To wonder if there's any actual evidence that's trans women are not safe in male loos?

[Evedence]

I feel, as a FWR lurker, that I would have seen linked articles to bank up the fact that trans identifying men aren't safe in men's loos, and therefore that's the rational why women should budge up and accept trans identifying men in their spaces.

I'm pretty sure with a quick Google I could fund evident that trans identity men have made women's spaces unsafe (Kate delowski? The one who worked for a charity and made a masturbation video).

So AIBU to wonder what hard evidence there is?

Exactly @Ilitetallycantrememberanythinganymore All this fuss stirred up over a non- issue.

Readers note:

https://x.com/gerrykeogh_/status/1926622168000983489?s=46

This video is of Sarah Baker who is a criminal who is a leading trangender activist. Please look Baker up (previous name is Alan) and Baker’s actions.

I have actually been in groups of women that Baker has spent hours screaming at. There is no doubt at all that Baker is a male person with a transgender identity. And was lauded by some members of the Labour Party. Even tipped to run for candidacy in my area.

I DO encourage any reader to do their own research when they see links posted.

Look at you, moving the goalposts when the evidence doesn’t fit your hateful agenda.

No, I'm not.

And how is it 'hateful' to stand up for women's safety and dignity? Unless you think women are a lesser species than men, that is? Is that your position?

Yep!

If there is a problem that TIM can use the voices they use to berate women and help their cause

Let's talk specifically about hate crimes, shall we?

You have to have one of five protected characteristic in order to be the victim of a hate crime. (Don't ask me why it's five when there are nine protected characteristics in the Equality Act.)

One of those five protected characteristics is transgender status.

Sex is not one of them.

This means that a woman cannot be a victim of a hate crime unless she has one of the other four protected characteristics in the hate crime legislation, i.e. sexual orientation, disability, race or religion (I think, off the top of my head).

What does this mean in practical terms?

Well, it means that a man who murders a woman in cold blood and later admits that he did it because he hates women has not committed a hate crime, whereas someone who spray paints "I hate trannies" on a trans person's front door has.

It also means that someone who murders a trans person because they hate trans people faces more time in prison than someone who murders a woman because they hate women.

Is a trans person's life more precious than a woman's? Because I'm struggling to see a different way of interpreting that.

Anyway.

Back to the point.

Of course trans people are going to be the victims of a disproportionate number of hate crimes in the statistics. This is due to the fact that crimes committed against trans people are usually classified as hate crimes, whereas crimes committed against most other people are treated as ordinary, lesser crimes.

Discuss.

> Demands evidence
> Gets evidence
> “No, not that evidence”

It’s hateful to single out trans people, a minority group subject to prejudice & violence and deliberately attempt to make them second class citizens. It reeks of segregation & apartheid.

Readers note:

When I have looked at these hate crime statistics in the past, they included such things as misgendering, seeing stickers that the person reporting didn’t agree with and a list of other things.

It has been reported in details released by the CPS also that domestic abuse includes a spouse or soon to be ex-spouse using ‘deadnames’ and calling their husbands by he / him pronouns.

Please do look deeper into statistics about hate crimes and domestic abuse statistics and see what they consist of for yourself.

Now comes the hyperbole.

No. This is not ‘moving the goal posts’ this is pointing out what is listed under the specific crime.

”Routinely” - no. But there is a violence in men’s toilets. Googling “attack toilets XPlace” where XPlace is the (very small) city I live in comes up with a large number of attacks in the last year. In the football stadium, various pubs and even bloody Tescos.

When I was at school a lot of fights took place in the boys toilets. Either there or a random corner of the field. I suspect because both places were free of the eyes of teachers.

You evidence doesn't reflect genuine vulnerability compared to women as @MissScarletInTheBallroom has clearly indicated.

Transwomen are not being denied anything, regardless of your overblown posting. They can use the facilities for their own sex, just like everybody else. If that is an issue, they can campaign for third spaces.

Men do not have rights to women's spaces. And that is the end of it.

How does requiring someone to use the single sex facilities that exist for members of their own sex along with other members of their own sex "reek of segregation and apartheid" exactly?

Unless your argument is that single sex spaces shouldn't exist at all?

It’s the reality for trans people, a minority you apparently believe it’s legitimate to hate.

Being asked to use the spaces provided for you is not making anyone a second class citizen. Everyone has a sex and a space provided for their sex. That's equality.

Your appropriation of the struggles of an actual marginalised and persecuted group has moved on from South American sex workers (the murder stats) to black people in South Africa (apartheid ) I see. Who are you going to do next? my money's on people with DSDs.

There's evidence and there's Evidence; cf The Cass Report.

The fact that trans people have their own reality isn't a good reason to disregard women's reality.

Indeed! Trans rights people and “allies” should be campaigning for 3rd space unisex toilets - like disabled rights campaigners did for years.

It is literally not women’s problem to provide their single sex toilets as some sort of safe haven for trans women. Women are very welcome to campaign on behalf of trans people to get a 3rd space should they wish.

My LinkedIn is full of professional, seemingly intelligent “be kind” brigade men and women hand wringing over how awful the SC judgement is without ONCE actually acknowledging women’s rights to single sex spaces and the need for a) men to stop being violent and b) the creation of 3rd spaces where anyone can go should they wish to maintain their own privacy and dignity.

Hangry thinks not wanting transwomen to use women's single sex spaces is "segregation" and "apartheid" because it is treating some women differently from other women. Hangry evidently thinks transwomen are women.

This is why Hangry is wrong. Transwomen belong to the other human sex. They are, in fact, in reality, men.

I may be being a bit thick but isn’t the fact that TW are not women in the name? If trans means across from and cis means same side (as the TRA keep reminding us), then transwoman literally means across from woman, therefore a man. So the truth is on plain sight

I don’t think it a huge stretch to think trans women would be in danger in a men’s toilet.

I’m all for women only spaces and the protection of women’s sports but there’s something about this thread and others that have a stench of witch hunt.

No, you are not be being thick. The only way to be a transwoman is to be born male.

Why would a TW be in more danger in a men’s toilet than say a gay man, or a young boy, or a frail old man? Surely if men are in danger in a men’s toilet, that is not women’s problem to solve, men need to do better if some men are afraid of going into spaces with them.

If they are, then that's not women's problem to solve, now is it?

And if getting frustrated at the suggestion that it is constitutes a 'witch hunt' in your eyes, well you do you. I think women are getting thoroughly fed up with having to constantly assert their rights to boundaries in the face of demanding men.

If you are "all for" women's spaces, that is spaces where males are not allowed, do you think all males should be told to keep out?

Or just some males? In which case, which males should be kept out and which ones allowed in? And for what reasons?