To wonder why some women Aren’t upset about men being in their safe spaces?

[Lion400]

Why would we make it easier for men to be in our safe spaces? Don’t twist my words. This is not about being anti trans women - this is about men not being in women’s safe spaces. Why should women have to allow men in so as to ‘save their feelings’? What about women’s safety, feelings and wishes?

Given stories such as these - examples only but they quite clearly demonstrate the issue. As if anyone needs this. The stats are easily available.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/shana-grice-murder-stalking-police-sussex-a8862611.html?fbclid=IwAR0bJYAs849f0I9VFv7tHw3aguB5C8HZi3yyOMr4LxxIRURs0HBxrc_TxzE

And now the disappointing John Lewis (aka Stonewall) disaster.

https://www.jamesesses.com/p/the-trans-takeover-of-john-lewis

Who puts women first, apart from JKR and friends. It’s a limited list.

Trans women that quietly want to live their lives don’t bother me. What bothers me about women’s spaces being opened up to men is that if gives any males bad actors an excuse to waltz right in and you are a bigot if you question them. This is the danger allowing trans women into women’s spaces poses.

if I see a male in the ladies, I get out ASAP.

It might be a trans man who you seem to think has every right to be there - how would you know?

Excuse me while I go and find my tattoo gun...

I think it's horrific to use this stalker case as leverage. It is yet again deliberately conflating transwomen and predatory males. This man was not trans. What he did is irrelevant to this debate. A truly pathetic effort.

@ShiteRider What don't you follow? You are trying to divert to say that we have to accept women who identify as trans so any man could just pretend to be those women. I'm saying I don't have a problem with them using the mens, they pose no risk to me or those men. Men of course can object and I wouldn't blame them. It's still not an argument for ANY male to use women's spaces. Regardless of identity.

I agree.

Excellent post.

This is an odd response to a poster who said her own sister was raped in the toilets - I think leaving it there's someone she thinks is a man there is a perfectly valid response, and if a tiny percentage might be biologically female surely she is still making a sensible choice

Let’s see. Your response is one of two things.
Either your levels of comprehension and analysis are so poor you don’t understand the post at all; or you are purposefully obsfucating. I suspect the latter. I’d rather the latter I suppose, that’s more the expected narrative.

Yes @jeaux90 . Exactly and well said.

I was in London for the day recently. Visited the National Portrait Gallery and Lightroom. Both venues had mixed toilets. In the case of the NPG the cubicles were self contained with washbasins. In the Lightroom handwashing area was communal. Got me wondering whether truly mixed toilets would actually be safer for everyone, men, women, transwomen, transmen, children. They’d be busier. There would be no issue about parents accompanying their children. I’m fully prepared to have my arse handed to me though.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you just don't understand the implications.

As soon as we allow transwomen (however that term is understood) into women's spaces, we are allowing every single man, potentially.

Because all a man has to say is that he 'feels he is a woman'. Then he is entitled to access. There is no way of us limiting that to only the 'good' ones or any reliable marker to tell us who is who.

That will be taken advantage of. It already has been.

Not at all. You dragged a crime committed by a non trans male into it. We all know that predatory and violent males are a problem. But your arguments would be far more relevant if you quoted crimes involving actual transwomen. As it is, you are still insidiously conflating male crime with the threat posed specifically by transwomen.

I am all for not allowing male criminals who have been caught to conveniently identify as female. I would however like to know what solutions you have for the issues that exist without effectively erasing the rights of trans people.

Got me wondering whether truly mixed toilets would actually be safer for everyone, men, women, transwomen, transmen, children. They’d be busier. There would be no issue about parents accompanying their children.

Assuming there are secure cubicles, maybe. I can see an argument that it would be safer for women than how things stand now - even if that sounds counter intuitive.

But ultimately, I suspect most men want their space too and wouldn't be keen. I also think the type of predatory male who's pushing to access women's spaces, wouldn't be as interested if it wasn't taboo.

It's an interesting thought.

No. So it was the first point (or you are doubling down with the second point. Who knows). Lots of (most?) people on this thread do understand the post.

erasing the rights of trans people.

Why would anyone have the right to access sex specific places that don't belong to them?

Judging from a scan of the responses it's about selfishness.

"I'm not bothered/ I'm not a woman in prison/ I'm not vulnerable on a hospital ward".

But I do think this selfishness arises from stupidity (or perhaps a lack of imagination in some cases). The idea that it will never be "me".

The point is that men like the stalker are now welcomed into female spaces because people don't care enough to object. How do we know which is a harmless male and which isn't, regardless of whatever they're thinking in their own heads?

When predators realise that all they have to do is claim they're a transwoman and be ushered into women's spaces, we have a problem.

I don't get how its so hard to see the implications.

And in fairness, there is a lot of social pressure to sweep this under the carpet.

People are starting to wake up though - thankfully

Whilst I admit that it isn't always possible to tell that a trans identified female was born female after transition in some cases, I do not think I or anyone would be fooled by a biological man into thinking they were ever female to begin with.

But third spaces do seem like the obvious answer. But as we know, they don't want that.

How should we tell the difference?

For example on a single sex ward. What do you think the criteria should be?

The problem with completely contained cubicles is that if anyone has a medical emergency it would be much harder a) to even know anything was wrong (in the case of normal cubicles the person could be seen if for example they fell) and b) to get the person out of the cubicle at all, if they have fallen then they are likely to be blocking the door.
The only solution would be to make each toilet as large as a disabled toilet, with an emergency cord to pull. And there just isn’t the space for this.

Because creating ‘safe spaces’ for women is counter productive.
we need to think bigger and identify a right to the WHOLE space to be safe.

targeting trans people is easy and also fucking pointless.

the two examples you gave have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

misogyny in the police force and the evidentiary requirement of substantiating a stalking claim/onus on a victim-survivor to ‘prove’ her own victimisation is a real issue. Talk more about that.

I’m not diverting anything at all, I’m following the logical consequence of people using sex assigned at birth facilities, in these very odd times. Someone else spoke about a very male presenting person who was assigned female at birth going into a women’s toilet and how this might be experienced by another user. Someone (not sure if it was you) called this a word salad but that poster had made an excellent point. If this is acceptable, there is a risk that predators will also use those facilities and commit acts of violence claiming to be a trans man, in the same way that some predators have taken advantage of the move towards acceptance of trans women in women’s spaces. They are predators and will use whatever mechanism they can to achieve their goal.

I have no strong feelings about men using ladies toilets (as an example) on a personal level but I do understand that others do have legitimate concerns and these need to be heard.

I keep saying it but shutting people down, insulting people, using the unrelated and tragic death of someone to make a point is not helping anyone to find a solution to this. It just creates more division, invalidates what are actually very important points and turns people away from hearing what needs to be said.

Where these gay or straight clubs