Trans/pride flag in children's stickers

[timeforacoffeebreak]

This was included in a pack of squishmallow stickers... why???
AIBU or is this totally wrong ??

Yes. You are correct in pointing this out.

However, why would anyone want to create loopholes in safeguarding for women and girls by allowing any male person over the age of about 8 into single sex spaces?

There is no evidence whatsoever that any male at any stage in transition has a lower risk of committing a sexual crime than any other male person in the UK. So, why should anyone have ever changed the policies to allow a group of male people to have special access to female single sex spaces?

Prior to these changes in policy, a male breaching the boundaries could be asked to be removed by security or asked to stop entering the spaces so that it was then known that any male in that space was highly likely to be harmful. Now, women and girls are told that they are not allowed to question a male person's presence. In one university, women were told that microagressions such as leaving the space was considered hateful and was not acceptable behaviour.

In the USA, and here in the UK, there have been incidents of girls being raped by males with trans identities. When we start asking about how many additional women and girls are acceptable to be harmed before the policies start changing back and maybe laws being created, there already has been additional women and girls raped because of these changes.

A question to anyone who says that these male people should have access to female single sex spaces is: what is your personal number of how many additional women and girls being harmed before policies and laws should be changed to protect all female single sex spaces, including toilets?

is it 1? Well, we have passed that number already.
2? yes, passed that as well.

How many? Because mine was zero. NO additional number of girls and women should ever have been harmed by these changes.

It is not just about safety. It is also about privacy. As I said in my long post, there are many reasons female people need privacy in toilets. Including women with religious needs for spaces without male people.

It is impossible to deny by now that there is a conflict between the demands of some male people and the needs of women across a number of protected characteristics. Solutions need to be found. Denying there is a problem is harmful.

Sorry, Ihaterainbows again this is NOT aimed at you. It is merely giving more background because you were asking questions.

It boils down to consent.

Women have never consented to the social contract being amended to allow males into female spaces.

Any male who enters a space without consent is showing their contempt for women.

consent and respect itsfinallytime

A male person who respects the needs of women and children are not those who are demanding access to female single sex spaces. If the laws and policies were to change, we have to expect that all male people will follow those law and policy changes so that female people will be respected.

The majority of the UK female population do NOT want male people in there single sex spaces. This has been proven in multiple polls on the topic. Just because some women are totally fine with it, they do not represent the majority.

I am very happy to post links to some of those polls here. The growth in awareness about the issues of single sex spaces has also meant that there has been a reduction in the % of women who support a male using single sex space.

It is particularly noticeable when women are told that up to 95% of the male people demanding access to those spaces still have a penis. Previous support was premised on women believing that these male people don't have penises. That has changed dramatically and women are just catching up on the fact.

In one university, women were told that microagressions such as leaving the space was considered hateful and was not acceptable behaviour.

Fuh. King. HELL!

The message this sends to young women is atrocious.

Tell me how this is not a men's rights movement?

“Microaggressions”!

I suppose in a world where defending women’s rights is transphobic, removing oneself from potential danger could be a microaggression.

But not in any sane world, which is a world that I would like to live in.

But remember Mavis, this doesn't effect some posters at all. They and their family have no issues at all with males using female spaces and cannot make the conceptual leap that stickers such as this, plus the literature that is now being used in primary schools (even nursery classes I have read but cannot find that link) and in secondary schools is being used to lower children's boundaries on their privacy.

Even the move to only having mixed sex toilets is ignoring the needs of girls for privacy. It is all being done in the name of inclusivity, when the reality is that it is excluding some girls.

It is all part of the same thing. Lowering the boundaries of privacy and the sexual boundaries of children and women.

The question should always be asked: Ultimately, who benefits from that particular action? Who benefits from creating loopholes in safeguarding for women and children?

I mean this never happens.

Mermaids for example believe consent over life changing medical intervention (puberty blockers, sterilisation etc) can be given by children. Also convincing kids to go no contact, seeking free chest binders without parental consent and they’ve recently moved off Twitter to youth focused Tik Tok. It’s almost curious why charities like these really want to remove the boundaries of women and children…

Not saying anything; just leaving the following link here…

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-63137873

Sorry, 'micro insults'. It amounts to avoidant behaviour effectively.

But yes, that would be hateful and not acceptable behaviour.

Thanks Idle

The Breslow scandal happened around the same time as the communications officer, Darren Mew, was publishing explicit and sexualised shots of himself as a little girl and posing for that six image penis collage for that magazine.

The link no longer works, but if you plug it in to archive dot is it will come up.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ca30ddfe-48e1-11ed-8176-c5c5e560820a?shareToken=bb95ff5e988ec157b06e22f7455eb977

Safeguarding is a disaster for the very groups who are supposedly child support groups. It is reflected in their comms, their literature and their staff selection so no wonder their policy guidelines and recommendations to others is appallingly low standard.

posing for that six image penis collage for that magazine.

