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

Ah, I go out to walk the dog and come back to find this safely corralled in FWR.

Wims, you must not draw attention to the lady penis, especially to a wider audience who don't realise that most transwomen retain them. (In fairness, this is partly due to long waiting lists, partly to the fact that the surgery is horric, but partly because a non-negligible subset don't suffer from bodily dysphoria at all and are quite happy retaining their penis.)

I see another aspect of the move is the disappearance of the poll, which again is a shame, because whenever you frame the question in terms of "do you want to encounter a naked stranger's penis in your women's changing room?" there's usually a pretty solid 90% for "no".

Mixed sex changing rooms are associated with more than an 800% increase in sexual attacks on women, and also increase the risk of voyerism and hidden cameras.

The vast majority of reported sexual assaults at public swimming pools in the UK take place in unisex changing rooms.
Just under 90 per cent of complaints regarding changing room sexual assaults, voyeurism and harassment are about incidents in unisex facilities.

www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/unisex-changing-rooms-put-women-in-danger-8lwbp8kgk

www.independent.co.uk/life-style/women/sexual-assault-unisex-changing-rooms-sunday-times-women-risk-a8519086.html

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7638537/Cameras-hidden-primary-schools-toilets-FIVE-years.html

@KilljoysDutch

www.policefoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/PF_Research-Brief_JULY-2017-FINAL-1.pdf

"Based on our review of sexual assault complaints in Atlanta,
Dallas, Miami Beach, Miami Gardens and Tucson, before and
after an official amendment to the human rights ordinance
in that locality, we did not find evidence of sexual assaults
taking place in which men, under the guise of being women
or transgender, entered women’s bathrooms to commit a
sexual assault or otherwise victimize women."

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/north-carolina-trans-sexual-assault-raleigh-bathroom-bill-women-charged-a8718796.html

Protect women from other women in the bathroom!

www.vox.com/2016/5/18/11690234/women-bathrooms-harassment

"The claim is a myth: Multiple investigations have found states and schools that have had legal protections for trans people for years have never linked an instance of sexual assault or harassment in a bathroom to trans-friendly policies. (The only bathroom harassment historically related to trans people, in fact, seems to be harassment and discrimination against trans people.)"

These are tiny samples in the US from around 6 years ago. I think the issue is becoming much more mainstream and therefore more open to abuse as more men realise what they can get away with, I feel similar research conducted now would show different results. What about the stats for prisons? I know of several cases in the US where women have been raped.

Transwomen are demanding access to female only spaces and removal of female boundaries.

Adult males are demanding access to female only spaces and removal of female boundaries.

Now these two sentences must either both be true or both be false because they say the exact same thing using different words.

There seems to be people on this thread that can pretend only 1 is true and 1 is false.

@Buccanarab

To answer the original question yes YABU to think people shouldn't be banned for voicing opinions that go against a platforms posting policy.

I'm not sure why we have to go through this every time someone/something is removed from twitter.

Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Mumsent and every other SM platform are private entities and are free to decide what they want to be published on their platforms. There's no obligation for them to allow anyone's views to be aired and they can ban people for whatever reason they want.

Twitter have obviously decided their stance on the trans debate is one of inclusion and if you're not happy with their policies on this go join a, or start your own, platform that supports your views. Although as Parlor demonstrated be careful what you wish for.

I know the discussion has moved on in 22 pages but it's worth reiterating.

They may not have a legal obligation at the moment to allow women's voices asking questions. But they DO have a moral obligation. Are you seriously arguing that these platforms that have become de facto "public squares" for discussion should be able to pick and choose who can give a reasonable and argued opinion? Twitter's stance on the trans debate is not one of inclusion. It excludes any critical voice. How and in what world is that debate?

@Buccanarab

But in this case inclusion is empty rhetoric. How is it inclusion when it's excluding women and removing their sex based rights? Why are women being banned for questioning it? That's not inclusive, is it?

How are twitter excluding women and removing their sex based rights?

They don't prevent women from joining the platform as far as I know, they also don't stop women from tweeting in general. They certainly don't have the power to remove someone's legal rights.

The reason some women are being banned for questioning trans rights is because they're doing it a way that contravenes Twitters "hateful condut policy" (that's what they call it).

It's there in black and white what Twitter will and will not accept, as are the concesquenses of breaching this policy.

If you've an issue with that policy you can try get them to change it but as I said previously they're a private enterprise and free to set their own rules about the content they wish to host.

I'm not arguing about the rights and wrongs of the trans debate, simply stating that social media platform is perfectly entitled to ban whoever they want for whatever reason they want.

You're right they can. It will eventually be their undoing though because the rest of the world does not want to be governed by the pseudo morality of a small number of techy North American men.

