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?

God I love that. I don’t believe trans women are a threat either, not proportionate to other threats we women face. I do believe in women’s sports and spaces like prisons for biological women but not Because I think the trans community are any threat to me. I have no problem with trans women wearing what they like and living their lives however they like, but in the same way my facial hair doesn’t make me a man, I just don’t believe plastic surgery, wearing different clothes or ‘feeling’ makes you a woman. I will use anyone’s chosen pronouns very enthusiastically however and have my own in my bio at work (helpful given my appearance).

I do not think there should be any legal support for anyone biologically male to compete in sports against biological females and I don’t believe anyone biologically male should be able to access women’s prisons or hostels given the increased risk to safety in those environments. I’m a lot more relaxed about toilets for a number of reasons, mainly that I think the risk here is minimal due to short time you spend in there and the fact they’re not generally somewhere you choose to engage with other people anyway, so easy to spot abnormal behaviour regardless of the sex of the person.

The problem is I’m gender critical but because im
not extreme and not willing to be cruel to trans people, I also get a hard time on here!

I too enjoy lighting matches to avoid starting fires. Totally logical.

If anyone is filming in a toilet then yes, that would be an example of abnormal behaviour you should challenge.

Me, Kate, washing my hands and turning to leave the bathroom having not even looked in your direction? Please don’t.

Just to clarify, it isn't now illegal for trans woman to use woman's bathrooms or other spaces. That's not what the ruling did. You can't call the police simply because there is an individual in there using the facilities.

My post was a response to the kind permission granted to challenge only after a leer or an erection. The answer is no. If I perceive a male in the toilets, I will challenge. If I'm mistaken, will apologise. Thats just how it's going to be and I'm sorry if anyone is hurt or angered by it. I am not taking the risk. If anyone had noticed the man in the toilets before he was filming the wee girl in the shopping centre, he should have been challenged then, BEFORE he whipped out the phone and stuck it over the cubicle.

It's literally what the ruling said.

That people should use the toilets that align with their biological sex and that transwomen are biological men.

I cannot believe that people are happy for these things to happen first, in a female only space, to women and children, to avoid their own feelings being hurt. Absolutely fucking not. Preventive measures in intimate and/or vulnerable spaces are acceptable and reasonable.

Ahhh you’ve misunderstood what the ruling actually does there and this is exactly why it’s a problem - it’s no more illegal for a man to enter a bathroom than it was a couple of weeks ago, that’s not what the SC ruling does, sadly. It doesn’t give you legal protection or mean a man or a trans woman in a woman’s bathroom is breaking the law. All it clarified was that where ‘woman’ is specified in law, this refers to biological women which is important for a few edge use cases like access to women’s prisons etc. It gives organisations a framework to be able to exclude trans women from the definition of women by default legally, but there is no law that states only women can use women’s loos and never has been. It changes the word ‘woman’ from being trans inclusionary by definition to trans exclusionary, meaning you have to specify you include trans in your definition of women rather than actively exclude them.

So, while the SC ruling is a positive step forward for gender critics and might make women feel emboldened to assert their right to sex segregated spaces, in practical terms it doesn’t do anything immediately.

Just throwing it out there, but pretty much every toilet in a service station has a sign in it saying that there might be male staff in there. Last time I was in a public toilet a male staff member was in there.

I don't really understand the threat of someone who isn't a biological woman being at a communal area in public toilets? For me it's just a case of washing my hands and getting out as quickly as possible.

Your apology would be pretty hollow to me given how justified you feel in ‘perceiving’ me as male despite me not engaging with you or doing anything other than existing.

What you’re saying there is you reserve the right to harass and abuse me based on my appearance and nothing else. Does everyone have that same right or did someone give you a special badge that appointed you the pants police? You are saying I have to put up with being humiliated every day for the rest of my life in public and there is absolutely nothing I can do to prevent that from happening? Even if I make myself as small and insignificant and invisible as I can (which I’m already doing), even if I already avoid toilets as much as I possibly can, even if I NEVER make eye contact or smile at another person, even if I do absolutely nothing to cause you to fear me other than look the way I do, you reserve the right to ritualistically bully me for my biggest insecurity and you think everyone else should have that exact same right and not only that, they should be encouraged and feel like they’re protecting other people by doing so?

If you truly walk around pointing at people and doing this, you are a terrible, terrible individual and protecting absolutely no one but your own self appointed right to bigotry.

But the male member of staff usually has a uniform on and is clearly working.

I'm sorry it would be hollow to you but honestly, that's just too bad. I don't underestimate your distress but I also don't think it trumps everyone and everything else. In an ideal world we could just trust that boundaries are respected but well, the fact they're not is not my doing.

Yeah so this is why I fall where I do on this - that and the fact so many toilets around the world are unisex. I agree about sports, prisons, hostels, and anywhere really where people are in prolonged exposure to each other or where being a biological male gives a natural advantage. The risk in toilets though I think is from men who wish you harm, and they don’t need to pretend to be women to gain access to a toilet to abuse you so the SC ruling doesn’t actually help this problem. If someone is behaving inappropriately in a toilet regardless of their gender presentation, that’s a problem. I include women accosting other women and accusing them of being men as inappropriate behaviour in a toilet, too.

