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?

Isn't Brighton where the case is of group counselling where the service organisation refused to provide single female sex provisions? So they had male, trans, mixed and female that was also mixed? And they refused to support a rape victim even though there was no other public funded organisation that available that did provide single sex group therapy sessions? So now the organisation is being sued and the person who is sueing is being lambasted on social media for taking away funding from this organisation for a legal battle because they wouldn't help her even though they are publically funded?

Oh and Brighton is also the place where schools are forcing girls to undress for PE with their male peers and refuse to change even though the law says this is illegal. So not sure if saying you are from Brighton means your feminist credentials are in order.

Gosh, the legal challenges to that will be flooding in, I imagine.

Horrific treatment of young girls.

Yes. That is the case against Brighton Rape Crisis Centre if I remember correctly.

I suspect that there will be quite a few legal challenges. Because if a group is advertised as being for women or men, it has to be only segregated by sex.

If a group includes one male person in that group, the group has to open for all male people.

Luckily for us, Akua Reindorf KC has clarified this

Starts between 34-35 minutes in, but the entire session is good with Naomi Cunningham, Akua Reindorf, Ben Cooper and Sarah Vine.

Either way this is the transcript that I tidied up, although there could be typos. This is the bit about associations and whether there can be an association with women and males who identify as female.

"But everybody has to have ALL the protected characteristics in question."

And then

"What you can’t have is a group for people with two separate [protected characteristics] …where some people have one protected characteristic and others have a different one".

"Because then let's say you have a group for lesbians or women and men who identify as women, trans women, it's not a… it doesn't satisfy the condition of being a single sex association. A single protected characteristic association for women because not everybody is a woman. It doesn't satisfy the condition for being um a single characteristic association for people who have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment because not everybody has that protected characteristic ."

"So you can't have that kind of an association. So you can't have a so-called trans-inclusive association. I mean as Maya says, you can always have two associations that join up and do things together. There are ways around it. But fundamentally, what we have started to call sumptions law is wrong both for services and for associations. um "

"Of course, if it was possible to have a self ID service or association, For Women Scotland simply would not have won the case. Because this is what the Scottish government wanted to do. They wanted to have transidentified males in a quota for women."

That's illegal discrimination against men who know they're men. If you're letting in some men (transwomen )you've no justification for keeping out other men.

I hope Bless Brighton's insurers are aware that they've chosen to commit unlawful discrimination.

Here is the link for the above post.

Reductio ad absurdum. Sigh.

On another thread @sadmillenial was going to see if they could find the details of a training provider who delivered training to her organisation which did include a consideration of GC perspectives, she thought it may have been the LA - I will eat my hat if that turns out to be true if her LA is Brighton!

I think the issue is that it takes a lot of funding and stress to legally challenge this and the dad in question is trying to have an open debate with the school on this, but not succeeding. The thread is on here as well.

You would think a school would not subject girls to this but no, they really don't see an issue and it is all legally complicated to have a girls only changing room.

i did say this - i looked and actually it was the Boarding School Association training, they offer it to every independent school and its online so anyone could sign up and/or enquire
(i dont work in an independent school anymore but must have been on an old mailing list)
It was very thorough and included all aspects of the equality act including GC views