of offending.

And Dave over the road knows why he shouldn't be in some spaces and unlike many TW is respectful of the fact they are there for protection and doesn't believe he is more special or entitled to tramp all over safeguarding.

And yes, I do know a TW. In real life.

@MichaelMumsnet

Hi all. We've discussed and have reinstated this one in AIBU. Apols for the confusion and the hokey cokey thread - there was a genuine misunderstanding in our virtual office.

Thankyou.

Look, I'm getting a lot of @'s and a lot of hate on here and it's getting overwhelming so I'm not going to be sticking around after this. Perhaps the way I went about this initially was overly provocative, and I'm pretty tired and mentally drained today so I'm not on top form anyway, but trans rights is a subject very close to my heart and one that I feel is so often misunderstood.

In my view, if a man wants to sexually assault a woman, he will find a way to do it. I really think it's neither here nor there whether a changing room is accessible to trans women, and I feel like the real reason why people don't want changing rooms to be accessible to trans women is much more to do with prejudice, misunderstanding and intolerance than a genuine fear of being attacked by a trans woman.

I feel like a better way to tackle violent assaults committed by men on women (ALL women), would be to unite with trans women against violence from men in all of its forms.

But that requires an acceptance that trans women are women - which, in all honesty, is what is really being debated on this thread.

[quote RedDogsBeg]**@wildraisins You asked for one example of a TW assaulting a woman in a female toilet, you were given one. In fact the TW in question assaulted two female children, on two separate occasions. Yes wildraisins that's CHILDREN who were sexually assaulted and your response to this was silence, no acknowledgement, no response, nada, proving yet again that you and all those who share your opinion see women and female children as nothing more than collateral damage or human shields for men who must be allowed to do as they please when they please.

Not only do you and others have no understanding or concept of basic, simple safeguarding but you are fully prepared to offer up the safety, dignity and privacy of women and girls to suit and please men.[/quote]
Yes, this is absolutely what underlies the thinking of people like @wildraisins and others who makes the arguments that they do.

(and I provided a link to a whole lot of examples, yet despite WR's haranguing cries of 'come on! Give me examples' once they were provided WR made no comment on them. Nor has the evidence she asked for changed her view. She's certainly not a ' when the facts change I change my opinion' person.

You are not getting hate wildraisins people are disagreeing with you and explaining why.

Trans people should be protected from violence, but it doesn't automatically follow that they should be sent to women's spaces. How do you protect transmen that way? Or non binary people?

Or are women's spaces just a free for all to anyone who says they're not a man? What about the potential (and actual) harm to women?

And as for this most vulnerable nonsense - the most vulnerable group of people in society are children and infants. And then you've got the seriously disabled, ill, and very elderly, etc. Basically all the people that have zero capacity to prevent or escape harm being done to them. I don't know how anyone has the chutzpah to say anything different.

[quote JoodyBlue]**@wildraisins I don't agree that transwomen are more vulnerable for the reason I made above. However, I do agree that transwomen should be protected by society. But protection and acceptance are not what is generally argued for by activist behaviour. Nothing less than complete acceptance of mtf trans people as women will do in the activist lexicon.[/quote]
Exactly this.

@wildraisins, what you don't seem to get it that no one here thinks the abuse of trans people is ok. They are entitled to equality in society - that means the same equalities we all should have, the right to live our lives without fear of abuse and harm regards of our personal beliefs. You (and many others) have confused that right with the idea that anyone whonis vulnerable in this world can be protected under the kindness of women and their spaces. Your either lack of knowledge of sex, of refusal to accept that gender beliefs have no right to impose on sex based rights is the crux of the issue. Protecting trans people from the crap of society doesn't mean that trans people can place themselves in equally protected womens spaces. We are not the same.

@wildraisins

Look, I'm getting a lot of @'s and a lot of hate on here and it's getting overwhelming so I'm not going to be sticking around after this. Perhaps the way I went about this initially was overly provocative, and I'm pretty tired and mentally drained today so I'm not on top form anyway, but trans rights is a subject very close to my heart and one that I feel is so often misunderstood.

In my view, if a man wants to sexually assault a woman, he will find a way to do it. I really think it's neither here nor there whether a changing room is accessible to trans women, and I feel like the real reason why people don't want changing rooms to be accessible to trans women is much more to do with prejudice, misunderstanding and intolerance than a genuine fear of being attacked by a trans woman.

I feel like a better way to tackle violent assaults committed by men on women (ALL women), would be to unite with trans women against violence from men in all of its forms.

But that requires an acceptance that trans women are women - which, in all honesty, is what is really being debated on this thread.

My question didn't require that - it was "How would you word a policy for a female space that would objectively allow transwomen in but not men? Specifically?

I am at a loss as to how someone can ascertain who is male and who is female unless it is purely down to that person's own statement. And if you think it is all down to that person's own statement, do you think it is possible to lie about it?

