Of course women will be safer

[HardyKoala]

Following the Supreme Court ruling. I’m flummoxed by the amount of women I considered intelligent friends, posting rubbish about how women are actually no safer and this ruling is just anti-trans. I just don’t understand how intelligent women are coming to this conclusion.

The main argument seems to be that men will be men and will still rape and assault.

Of course they will.

But now, they can no longer just assert ‘I am a woman’ and automatically be able to enter women’s spaces unchallenged to do this. And this did happen, a few examples below.

They will no longer be able to enter women’s changing rooms and film teenage girls naked. They will no longer be able to enter the women’s toilets in Morrisons unchallenged and sexually assault a 10yr old girl. They will no longer be able to be housed in women’s prisons raping vulnerable women in the shower. This will all stop.

Yes, I do understand the negative impact on a few trans women and I feel for them, but why should ALL women put themselves and their daughters at risk for this tiny minority? I just don’t get it. If you’re campaigning for anything, campaign for 3rd spaces surely? But don’t campaign to allow any man the right to enter women’s spaces.

I have no issue with trans people in any way (I know a few) but I just can’t understand this argument that all women should be more at risk. Of course most trans women aren’t a threat. But men pretending to be women for access to women ARE a threat. And this ruling makes it harder for them to rape and assault us.

The amount of friends I’m seeing posting this rubbish has thrown me. I feel like I’m in an a weird alternate reality.

This

I’m asking for the evidence which shows I will now be safer following the Supreme Court’s judgement. Where is the evidence that I was unsafe prior to the ruling? As per OP’s observations.

I’m not sure what you mean by ‘the cause’ and why you feel that makes you collateral damage?

You do understand that women are a lot more vigilant and sensitive about who they see in female only spaces now purely because so many men have decided they want to barge in as well?

The implication from your slightly aggrieved sounding comment is that women are somehow to blame for this situation - I suggest that if you worked with us rather than against us and we re-established women’s spaces for women only then eventually things will settle down and you will be hassled less.

If you can’t imagine how that having clarity in the legal backing to demand policies that exclude men who identify as women is going to make women safer than it’s going to be hard to help you.

Try reading up on events of the last few years and find out? There is a long list of women and girls that specifically would not have been raped or sexually assaulted, had the authorities followed the actual law including Dolotowski’s young victims, the women raped in a female hospital ward by a trans identifying male (at least two off the top of my head) and the women in prison punished for complaining about being sexually assaulted. All if those utterly preventable.

How many raped and sexually assaulted women would be enough for you to agree there been an issue that we at least now have the tools to fix?

The alternative is a female officer being forced to strip search a male. How is that right?

Here’s some evidence that you are more unsafe in mixed sex spaces.

https://fairplayforwomen.com/unisex-changing-rooms-put-women-in-danger/

Plus take a look at the ONS stats on sex offending. The most up to date show that 99% of sex offences are carried out by men. Previously it was 98%. It varies slightly from year to year, but is always hovering between 98-99%. Stats show trans women commit sex crimes at the same or slightly higher rates than other males.

So just keeping males out of what should be women’s single sex spaces - not just changing rooms and toilets, but prison cells, refuges and other places where women are vulnerable - keeps women MUCH safer. Which is why women’s single sec spaces were created in the first place.

You cannot tell who's a man and who's a woman from looking. So this ruling changes nothing. Rapists and abusers will continue to break the rules and go where they like.

In fact, if we become accustomed to seeing trans-men in female spaces, that makes it really easy for male-presenting people to go unquestioned.

If a week ago we assumed a rapist was willing to claim to be a trans-woman, why on earth would they not now claim to be a trans-man?

You absolutely can detect sex by looking with a very high degree of accuracy. Don't be silly.

And now that the law has been clarified, any man who tries to infiltrate women's spaces, knows that this is wrong and they are breaking the law. Those men need to act with decency and stay out.

Sorry for your medical problems, that sounds tough for you.

If your appearance is ambiguous (though it doesn’t sound as if it is really?), were you to be challenged in a women’s single sex space, the minute you speak will make it very obvious that you are a biological female. There’s no need for you to avoid using the women’s toilets.

You cannot tell who's a man and who's a woman from looking
This again? Will you stop talking shite, ffs!

Any evidence that isn’t behind a paywall? Please bear in mind that I’m asking for evidence that trans women pose an increased risk.

The vast majority of women CAN tell very easily who is male. It’s an evolutionary survival mechanism, honed over millennia, to enable us to keep ourselves safer from predatory men (the oppressor sex). Men may find it more difficult as their survival hasn’t relied on doing this with accuracy.

It isn’t behind a paywall, I’ve just double checked.

For future reference, you can type a URL into archive.ph to get around paywalls.

You’ll have to look at the stats on trans prisoners. They are out there, but I don’t have them to hand at the moment and am about to go out for the day (though someone else may oblige you).

Remember, trans women are men, not women. You’ve had evidence that males do 99% of sex offending. What extra offending will satisfy you? 99% is extremely high!!

If you felt safe before the ruling clarified existing law why would you need to feel unsafe now? Unless you are worried about the angry TRAs doing something that would put you in danger?

additionally m, our single sex spaces are not just about safety but also privacy and dignity.

And the right to association without the presence of males? Any idea of the number of groups that have been utterly ruined by men forcing their way in? Or women having venue bookings cancelled because they want to gather somewhere without men?

The Times article referenced in the link you sent is the source of the data and that article is behind a paywall. It’s not my job to go searching for the evidence, I’m asking the people making the claims (that I’m safer because trans women can’t access single sex spaces) to supply the evidence. Also, for information, that times article is the only one that’s whipped out when making claims like this. Anything more recent? Anything other than just one single source?

Remember that I’m asking for evidence regarding trans women. Not men. Trans women. You may not agree that trans women are not women, but they are not men. They are trans women. I’m asking for evidence regarding trans women specifically. How many of the 99% of male offenders are trans women? I’ll engage when someone can provide reliable evidence.

It’s not that some rapists are claiming to be transwomen but that some transwomen are rapists and sexual predators. But even if there were not a % of trans identifying men who are sexual predators or who have violent tendencies, 100% of them are men and women have rights in law that allow us to have single sex spaces.

Where is your evidence that they pose less of a risk than any other men?

You may not agree that trans women are not women, but they are not men.

What's the difference between a transwoman and a man?

Transwomen are men. It’s is quite literally the only criteria required.

I haven’t made any claims in this thread? The OP says that women are safer. I’m asking for the evidence to prove that statement.

Also, very amusing that an article to ‘prove’ the claims was provided but the data used in that article is inaccessible because it’s behind a paywall. Would suggest to me that people are reading blindly without interrogating the data… fascinating.

Back to first principles.

If we agree that it's best to keep men out of women's spaces, then why would we make an exception for one group of men without exceptionally good reasons?

Why single out trans identifying men for access to our spaces but not disabled men, gay men, old men, etc, etc?

The question for you is, what's the justification in the first place for giving this one group an exemption from the rules put in place for all men?

Alright, if you want to say that trans women are men - of the 0.5% of trans people in the UK, how many of the 99% of male offenders (previously quoted by someone else) identify as trans women?

You’re presupposing my views. The OP has stated that as a female I’ve woken up safer because trans women now can’t enter single sex spaces. I’m asking for evidence relating to trans women specifically to demonstrate that I was ever unsafe. Is it because ‘trans women are men’ ? Is that it?