To think that, under the threat of "Let the war begin", there should be specific laws against male's entering female private spaces (and vice versa)

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

After being told they will not be allowed to enter female toilets, changing rooms, clubs and other private sexed spaces, men have vowed to "fight" or be arrested “multiple times”

https://archive.ph/tdkd0

"Let the war begin. Fingers crossed. You need to fight for all of us globally. It’s a war."

I think it is reasonable to have a specific crime for this sort of violation of rights and privacy, rather than Outraging public decency, Voyeurism, Exposure/ indecent exposure.

It seems clear that without firm dealing with, men are going to violate these spaces again and again.

”Invasive and intrusive tests” my arse. Most TIMs can be easily identified by sight. Then it is a simple cheek swab, hardly intrusive. I wouldn’t bat an eye if asked. You need to find a better argument.

And as you well know, being male is the only qualification for being a transwoman. No woman can be a transwoman, by definition.

“Feeling like a woman” is simply a state of mind. Enjoy it, have fun dressing up, but do not pretend you are somehow less male than other men.

No it’s not remotely the same at all. Nor is it the “reverse” - its a completely different thing.

Which is why, despite the fact that trans women have been using female toilets since they were first established (and continue to use them today) you still choose to use the female toilets rather than walking into the men’s.

Would you like me to link you to a Reddit thread where they are wanging on about “war”? This rhetoric is all over social media, sometimes with violent threats towards prominent women or politicians, or generally towards GC feminists. I’ve got people deleted for that multiple times, so these people definitely exist.

Eh? Try to at least make some kind of sense. I realise that’s difficult

being male is the only qualification for being a transwoman

this is incorrect. A transwoman is a person registered male at birth who nonetheless understands themself to be female.

So a man then @Tandora

Transwomen, who are men, using female toilets and changing rooms is completely incompatible with the safety, privacy, dignity and comfort of woman and girls.

Here’s the thing: I use the female toilets, and not the men’s at any time, because I’m a woman. I don’t use the men’s even if men come into the women’s toilets.

I don’t think it’s fine to start a thread with no provable basis that implies actual violence may be on the way.

I’m sure there’s loads of horrible shit said from both sides, in fact I know there is. Chucking links of horrible shit people have said on the internet at eachother doesn’t seem… productive and certainly won’t prove anything other than that some people say some horrible shit.

no: a person registered male at birth who understands themself to be female: a trans woman.

Exactly. Because sharing the women’s toilets with the odd trans woman is completely different to walking into the men’s toilets as an individual woman.
You would continue to chose the former over the latter any day of the week. As you do everyday and have done all your life.

He’s still a man Tandora, whatever he might believe himself to be.

thats your opinion/ belief. It doesn’t make it true

It’s the law, Tandora, love. Sorry.

Indeed it is.

Any male entering into a female single sex space makes that space no longer female only. It is like purchasing something that states that it is nut free, and having just a 'trace' of nuts.

And I forgot my intention not to engage with this poster further. Apologies to all.

Oh my god. It is absolutely NOT the law 😂😭🤦🏼‍♀️. People need to acquire some basic legal literacy.

1 in 70 in the under 25s or 1 in 90 in the under 35s is not occasional as we’ve discussed on a previous thread

A person's philosophical belief about their identity that doesn't reflect the material reality of their body does not make a person who is male not a male person. Just because they don't believe they are a male person, they still are.

When a fact is well established in science, it is not a belief or an opinion. Someone can choose not to believe a scientific fact and it means fuck all. Because the fact still abides and remains even if someone does not believe it.

Men who identify as women:

biologically men

covered by the male protected characteristic of sex in the Equality Act 2010, rather than the female one

men in every aspect, unless you personally believe “womanhood” is conveyed by a gendered soul or adopting sexist stereotypes

pose the same statistical risk to women as other men, not women

ooh I forgot one

socialised as members of the male sex, not girls or women

Men who identify as women

No. people registered male at birth who understand themselves to be female.

biologically men

Imprecise , nebulous and misleading statement, that ignores the complexities of biological sex and the growing body of evidence that transness has a biological underpinning.

covered by the male protected characteristic of sex in the Equality Act 2010, rather than the female one

There is no “male protected characteristic” in the Equality Act. There is the protected characteristic of “sex” which the Supreme Court has clarified means “birth sex” . In other words it generally applies to people on the basis of their birth sex, however there may be circumstances where the consequences of gender transition have implications for how it is applied. Trans people are also protected from discrimination as trans under the equalities act .

men in every aspect

false and meaningless over claim which has nothing to do with the SC judgement

unless you personally believe “womanhood” is conveyed by a gendered soul or adopting sexist stereotypes

Bizarre and meaningless statement that has nothing to do with being trans.

pose the same statistical risk to women as other men, not women

Naturalising violence against women and girls.

“Let the war begin. Fingers crossed. You need to fight for all of us globally. It’s a war.”

This is a man threatening violence, surely? That's the only way I can read it.

And: Sophie Molly, a trans rights activist, posted on X on Friday morning: “Do not comply. I’m prepared to be arrested multiple times over this.”

This is a man stating his intent to terrorise women and girls.

Laws against specific offences have been added to the Sexual Offences Act in recent years - upskirting being one example. So it's possible that a law could be written for men who intend to 'fight' women and break the law in this way.

You're saying understand a lot.

My mother quite literally had a friend who understood himself to be the Second Son of God...

He was prescribed antipsychotics.