A man undressing in front of a woman without her consent is an act of intimidation and control. Men do not acquire consent by identifying as women

[SernieBanders]

How and why has it become anything but voyeurism and control?

What on earth can be done to reverse the madness?

Trans staff should always be given dignified, adequate, separate changing spaces. Females should never feel cowed, silenced, intimidated into putting up with a man looking at them half naked.

Background.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/why-scots-nurse-sandie-peggie-has-taken-nhs-fife-to-tribunal-over-dr-beth-upton-transgender-dispute-4974664

(Phrase inspired by a tweet from x.com/SonyaDouglas )

... and to the point where when we see headlines saying "Woman rapes child" or "Woman arrested for indecent exposure" we know before even reading the article or seeing the pictures, that this "woman" is actually a man. And we're always right.

There is something very wrong with society if we expect someone to go through brutal surgeries to be allowed a special exemption to access spaces that they simply shouldn’t be in.

It all comes down to why should one male who has had to have his testes and maybe even penis removed due to injury or disease be excluded when another who has elected to do it for their philosophical belief about their identity be allowed ?

What exactly is the difference between those two male bodies?

Always a good reference.

Usually swiftly followed by 'well some women have hysterectomies and they're still allowed to use female spaces, so men should be allowed too!'

Yes.

What people who make those statements fail to see is that they have just leveraged a woman’s medical condition to support a male person’s philosophical belief. And they seem to genuinely think it is a legitimate comparison and a strong one.

But the facts are still the same. Male person is excluded from single sex spaces because they are male. Not because they are transgender. Because they are male and no male people ever be a female person.

And if you find yourself leveraging other people’s medical conditions and other group’s oppression to support your group’s demands, it shows just how weak your arguments are.

We had a great hashtag on here a few years ago, #DontHijackMyHysterectomy

That is the summation of how safe your life has been.

So take a moment to think of and appreciate how much work went into that by parents family friends etc., the luck and a good foundation etc. results in you picking good partners who were actually good partners.
Luck and it was luck not you managing your environment that to date things worked out.

And I will guess that you dont have children of 'that age' (yet) because parents need to risk assess a space they are not going to enter from a distance by checking usage.

I was peaked quite a few years ago by a tweet to a children's author, sent by what appeared to be a woman in her early twenties, which basically said 'we let a woman who's had a hysterectomy call herself a woman, so there's no reason why you shouldn't'

You can figure out for yourselves who that was and why it peaked me.

😂
Rigorous intellectual arguments are usually absent from men demanding that women undress in front of them,

On the "how can you tell" point.

I'm aware this is anecdotal but earlier this week I spent 20 minutes or so in the very busy foyer of a local FE College, waiting for a meeting. I was off to the side of the main corridor with my back to the entrance door so I was only aware of people approaching from behind when they appeared in the extreme periphery of my vision.

To while away the time I decided to guess the sex of people as they first appeared and see if I was right as they walked past me. Now, OK I obviously couldn't confirm absolutely without a "genital inspection" or at least some invasive questioning but I'd say I got it 100% right.

I reckon around 50-80 people passed me, mostly students so all styles of hair, dress etc for both males and females, all types of body shapes, females over 6 foot, males under 5 foot and everything in between but IMO I still called the right sex of every single one.

Twice recently, just walking through town, I've noticed transwomen

Now given that I had no reason at all to interact with them I didn't feel the need to tell them that they didn't pass. Those individuals might therefore think that no one could tell they were male.

It's not like I'm going to go up to a random stranger and start talking about what sex they think they are.

Incidentally my DH was absolutely oblivious. The same way he's oblivious as to what sex the person walking behind him might be.

Cis is like having a word for someone who doesnt collect stamps

Good point.
(Edited because I posted a hopelessly muddled post. But that’s what this nonsense does.)

@AQuickDeathInTexas

All this "transwomen have been using women's toilets for years and no-one ever noticed".

Yes, we did and felt extremely uncomfortable about it. We just didn't say anything because

a) Female socialisation and to challenge would be rude.
b) Fear of how they'd react.

We just washed our hands and got out of there as quickly as possible.

The term 'cis' is meaningless because the term includes any male person who has a DSD yet has a body that is **formed around the production of small gametes that has any degree of sensitivity to any of the testosterone that body produces.

There is no word left for female people.

Because even male people are now saying they are also ‘female’ . When ^^ female means only a person of the sex category where that person's body has been formed around the production of large gametes, regardless of whether the body does, has or ever will produce those large gametes. ie that requires the presence of ovaries or ovarian tissue - never testes.

In fact, we now have examples of many male people declaring that they are female people. So even the word for female has become meaningless in that sense.

But 'cis' is a* *word that was repurposed from its original usage and is meaningless for the purpose of discussing female people in its current usage. It has been used in academic papers as well in an attempt at using inclusive language which then renders the papers meaningless because the term is not describing a unique grouping of human bodies, even when it claims to be doing just that.

To see how this works, we have been told that 'girl' and 'woman' both now include:

1 Male person who has been incorrectly registered as a female at birth, but has a male body **.
2 Any male person has now claimed a transgender identity using those labels.
3 And any person who has a female body ^^.

Under the label of 'girl' and 'woman', extreme transgender activists have been telling us for years that those labels break down into two types of girls or women:

Cis and Transwomen/transgirls.

These terms mean:
Cis
= (1) Male person who has been incorrectly registered as a female at birth, but has a male body **
and
= (3) Any person who has a female body^^
Trans
= (2) Any male person has now claimed a transgender identity using those labels.

