The case of women at the ESB fighting against sharing changing rooms with trans-IDing men completely escaped me!
PressReader.com | Criticism of ESB transgender toilets policy after promise for ‘exclusive private facilities’ delayed
It is very similar to court cases in the UK which have been going in favour of women-only spaces being segregated by biological sex not gender, so it could be a very useful test case - if we didn't have the GRA.
As in Sal Grover's case in Australia, it would be hard for a court to say that a transwoman is not allowed in a women's space, because the law says he is a woman.
We know that's totally wrong, but the law has to follow its own logic, and in Ireland, a man who says he is a woman has to be treated legally as a woman.
It feels hopeless, until we repeal the GRA.
I notice the ESB defence is based on a risk assessment regarding aggression or violence -
‘the likelihood that a transgender person accessing bathroom and changing facilities matching their gender identity will be the victim or perpetrator of verbal or physical aggression is very low’.
I know the stats on attacks on women by transIDing men in toilets are significant, I'm not in any way downplaying the seriousness and the trauma for the women concerned, but I think objections based on comfort, dignity, and long-established norms of privacy in situations like toilets and undressing are important too, and less easily brushed aside by 'risk assessments'.
I think a lot of people - probably a majority? - instinctively feel the need for privacy in those kind of situations, whereas the threat of being attacked may feel less immediate.