‘That’s just too bad’. WOW.

’it’s not my doing’ when you are literally wandering around like a modern day witch hunter screaming ‘BURN HER!!’ because someone doesn’t look female enough to you is WILD. The numbers suggest you are far more likely to be accusing someone like me than you are an actual trans woman. You’ve probably abused a woman like me and not realised it because like me, she’s not responded to you in the moment and the fact that you’re fine with that makes you the very worst of us. Or, are you just a keyboard warrior who would never actually challenge anyone in real life because you’re too chicken shit to actually deal with the confrontation you incite online in real life?

A male member of staff doing his job, where women are given due warning of his possible presence, is not the same as an unknown and perhaps unidentifiable male entering a female facility as and when he pleases. The male member of staff is subject to vetting and disciplinary procedures and is easily held accountable for his actions. The random man is not.

False equivalences like this are regularly put forward to support the arguments of transactivists.

Agree with this, too. Where it falls down is what’s stopping a man who means you harm from pretending to be a male bathroom attendant to gain access to women’s loos? Probably a lot less hassle in the long run to buy a generic cleaners uniform than to be a trans woman?

Still don’t think the mere presence of a trans woman in a bathroom is a problem if all she’s doing is washing her hands and leaving. Same as if I’m washing my hands and leaving, I’m not a problem either. The problem is you THINKING about someone else being a woman or a man and therefore being uncomfortable. Maybe the solution is just to stop thinking about other people’s genitals in public.

Well yes. The sign is there because its understood that women disliking finding men in the toilets is pretty common, so the sign warns them, tells them the man is there legitimately and gives them an opportunity not to go in if its a problem. An entirely different thing to having random men going in and out whenever they feel like it.

This! 👏👏

I'm also growing somewhat suspicious about the whole discussion surrounding the 'right' of transwomen to have access to female spaces.
I watched a clip earlier of what was evidently a group of transwomen in a female toilet block chanting: 'Where we do our business, is none of your business'.

Why this obsession with being able to use women's toilets? Surely if their argument was genuine, they would be campaigning for more dedicated trans/unisex spaces, no? Not insisting they use the ladies!?

This frankly sinister behaviour is exactly WHY women don't want bio men in their spaces.

Well I'm not doing any of those things. I've never abused a person in my life. I've read your posts and what I'm getting is that it's ok for women to look out for themselves in situations where you think it won't directly affect you.

I don't care if you think I'm a terrible person. I think people who are happy for women and girls to potentially be exposed to voyeurs and predators in intimate spaces - including when I have specifically outlined an issue with voyeurs in my immediate local area (at least one was jailed for it last year but how much damage was done first) - because your personal feelings are more important is truly up there with the very worst of us. I've had my sex questioned, I acknowledge it's painful. In an ideal world boundaries would be upheld and suspicion would decrease. As I said, none of this is my doing, nobody asked for it, but you are happy for a risky status quo to continue to preserve you own feelings. Your prerogative. I'm not going to fawn over you for it.

But any man could enter a woman’s toilet dressed as a bathroom attendant and when challenged, say ‘I’m here to clean the loos’. It is far more common to see male cleaners than trans women in bathrooms. It would give him an excuse to be in there for a while too, less likely to arouse suspicion than a trans woman hanging out in there surely? Has anyone told the men? Or is it possible we don’t hear about abusive bathroom attendants all that much, or fear them because it doesn’t serve anyone politically to start a culture war over cleaners?

Or, of course, the man in the bathroom was born female and has transitioned to live as a man. So has every right - as per the ruling - to use womens toilets.

I hope they won't be given a hard time if they use the womens toilets as and when it suits them.

i am happy for trans women to be excluded from spaces where there is prolonged exposure to vulnerable women like prisons, hostels and sports for the reasons I’ve outlined, it has nothing to do with where I think it will impact me directly (sports does impact me as it happens). If you have read my posts then you know I’m GC. If you’ve never confronted anyone in your life then you’re a keyboard warrior who likes to incite other people to do your dirty work. If you’ve read my posts you would also know I am one of tens of thousands of women in the UK who live with masculine features entirely against our will, im not an edge case.

I have a close friend who is in the process of transition to trans man who passes fairly well (also a severe PCOS sufferer and I do believe much of his desire to transition is in response to the way society treats him generally). He’s been using the men’s loos for a couple of years and even when he looked a lot more feminine than he does now he never had any trouble at all. Ironically I’ve had more abuse in loos than he has.

Can anyone explain why so many gay men, not trans, are so concerned about which toilets trans can use? I don't get it. They are probably just as "at risk" in the men's toilets.

Possibly we don’t hear about abusive bathroom attendants because they are just doing their jobs. Most washroom attendants aren’t in there full time they are the barista who makes your coffee or the housekeeper who cleans your hotel room. They nip in squirt stuff down the loo, spray and wipe the seat, clean the sinks, replenish paper towels/loo roll and off they pop. They aren’t hanging around,they are most likely overworked and earning within a £1 of min wage.

Yes, but we’re not talking about ‘real’ bathroom attendants are we? In the same way we’re not talking about ‘real’ transwomen? We’re talking about the men who pretend to be women in order to abuse women in the same way we’d be talking about men who pretend to be bathroom attendants to abuse women. What’s the difference?