Either people will tire of it and leave in droves or governments will start intervening. Merkel has already expressed concern over the monopoly they have.

I'm in favour of single-sex spaces in theory, but I would not wet myself in public rather than take my little grandson into the Ladies. Would you, OP?

I believe this is what's known as a straw man argument.

We all know the common convention is that boys up to the age of 7 go into women's toilets with their mothers.

@Buccanarab

But in this case inclusion is empty rhetoric. How is it inclusion when it's excluding women and removing their sex based rights? Why are women being banned for questioning it? That's not inclusive, is it?

How are twitter excluding women and removing their sex based rights?

They don't prevent women from joining the platform as far as I know, they also don't stop women from tweeting in general. They certainly don't have the power to remove someone's legal rights.

The reason some women are being banned for questioning trans rights is because they're doing it a way that contravenes Twitters "hateful condut policy" (that's what they call it).

It's there in black and white what Twitter will and will not accept, as are the concesquenses of breaching this policy.

If you've an issue with that policy you can try get them to change it but as I said previously they're a private enterprise and free to set their own rules about the content they wish to host.

I'm not arguing about the rights and wrongs of the trans debate, simply stating that social media platform is perfectly entitled to ban whoever they want for whatever reason they want.

There's actually quite a lot of concern from a number of different quarters about the extraordinary power that this private companies now have. They are the main forums for debate and discussion. And they are controlling what debates are allowed on these platforms. And that means they are able to exert considerable influence on whose voices win out in public policy. When they have such reach, and hence such power, just saying, well they are private companies, isn't really good enough. At the very least is blinding yourself to just how much power such companies are now holding. People are right to be concerned about this.

@InspiralCoalescenceRingdown

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

I mean, by this logic - if a man wants to sexually abuse a child, he will find a way to do it, so let's scrap CRB checks on people applying to work with children because most people aren't paedophiles and they're a waste of most people's time.

Abusers have jumped through all sorts of hoops to gain access to potential victims - that's not an argument for removing the hoops.

If you want to make some kind of cost-benefit risk analysis argument, then go for it, but you need to have real, robust, data on the risks to everyone involved. But what if your data says that women have to endure an increased risk in order to reduce the risk to others? Don't you think women deserve a say in that?

Actually, as a post-script - I'm comparing male paedophiles to male rapists above, not trans people, in case anyone feels like telling lies about my post.

Christ it's tiring trying to explain the basics of safeguarding isn't it?

The reason some women are being banned for questioning trans rights is because they're doing it a way that contravenes Twitters "hateful condut policy" (that's what they call it).

I got a temporary ban for asking "what a was was?"

That was literally the question, I was reported and subsequently banned

Do you believe that is hateful conduct?

@Whatsnewpussyhat

Transwomen are demanding access to female only spaces and removal of female boundaries.

Adult males are demanding access to female only spaces and removal of female boundaries.

Now these two sentences must either both be true or both be false because they say the exact same thing using different words.

There seems to be people on this thread that can pretend only 1 is true and 1 is false.

That IS the genius of the "no-debate" mantra. The meaning of words changed by stealth, embedded in law and kids and young people's education, public broadcast and mainstream media, hoping that women won't notice until it is too late. It is clever and supported by the platforms which people use for debate. Thanks goodness for mumsnet.

Maybe you should have looked at cases of assault in the UK.

Ah, but that's a transwoman in a changing room in the UK.

Anyone notice how hyper-specific it is. No evidence that men, pretending to be women or trans, have sexually assaulted a women in the toilets, in several specific parts of the US.

Men would never disguise themselves as a women to sexually assault women.

www.itv.com/news/london/2020-12-18/man-who-sexually-assaulted-jogger-while-dressed-as-a-woman-jailed

No transwomen pose a risk to women in prisons or shelters or any other single-sex spaces.

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/oct/11/karen-white-how-manipulative-and-controlling-offender-attacked-again-transgender-prison

torontosun.com/2014/02/26/predator-who-claimed-to-be-transgender-declared-dangerous-offender/wcm/fc2c70f0-b1a1-41e2-85db-bec9d0012ce5

If anything has happened, it's a completely isolated incident.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/seven-sex-attacks-in-womens-jails-by-transgender-convicts-cx9m8zqpg

Sorry asking "what a woman was?"

I don't understand how the life experience of a woman is related to a trans woman's. They don't have to deal with menstruation, endometriosis, fibroids, vaginismus, female contraception, female infertility issues and treatments, surrogacy, still birth, miscarriage, gestation, birth, breastfeeding, menopause. Being a mother in a society where it feels like you are responsible and to blame for everything, and fathers get to just walk away. And the social, financial and health implications within all of that. They are not victims of FGM, sex selective abortions and infanticide, sex trafficking, segregation, gang and war rape, education exclusion and low social status. They are not the vastly predominant victims of rape, sexual assault and domestic violence. If had to describe what living as a woman is, or feeling like a woman is, it would be in reference to all the above. Even if trans women did experience misogyny or sexual assault after a large amount of cosmetic surgery to mimic the female body, its hardly the same thing as living with it from childhood.

