A woman is a woman

[EmotionSickness]

For those who have been following the Tory conference and general themes of their speeches…

How do you feel about Sunak’s speech?

I know there has been a lot of discussion on here from those who didn’t want to vote for a party that didn’t know the definition of a woman.

Rishi has stated clearly that “a woman is a woman and a man is a man.” While I’d argue that still isn’t a definition, per se, he is appeasing this way of thinking.

So I’m just wondering. Is this enough for you to vote Tory at the next election?

I assume the idea that women don’t make eye contact in the Ladies toilets is because they wouldn’t make eye contact with a man in that circumstance. Transwomen aren’t having a female experience when they go into female spaces, they’re having a male in female space experience.

I'm pretty sure I usually make eye contact with other women in the toilets.

I never do. Shoot in, use the loo, wash my hands, shoot out again. I don’t tend to scrutinise people - places to go, things to do.

Your subconscious is doing that job for you.

We should set up loos for those who don’t mind men and mixed sex

And the women who want to be with their own sex class can have that

No it’s not. My subconscious doesn’t give any more of a shit who’s there than my conscious does. We’re not all paranoid.

It's educated, not paranoid

Just a standard observation from the realm of science

Those who don’t care should get what they want

Women who do care also should

Mixed sex plus Women only (sex not gender)

It's a basic human instinct for women to be able to perceive men, not "paranoia".

Tbh I don’t care if others want to do their own thing and be around males

As long as those who don’t consent get single sex spaces

Yes, me neither. Happy for there to be additional "gender" spaces.

There probably should be additional open gender spaces anyhow as there are so many genders to accommodate that the binary toilet option was never going to work

I'd quite like to subdivide some spaces by horoscope sign, just to mix things up. Or, if that's too many, at least by their elements.

At least one in four women have a history of being assaulted/abused*. Some may have lasting effects, including PTSD, anxiety, or even what could be called paranoia in some cases, it's true.

This may mean that their risk assessment is extra cautious. Or it may mean that they quite logically have looked at the statistics and decided that on balance, they'd just prefer not to share spaces with strange men, given that men have their own perfectly good spaces to use.

A sensible way to approach balancing rights is to weigh up benefits and risks.

What benefit is there to women, opening up single sex spaces to men? Against what risks? What do we lose, if we lose single sex spaces? What do we gain from mixed sex spaces?

There are also just women who prefer not to share with men for reasons of privacy and dignity, and/or religious reasons.

I don't think trying to suggest that women should just 'man up and get over it' really cuts it as an approach, tbh.

*https://criminalinjurieshelpline.co.uk/blog/sexual-assault-data-stats/

@ArabellaScott Shouldn't we be reducing these attacks and assaults?

I find it incomprehensible we focus on the extremely rare attacks on women by TW, ignoring the rapes and murders carried out by non trans men.

It doesn’t matter whether you are a person who makes eye contact with others as you pass in the toilet, are someone who needs the toilet for activities that involve more than just a quick per, or can recognise male cues better than other people, a woman who doesn’t care whether they share female single sex spaces with a male person doesn’t get to dismiss the concerns of those who do.

Aye, great. Once you've fixed male violence, come back and talk to me about mixed sex spaces.

But attacks on women by trans women ARE attacks on women by men. There's not some new third sex.

This is another fallacy being used. One that relies on all or nothing.

Women can work on multiple fronts at the same time and focus on different objectives relating to the safety of women and girls at the same time.

Not only that, this type of argument then seems to keep dealing with safeguarding loopholes reduced to the priority level of only discussing it when numbers of women and children are high enough.

The issue is allowing a particular group of males to access female single sex spaces when there is absolutely no evidence to support those male people having reduced risk of committing sexual offences than any other male in the UK. If you, or any poster, cannot provide that evidence why are claiming that a special group of males should be treated as having that lower risk?

Also, just how many women and girls do you believe is acceptable to be subjected to harm each year before we can discuss it and seek changes?

1 ? 3? 10? 25? 100?

We had poster the other day declare that when over 100 girls and women each year have been sexually abused in female single sex spaces we could talk about it being an issue. Until then it was hateful to do so. Do you agree with them?

Is that your number? Or is your number the usual n+1. ie maybe the next one harmed….

Of course, i ve not said otherwise but these are threads about Trans women and how women are at risk, losing rights etc.

@Helleofabore Strange how we don't get loads of threads on womens safety, abuse, rape stats, the DV murder rate now almost 3 women per week murdered, all this by "normal" men, not a thing, not even a thread.

But mention of a trans women in a toilet and you'll quickly get 40 pages.

I fear an attack (on me or my DD) by a non trans man and the subsequent complete lack of action by the Police.

I suppose you could base it on sex offender prison rates.

When the percentage of male sex, transwomen sex offenders in prison who are trans is greater than that of male sex, sex offenders who are not transwomen (obviously adjusted to reflect their actual % of the population), then we can talk.

Oh shit

Better start talking I guess

Do feel free to start these threads on things you want to see discussed. Suggest actions. Bring it. Be the change!

So, more tone policing about what women discuss, probably many who are actively involved directly in caring for abused women and girls. More dismissing that women can discuss and work on multiple fronts all based on what? MN thread numbers ? About changes that open safeguarding loopholes and increase risk?

Can you produce the evidence on the reduction of risk any male person has of committing sex crimes vs the UK male population? Yes or no? What have you based your analysis on? Numbers of MN threads?

We have had loads of threads on male violence. Usually they are taken over by women saying that their sons and husbands- the normal men- are absolutely lovely.

How many women and girls do you believe is acceptable to be subjected to harm each year before we can discuss single sex spaces and seek changes?

1 ? 3? 10? 25? 100?

We had poster the other day declare that when over 100 girls and women each year have been sexually abused in female single sex spaces we could talk about it being an issue. Until then it was hateful to do so. Do you agree with them?

Is that your number? Or is your number the usual n+1. ie maybe the next one harmed…

Why are these male people seeking access to female single sex spaces?

Is it safety? Can any poster please post the statistics of how many male trans people have been sexually abused in the male toilets used by all male people ?