This is the only version mumsnet will let me post without deleting me!

Following on to my post about women and girls being told that they can not complain about male people in their single sex spaces, here is an example of how this works.

This university is certainly not the only one that I remember doing this.

Now put this together with a diversity document that says that 'avoidance behaviour' is a micro-insult and is therefore unacceptable behaviour as in at least one other university, and that girls are being discouraged from complaining about mixed sex toilets in their primary and secondary schools and you can see how this is impacting women and girls.

https://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/plymouth-news/university-plymouth-criticised-over-trans-6988584

Have been on another thread and I see it's progressed to the penis collage here

Thanks Boiled!

So, this is Darren Mews who was the communications officer for Mermaids at the time of this pic being published. And the same time that Jacob Breslow was a trustee for Mermaids, and Breslow has dubious beliefs about paedophilia (or I believe it is vilely called - minor attracted persons).

Mermaids! The group who provides many school resources and guides on school policy. But apparently.... there is nothing to be concerned about and this is just hyperbole and not happening.

Now put this together with a diversity document that says that 'avoidance behaviour' is a micro-insult and is therefore unacceptable behaviour as in at least one other university, and that girls are being discouraged from complaining about mixed sex toilets in their primary and secondary schools and you can see how this is impacting women and girls.

I remember an early thing (2015 or so) I was shocked by was a comment by a US army guy that women weren't allowed to wear a towel to go through the showers when there was an MTF there because it was "othering". This is an example of how the oppression of women and girls for the benefit of these males is structural. This view has been pushed by the trans lobby since the beginning.

Other examples of this framing of avoidant behaviour as "othering" and therefore "hate" and oppression:

The posters that instruct women to keep it to themselves when they feel someone is in the wrong place

Women being criticised for using a different toilet on another floor at work because they don't want to use the toilet with males

Women seeing a male in the toilet/changing room and quickly exiting without saying anything

Women asking for female only sleeping accommodations in university housing etc, or insisting intimate care not be carried out by "trans women".

Well the US is quite dire at this time. You have the young women, some girls, who are in the sorority house and have been told that they have to accept the male sitting there in their sorority house cannot be removed despite them sitting there with a cushion to hide their erection because they are allowed to watch the young women in various stages of dressing etc.

This is all filtering down to some primary and secondary school aged girls (and Girl Guides) who are being told that they also have to accept that male student in their accommodation while on away trips. All under the guise of inclusive behaviour.

And we then also have the female university athletes stating they were told if they complained about the male athlete watching them get into their compression suits for competition (some take 45 minutes of wriggling to get into those suits) that they would be off the team and jeopardise their university place.

I am not quite sure how people can understand that all this messaging is happening, and that our primary school children are being told that they have to be inclusive of people even when they are in states of vulnerability, because it is all about tolerance and kindness and compassion. Whereas, it really isn't kind, tolerant or compassionate to teach children to have lower sexual boundaries and that their desire and need for privacy comes second to someone else so they should learn to deal with it.

But I think some people like to believe that it isn't happening, that there is no impact on children and that the messaging is completely different to that of accepting LGB people for who they are.

LGB people did not make demands of society to create special groups for safeguarding purposes.

Using LGB rights as a comparison here is not a direct comparison at all. Yet I have seen some posters attempt to do this. It is a false comparator to the safeguarding issue.

The main faction that compares trans people to POC is the the trans lobby - Peter Tatchell being a serial offender. And, as a POC myself, I am bloody sick of it. Stop using us and the real struggles faced by us as your human shield. Generally critical feminism has got nothing to do with racism. The "struggles" of trans people do not exist - they literally have every right every single white, straight male has ever had throughout history, and. then some. So stop comparing these people to me and other POC.

It's astonishing isn't it. I have to confess at times I am gritting my teeth when I read some comments (on here and other forums) from the 'what's the big deal' brigade. I am not sure if they really that naïve or if they are being deliberately disingenuous.

I am starting to think that anyone who can't/ won't see the impact on women's rights is either trans themselves or has a close family member/ likely child who trans identifies.

Oh dear. Sorry.

'that the messaging is completely different to that of accepting LGB people who they are'

Should be 'that the messaging is the same as that of accepting LGB people for who they are'. I had not edited something I said as accurate as I wanted and I stuffed it up completely.

The point is, that the messaging is NOT the same as accepting LGB people and it is erroneous to claim that it is as a comparison.

Ha ha ha! His FACE in those photos!!!

Well, it’d be funny if it wasn’t so fucking disturbing.

I know! And You do not want to see the uncensored version that I have that mumsnet won't let me post!

You do know male paramedics have been convicted of rape don’t you?

Obviously once they have been convicted they lose their job (and i assume suspended when charged) but they are just as much a danger to women before they are charged, tried and convicted