What being a woman is not to me, is the clothes, hair style or makeup I wear; or even many of my social behaviours. They are what I do to fit in as a female in a patriarchal society. Not because I want to do it – but so I meet cultural/social expectations and don’t cause a fuss (another female expectation). These expectations have been imposed on me from infancy and I meet them because it makes my life easier.

Trans women are males who refuse to meet the expectations of their sex. It is brave, I do understand how hard it must be to completely reject the social and cultural expectations, it must take a huge amount of courage. And all people who embark on that journey should be protected. But it is not the same as being a woman and all the incumbent issues that women face, and the law must reflect that.

I got a temporary ban for asking "what a was was?

I got a permanent ban for refusing to retract my view that "transwomen are not women".

Twitter is a misogynistic, stinking cesspit of filth. I'm proud of my ban!

@teawamutu well said.

@InspiralCoalescenceRingdown

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

I mean, by this logic - if a man wants to sexually abuse a child, he will find a way to do it, so let's scrap CRB checks on people applying to work with children because most people aren't paedophiles and they're a waste of most people's time.

Abusers have jumped through all sorts of hoops to gain access to potential victims - that's not an argument for removing the hoops.

If you want to make some kind of cost-benefit risk analysis argument, then go for it, but you need to have real, robust, data on the risks to everyone involved. But what if your data says that women have to endure an increased risk in order to reduce the risk to others? Don't you think women deserve a say in that?

Actually, as a post-script - I'm comparing male paedophiles to male rapists above, not trans people, in case anyone feels like telling lies about my post.

Exactly.

The 'look ladies, you're gonna get raped anyway, so let's remove any safeguarding that is currently in place' argument is one of the most fucking mind numbingly stupid arguments I have seen on this issue. And that is saying something.

These threads are absolutely brilliant for setting out the issues really clearly.

Which is why certain people want to see them stashed away in FWR rather than in AIBU....

I was banned for asking questions of Governor Gavin Newsom's plan to allow male sex offenders to self identify into California women's prisons.

Given at the time (barring murder threats) people were allowed to tweet (quite rightly) whatever they liked criticising the now former President Trump and his administration you have to ask why must criticisms of this particular policy be suppressed?

@blendedmummy

YANBU to think they shouldn’t be banned as that’s a bit extreme, but YABU to be transphobic

How is it transphobic? If anything its biological male phobic which in this instance is fine because we're discussing spaces segregated by sex. Nothing to do with trans. How people identify means fuck all in a place that is segregated by sex. How is this so difficult to understand?

@HebeMumsnet why is this purely a feminist issue. I don’t understand why you’ve moved it from AIBU. It seems a very legitimate question.

[quote NotDonna]@HebeMumsnet why is this purely a feminist issue. I don’t understand why you’ve moved it from AIBU. It seems a very legitimate question.[/quote]
It's been moved back now.

@Jetatyeovilaerodrome

These threads are absolutely brilliant for setting out the issues really clearly.

Which is why certain people want to see them stashed away in FWR rather than in AIBU....

It is exactly the reason. It may also be the first time many women have come to these issues for all of the reasons discussed above. There are lots of resources of support and help for women on FWR, but AIBU always gets more traffic.

@FlamedToACrisp

OK, let's say you ARE allowed to ask the question, “Do you believe that male sexed people should be allowed access to changing rooms and showers for female sexed people and teenagers?”

Firstly, I would say that the phrasing of the question is not neutral, but effectively demands the answer 'no.'

Secondly, if you refuse to allow any male people, what about a pregnant woman with a one-year-old boy? She can't leave him outside, nor can she simply hold it until she gets home.

But if she's allowed to bring him into the Ladies, what about a woman with an adult-bodied son/brother with a serious case of Down's Syndrome which makes him effectively the mental age of 4? He can't be left outside, either.

I'm in favour of single-sex spaces in theory, but I would not wet myself in public rather than take my little grandson into the Ladies. Would you, OP?

You haven’t quoted the question correctly.

The question is whether a man should have the right, not whether they should be allowed.

Currently the law allows any space to be unisex, but single sex spaces are also legal in some circumstances.

The Staniland question is about the removal of legal protections that allow any single sex spaces.

I agree that it isn’t immediately effective if you aren’t somebody who cares much personally about single sex spaces, and that unisex spaces are also necessary.