To be shocked by a transwoman guest on Jeremy Vine today asking a female caller what sex she is - and whether she’s “been tested?”

[AlertMaker]

I genuinely couldn’t believe what I was hearing. A woman called in to make a point and instead of responding to her argument, the guest asked her what sex she was - and even questioned whether she’d been tested to confirm it.

I found it incredibly demeaning and unsettling. AIBU to think this kind of behaviour undermines the whole idea of respectful discussion and actually silences women?

I think you have read 'allowed' to mean it's optional.

It isn't.

No where is obliged to offer single sex spaces eg toilets.

If they do offer men's and women's, then they must be single sex. For biological women and biological men.

But they are not obliged to do so. If, for example, they choose to only have unisex toilets, that is fine. They cannot be forced to add additional male and female toilets on top of that.

It says 'allowed' because the message that has been sent out for far too long is that they weren't allowed. When they were all along.

Sure. If your friend want to be inclusive, make sign the signage is clear that male people can enter.

If they don’t wish to exclude male people and female people avoid your friend’s pub, that is female people making a choice based on your friend’s decision. If your friend is in an area where female people will accept male people in their spaces, great.

You using this as some kind of gotcha is really not making waves.

Are you seriously arguing that having symbols for male and female instead of words means they aren’t designated as a single sex space?
Your friend will be breaking the law if she doesn’t make it clear the toilets are single sex spaces even though the word isn’t used and if she refuses to act if a customer brings a breach to her attention. The clarification of law clearly says that single sex spaces are for biological sex designations only.

Yes - you are right in saying that if male people in the form of trans women are allowed it ceases to be a single sex space and it would be discriminatory to block other men.

Basically there's no legal blowback for excluding trans women, contrary to Stonewall law. But there can be legal repercussions for including them when something is designated by sex.

Edit - Sorry, yet again quote I was replying to disappeared. My cue to finally get the app I think as it keeps happening.

Yes.

I reckon that people have not realised that if one group of male people are allowed into a female single sex space, then the establishment is not allowed discriminate against all other male people.

if one group of male people are allowed in, all male people are allowed in. And if a poster’s mate wishes to test either female people’s resolve around avoiding places they know allow male people in or wishes to be a test case for a legal challenge, I say good for them. I hope they do it with full knowledge of the potential repercussions.

I consider posts in that vein to be meant to shame and intimidate. The poster may not see it that way, but why else post it.

If the symbols on the door were meant to signify the actual clothing worn, the 🚹 facilities would be used by probably 90% of people Just imagine the queues!

Indeed.

I don’t remember the last time I wore a dress. But hey ho! This is a thread where we are learning lots.

Yes - you are right in saying that if male people in the form of trans women are allowed it ceases to be a single sex space and it would be discriminatory to block other men.

Yes, I said similar on a previous thread.

I don't think people realise this.

If other men also wanted to enter a women's single sex spaces on the grounds that they let men wearing dresses in (or even not wearing dresses) they would be able to challenge it on the grounds of sex discrimination on the basis that they weren't being treated equally to those dress wearing men.

This was a discussion that I mentioned when Midrul Wadhwa was hired. Technically I feel that another male person could have taken ERCC to tribunal for sex discrimination because they allowed him to apply, interview and get the role. No other male was permitted.

Ugh I wish there was a barf react.

Chief George Earle: We can just wait for another code to go red. And when Phoenix performs another Murder Death Kill, we'll know exactly where to pounce.
John Spartan: [sarcastic] Great plan.
Chief George Earle: [not realising the sarcasm] Thank you.
Erwin: He likes your plan, Chief!

• Demolition Man, 1993

Did anyone explain to the trans woman that their response to the caller was something you would expect from a patronising prick of a man? Any woman would not expect a woman to be tested to confirm their gender.

I assume as soon as you spoke it was clear you were a woman.

As a woman with pcos also I have not had these issues ever.

Usually even v masculine women are clearly women.

Lol. Because it's infertile women that are saying don't mention those things, is it?

The answer was to the question "have you had your chromosomes tested?"

Typical lies and misrepresentation. I said I did not give a flying fuck for your outrage. I objected to the patently false claim that no one could identify a woman these days despite their obvious bodies and common reproductive capacities. You choose to mispresent this as me attacking infertile women as unfemale. That is an outright lie and typical of trans ball-carriers trying to gaslight women.

The lovely bit in the faux outrage? I am one of those women who has never even had a pregnancy.

PP also claims that she has a deep voice. And her build is large. There is a concerted attempt to portray women with PCOS as sexually ambiguous.

If they do offer men's and women's, then they must be single sex. For biological women and biological men.

No. This is not the case. They can exclude trans women from women’s spaces if there is proportionate and reasonable justification. They are not required to do so. It is not illegal for trans women to use women’s toilets.

There is absolutely no way she will be excluding trans people from any toilet in her pub, and there's nothing anyone can do about that.

Exactly. It would be beyond unreasonable and impossible to enforce. Very few service providers are going to want to try to do this unless they have a very specific reason for needing to do so (or potentially because they share some of the ideological opinions of pp on this thread). It’s really important they are not made to understand that they are absolutely not required to enforce this in the way people are trying to promote. Simple that it’s an option if there is reasonable grounds, as has always been the case.

No she will not be breaking the law. She can use whatever words or symbolic signage she would like on the toilet. She is not required to enforce the exclusion of trans women from the toilet labelled “women”. This was never required. It is not required now. The law has. Not. Changed.

If its beyond unreasonable to seperate toilets by sex, why do you think the vast majority of places throughout the world do so? And why do you imagine they will decide its beyond unreasonable to continue to do so ,just because the law has made it clear who belongs in which sex category?
Service providers will no doubt in the main continue to designate toilets for women and for men. If trans people decide to use the toilet not designated for them, obviously the landlord of the local can let them if they like, but problems may well occur if everyone else then decides to use whichever toilet THEY fancy, and the landlord tries to prevent them. Landlords who want to go this route are far better to simply designate their toilets unisex.
This will not be so straightforward in other venues where people don't get the choice to avoid if they don't like it. There is a good case for sex segregated toilets in public buildings we are obliged to use, schools, hospitals etc and if trans people are permitted to use the opposite sex one in those places, the provider is likely to be discriminating.