Therefore there is no unique word to mean female people who have a body ^^ formed around the production of large gametes.

Cis is meaningless as a unique description for female people and it always was. It doesn't matter if it had some meaning in science, it has been utilised in a way that is not fit for purpose. It is also misogynistic because it leaves female people with no unique word for their needs.

But, if someone wants to use it for themselves, that is fine. Crack on. However, do so while understanding what it actually means.

The more and more I evaluate and analyse for accuracy the theory and the language behind people's claims to have a gender identity, the more I am astounded such pseudoscience (and I rarely use that word for anything) has been allowed to shape policy and law. But it has.

Absofuckinglutely this!!

im 5ft 1 - the chances I’m going to approach a bloke in the women’s toilets and tell him to get out are 0 because I’m assuming any man in the women’s toilets already thinks boundaries don’t apply to him.

i mean ffs women are socialised their entire lives not to antagonise men just in case they get violent

of course we’re not going to tell TW to get out….because they’re men! And we don’t know how they’re going yo react…

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/feb/09/no-woman-should-be-forced-to-change-her-clothes-in-front-of-a-trans-colleague

Sonia Sodha puts this case into perspective very well.

Imagine not being able to tell the difference between men and women.
How thick can a person be?

Filters are doing a LOT of heavy lifting for men who say they are women in photos.

I worked in a scene where there were lots of transexxuals and transvestites.
You could always tell. Something people forget about plastic surgery is that even on women, when they have a lot of surgery you can tell. So of course it's even more obvious on men who have it done.

I don't think Beth Upton passes as anything apart from a massive bloke - but this isn't about magical passing or clocking.

Why was a man permitted to use a woman's changing area and demanding her to accept it? Where is his empathy for women??

No female patient should be left at the mercy of male doctors who haven't even got the common sense or empathy for women to a) not cosplay as us, b) not understand that the presence of a man in a bathroom with a woman means she might feel unsafe.

He is a man.
Posters can argue all they like about not noticing or understanding the difference between men and women but that's just bullshit to cover for predatory men.

Agree it is easy to tell but based on this poor Notts online guy who went to cover the let women speak Nottingham event very few are ambiguous

It is true that plastic facial surgery is rarely successful in changing male facial cues to be always perceived as female. Is it ever? I look at the latest Bergdorf or Mulvaney photos. These are both male people who have had the very best surgery that money can buy.

They have had their faces peeled all the way back. They have had their brow bones shaved right down, cheek bones implanted, their hair lines dropped (I think), their chin and jaws reshaped, and more. But unless the photographs are very carefully chosen, those male facial cues remaining still come through.

They may work in some facial expressions, but not others. And that is in photos which are carefully chosen. In life, I suspect that there are numerous cues still there. Even to the position of the eyes, the distance between top of lip and nose, the shape of the top lip.

And as they get older, what happens then. There is a person on twitter who keeps declaring that they pass completely and have always done so due to them having a sluggish male puberty and being one of the first patients at GIDS. But, again, even in certain expressions in photos this is just not true because male facial cues (and other body cues) clearly show through.

However, this person has been surrounded by family and friends who have constantly told this person that they pass completely. Now, they cannot accept that people say 'actually, you don't' or maybe they just will not accept it. Either way, I would think if female people meet them in real life, they will likely be able to tell over time and interaction, if not immediately.

@Clarabell77 You are misinformed. The only way to address that is to do the necessary reading. I’ll even give you the links. It’s up to you if you choose to read them or if you choose to continue believing that the trans-identifying male didn’t change in the changing room or that your own experience of a unisex changing room is universal. You’ve not explicitly said that, but I have inferred it serves as your defence of the doctor’s actions.

Please read points 17-20 of this report produced for the tribunal in question by Maya Forstater, giving expert evidence about single-sex toilets / dressing rooms. It appears that you don’t know about differences in architecture and think that unisex facilities are designed without particular distinct features. NHS Fife tribunal documentation

Please also look for the TribunalTweets account on Twitter which has been live-tweeting the words of the tribunal so far. It’s quite clear that the doctor didn’t enter the changing room simply to turn his back to the wall and stay dressed. The doctor is going to be asked questions by one of the country’s best lawyers tomorrow so I’m sure you’ll be keen to hear his own words about what he did in the changing room.

Thanks Maddening. That was pretty illustrative. The umbrellas, the noise making. It is all part of the style of engagement tactics.

The women simply just talk and talk loudly, they let people speak. But that group of protesters was so typical, they only want to stop people talking and intimidate others.

They then becomes targets of these YouTube auditors who broadcast these tactics. And yet, people will always find a way to dismiss the intimidation that is the outcome of these tactics.

And the masks. Do they realise that wearing masks and hats focuses the attention to around the eyes? Which is a very telling area for male facial cues.

And yet, they continue to do it so people won't identify them as someone who intimidates women who disagree with them.

In fact Doctor Upton refused to work with Sandie Peggie.

After a 2 month sick leave because of the upset over being asked to leave changing room - Doctor Upton refused to return to work if Peggie was there.

There was no "leaving critically ill patients" - the incident as explained last week by Doctor Upton was that Sandie Peggie asked Doctor Upton to take observations on a patient which Doctor Upton considered "nurses work". Doctor Upton admitted to their own lawyer that they had no knowledge of whether Sandie Peggie - who was A&E triage nurse that night - was dealing with other patients etc. It was just assumed by Doctor Upton to be a personal slight.

👏👏👏