Is Andy Burnham reasonable to say only a small minority of women object to men being in their toilets? YABU he's right, YANBU he's wrong *titled tweaked by MNHQ at OP's request*

[SingleSexSpacesInSchools]

https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15830845/Andy-Burnham-men-identify-women-use-female-toilets.html

'I don't think that's a majority view. I think it's a minority view and quite a small minority view, actually. But it is a view so you can't completely ignore it. Possibly they might be women who have experienced male violence at some point in their life. I don't know, that's one way of looking at it.'

Trans women aren’t banned from toilets.

That’s utterly bollox. I’m a short woman who hadn’t ever been mistaken for a bloke in 52 years, until I got my hair cut short. It has haooened four times in 6 months since then. Are you suggesting that someone like Fatima Whitbread or Martina Navratilova doesn’t have similar physiology to a bloke? I know plenty of men who could dress like women and you would never know, particularly in silhouette, from a distance.

Yes, I'm sure he will be asked. It's how much his answer will influence votes that's the question, and my view is, not a lot.
I think the majority of people would be more interested in the possibility of spare cash for "A few pints at the weekend and a holiday" than the possibility they may see a man in a dress in the ladies toilets. Which in the mainstream, tends to be what the debate is reduced to.
Then there will be others who may be extremely disappointed if AB fails to offer a strong statement of intent, but who will still vote for him, because stopping Reform will be their priority.

So when you’ve opened your mouth to speak you’ve still been mistaken for a male?

The polling is remarkably clear (given the issues of obscure language and it depending what questions are asked) but here's a steady increase in the numbers of women and men who think that no men should be in women's changing rooms, hospital wards, sport etc.
Just had a quick look at the Times article linked upthread - 1.3k comments underneath and a quick glance suggests that Burnham's disdain for the sefaty of girls and women is being repeatedly called out.

Burnham is more about replacing Starmer than stopping Reform.

There are those who believe the first is important in achieving the second.

Anyone who thinks that trans women are not a risk to women in the women's toilets have fallen for the lie that trans women are just like women, and behave like women. They're not and they don't, they behave just like the men that they are.

It's not bollocks though. It's physiology. Men and women have different skeletal structures. Im not suggesting theres never a mix up but its a biological fact that theres a difference.

particularly in silhouette, from a distance.

But, unlikely in the extreme that women would not know in close quarters, such as in toilets, medical examination rooms, and in-person counselling sessions at rape crisis centres. Men who think they are women look like men who think they are women.

And, as other posters have pointed out, trans people are not banned from using public toilets, they just need to use the one appropriate to their biological sex.

I absolutely don't believe that a short haircut has led to people truly believing you are a man even after they talk and interact with you, especially if you are short. Women with short hair are not unusual. You may have found women are more wary these days after years of being told to expect men in their spaces but you can blame transgender ideology for that. Beforehand, the idea of a man in the ladies' was so taboo, people probably wouldn't have thought it was possible. They'd just think "she looks butch".

But let's say you're right and every sexed cue in your short female body was completely reversed by your haircut. So what? So a few people thought you were a man; the fact that you know they were wrong is just further proof of there being two sexes. They made a mistake about it. Why on earth would that mean women don't have a right to single sex spaces because of your magic haircut?

Edited as I made a mistake on the height.

But there are cubicles in men’s toilets too. So TIM will be perfectly safe in there won’t they?

Which woman are these men dressing as? Surely you can’t be as offensively sexist as to suggest all women dress and look exactly alike? That would be stupid wouldn’t it 😂

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5532284-aibu-to-suggest-emailing-andy-burnham-about-access-to-womens-toilets

hello.

Right, let's go.

• A single lockable Costa toilet is not the same as a women’s toilet block, changing room, shower, ward or school facility.
• “Cubicles” is not an argument. Men’s toilets have cubicles too.
• If transwomen are frightened of men, that rather proves the point: women are also entitled to be frightened of men.
• Women’s toilets exist because sex matters, not because every woman is traumatised or every man is a rapist.
• The sign on the door is not a forcefield. It is a boundary that can be enforced.
• Once males are allowed in on the basis of identity, that boundary is gone.
• Women who are fine with mixed-sex provision can use neutral toilets. They do not get to give away female-only spaces for everyone else.
• Calling women “bigots” for wanting privacy, dignity and safety is just misogyny in progressive wrapping paper.

This is just lazy bullshit.

“Mumsnet is an echo chamber” is what people say when they do not want to hear women talking honestly.

Women self-censor everywhere else because they get called bigots, Karens, hysterics and fascists for saying the most basic thing imaginable: they do not want males in female intimate spaces.

And the polling point is nonsense. Ask vague questions about “trans women” and “inclusion” and you get vague answers. Ask clearly whether male people should be allowed into women’s toilets, changing rooms, showers, wards or refuges, and suddenly people understand the issue.

This is not about every woman “feeling threatened” by every trans-identifying male. That framing is manipulative.

It is about privacy. Dignity. Boundaries. Safeguarding. Enforceability. Consent.

Women’s toilets are not there because all women are terrified. They are there because sex matters, male violence exists, and women should not have to negotiate male presence when they are vulnerable.

That’s not really the point though.

The issue is not just whether toilets swing an election by themselves. The issue is what this says about him.

Voters can smell someone who does not actually believe anything. Burnham’s problem is that he appears to try on opinions like jackets, keep them on for a bit, then swap them when the room changes.

On this issue he has managed to sound patronising to women, vague on safeguarding, and slippery on the law. That is a terrible combination.

People may vote on money, public services and Reform, yes. But they also judge character. And if he looks like a man saying whatever he thinks the audience wants to hear, he will get eviscerated for it.

Rightly.

I cannot believe this odious man is possibly going to shoehorn his way into number 10.

Are you suggesting that someone like Fatima Whitbread or Martina Navratilova doesn’t have similar physiology to a bloke?

Yes. That is exactly what we are suggesting.

But even if female and male humans weren't dimorphic, women would still need sex based rights.

Recent You-Gov polls suggest otherwise. Women DO care. Likewise I've seen numerous posts on this on FB and X and the general consensus is always that women do not want men in their spaces. There's a lot of anger at AB out there over this.

Nobody is suggesting trans women be banned from toilets, so I don' know what polling you are looking at.

but if you listen to the majority on here you’d think the vast majority of women would feel threatened by a trans woman in the ladies toilets.

If you actually read what people are posting, you would understand that many women feel threatened by men in women's toilets.

Yep and MN middle class lefty women will still be loyal to Labour. As they say like turkeys voting for Christmas.

So much of this crap could be cleared up if people understood that these spaces do not discriminate against trans people. Women with a trans identity (trans men) can use them. It's about sex. And we can't say that a self selecting group of male sex people can go in but not the others. That really is discrimination.

Leave the female feelings out of it. They're totally irrelevant. These are spaces for female people. That's it.

Oh ffs. If you don’t understand the issue please don’t post. You just look silly. Women do not want to shit, pee, cry, bleed, miscarry, hide, take a breath or whatever they do in toilets, around MEN.

However men “identify” (whatever that bullshit means) is irrelevant.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/e7a64925-b21e-4e3d-ada1-598f6f39a5a5?shareToken=5ce21ce193650cf74bd0b5476cbbe2fd

share token for all

”Labour’s gender critical women tell Burnham to clarify his views on trans rights
Calls follow revelations that the Manchester mayor backed a campaign for transgender women to use female toilets”