I'm not asking if it's likely or probable - is it possible for someone to claim to be trans when they aren't if it is the act of claiming to be trans that makes someone trans?"

You said earlier in the thread it was a shame no-one understood what being trans was (I'm paraphrasing) yet you're too tired to put us all right?

This is about the 10th time this has happened - I ask the question and the person claiming to know gets too tired or disappears or changes the conversation to how awful feminists are. I've not seen a single answer to this policy-drafting question yet.

Gender reassignment protection prevents tran women from being discriminated against in comparison to OTHER MALES. Not that they must have female sex based rights, you know because males don't require female sex based rights.

Yes.

Why has the poll disappeared since it was put into FWR and then put back in AIBU again?
Would be good to know what the percentage is (was 88% YANBU, 12% YABU before it got taken down)

In my view, if a man wants to sexually assault a woman, he will find a way to do it.

I don't think 'men will rape women anyway so we shouldn't even bother to try and have safeguards' is a compelling argument.

I do hear the 'women are going to raped whatever, so why bother enforcing safeguarding' argument quite a lot though, so well done on that.

But that requires an acceptance that trans women are women - which, in all honesty, is what is really being debated on this thread.

Again, @wildraisinsyou are the one who absolutely refuses to engage in this 'debate'. Several time you have been ask to clarify by your own words what essentially makes a transwoman as much of a woman as biological ones. You categorically refuse to answer.

@Idratherberude
The point I was trying to make still stands. If a person is transitioning or has transitioned, they are protected by the Equality Act - fair enough under the heading 'Gender Reassignment' rather than simply 'gender'...nitpicking but fair enough. The gender of a woman - including a man transitioning to be a woman - is protected. Hormonal and surgical interventions are not required. They are protected - rightly - by this act and are free to use the facilities that meet their presented gender.

There is also the really important issue of children being able to learn about and protect boundaries. In recent decades there were a number of campaigns in child safeguarding around the right to privacy and to say no to touch etc. These arguments around the rights of adults do not address these issues often enough. Single sex toilets are where mums take kids for rest, clean up, protection. There is a clear statement that this is a place of safey and there is the option to say "no". Boundaries are really important. They need a prominent place in this discussion. In fact there are so many things to discuss around these issues. It is unfortunate that more media outlets are not asking these questions.

@MrsHusky

No she shouldn't be banned but, its not THAT black and white as some people are saying.

I know a lot of Transwomen, i can assure you, not ONE of them has ANY kind of intention of abusing/raping a woman, and i have absolutely no issue in sharing shower/bathroom space with them, and have done at various conventions where we've used the spaces swimming pools/public toilets.

Personally, there ought to be a 'genderless' facility available for those who dont want to be in the male/female spaces, or lockable cubicles provided now.

There are enough non-binary folk around who aren't trans, but who still dont want to be in their bio-gender bathrooms that society ought to adapt to be inclusive.

I know some trans people too. They’re not predators either. No-one is saying that trans women are more likely to be predators though. They’re saying that self-ID could allow predators to ID as trans women and enter female spaces where no-one would be able to challenge them.

Most non-trans males aren’t predators either. My brother isn’t. My uncles aren’t. I’ve shared toilets with them. But that’s all irrelevant It’s not about me, it’s about all the other women who don’t know my brother and uncles and would feel uncomfortable with them there. It’s about women who can’t share spaces with males for religious reasons. It’s about women who’ve been victims of abuse from men and who are afraid and traumatised by seeing a male however lovely they might be.

It’s about women’s privacy and dignity too.

And no, we dont need “genderless” toilets. Toilets are separated by sex not gender. Most people don’t even have a gender. What we do need is a third space open to people of either sex.

I used to think like you - that my trans friends were lovely and so why couldn’t they use the toilets of the opposite sex. But then someone pointed out that it’s not about me, it’s about all the other women who would have their privacy, dignity and sense of safety threatened.

Exemptions are allowed on the basis of Sex.

Wildraisins what hate have you experienced on this forum. People disagree with you but that doesn't amount to hate against you.

No one has expressed hate towards you just as no one has expressed hate towards trans people. You chose to mention only transwomen which is interesting.

I don't and will never agree that transwomen are women because they are not. They are adult human males. it is not possible to change sex.

The fact that you acknowledge that 'if a man wants to sexually assault a woman he will find a way to do it' does not mean that I have to accept that transwomen are women and all of the consequences that that brings to the sex based protections afforded to biological women under the Equality Act.

@SomewhereInbetween1

That questions incites people to direct their anger at the wrong group. Someone made a point and they're absolutely right that women only spaces are there to protect us from male violence, but trans women are women, and trans women are not the correct recipient of this anger, predatory men are.

Trans women like Karen White Michelle Winter?

To be clear:

Transwomen are a subset of MEN.

If transwomen do not feel safe accessing the facilities provided for their sex, then this is in fact a MEN'S rights issue, and what we have here is men campaigning to access women's spaces because it suits them.

Women's rights are not men's rights to give away.