to ask why you wouldn’t sign the petition?

[CircleSquareCircleSquare]

The petition set up by Amy Desir (one of the women who self identified as a man to attend a men only swim session) is asking the government to consult women on privacy and dignity that could be removed or impacted by proposed changes to the gender recognition act.

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/214118

The petition is merely asking for debate - doesn’t it come to something when women have to petition the government to have to ask to debate their safety?

Most gender critical feminists recognise trans human rights but we don’t want their identity and wishes to be placed above our safety.
I posted on MN recently about my experience of living in a domestic violence refuge as a child and now I was terrified of men, a male bodied person presenting as a female in that safe space would have terrified me and impacted my PTSD more than the other experiences already have.

If you haven’t signed it why not? Please reconsider, if only so both sides can be heard. Of course signing isn’t mandatory and I’m not angry but I would be interested in hearing more.

If you would like to sign it, you can find it here
petition.parliament.uk/petitions/214118 - your details are kept private. Please consider sharing.

Ska do you think the trans people who support this are Terfs? Also there has been a lot of respectful debate on this thread. All the petition is asking for is to be allowed to have that debate with the people who are planning on changing the law.

twofalls Christ no, I only thing people who say they are TERFS are TERFS. I honestly
don’t understand people who take pride at being exclusionary, I wouldn’t accuse anyone of that.

@Glitterati. Out of interest, do you have any experience of criminal profiling? You've been asserting that self-ID wont be abused by predatory men because of the psychology associated with violent sexual offenders. Is that a professional, academic opinion and if so, can you provide links?

Over the last 150 years, as women have increasingly taken an equal role to men in society, it has been deemed necessary to provide sex segregated spaces for women in order to protect them from predetermined men. This is based on sound, evidenced crime analysis. Politicians are currently proposing to remove those sex segregated spaces. What evidence is there that the risks that led those spaces to be created in the first place no longer exist?

*predatory men

98% of sexual crime is committed by men and none of them have needed to identify as women to do it. Why would they change now?

It is of course possible that some men may identify as women purely to get into female spaces. But this would be so obvious, surely, they wouldn't get far.

Men have access to women anyway - in the streets and in all walks of life. Most sexual assault is within families.

In my DC school, there is one boy who identifies as female and I'd be fine about my DD sharing a room. Yhet are certainly not doing it for predatory reasons - it takes massive courage. I'd be happy for them to share a room with any of my DC, the same as anyone else. I can't imagine one boy in the whole who would pretend to identify as a girl to get into female spaces - everyone would spot it a mile off.

Dh refuses to sign as he says that although self-Id seems like nonsense, he thinks the petition is too one-sided and that the groups it links to...

• The Sex and Gender Ethics Society
• A Woman's Place UK
• Fair Play for Women
• #ManFriday

... seem goady, have a lack of solid facts, and the articles he's read which seem to support them have lots of questions tearing them to pieces.

He says he feels it's similar to anti-gay and anti-abortion sentiments.

So, some people will have been put off by the overly strong trans and feminist links. A petition which emphasised the nonsense of self-ID for both genders and transgender people too, which listed things which are at risk and didn't mention talking to specific organisations, would probably have done better.

signed

Glitterati the point is that a change in the law will allow male predators lawful access to women and children's spaces. It's not about assuming genuine trans people are predators.

That has been pointed out numerous times on this thread.

It has nothing to do with sexuality. I care not one jot if I am sharing my space with a lesbian.

98% of sexual crime is committed by men and none of them have needed to identify as women to do it. Why would they change now?

It is of course possible that some men may identify as women purely to get into female spaces. But this would be so obvious, surely, they wouldn't get far.

Men have access to women anyway - in the streets and in all walks of life

@Glitterati - so you're saying that sex segregation has never been an effective crime prevention technique and that society has wasted literally hundreds of millions of £ over decades providing sex segregated spaces and services when in fact they have not been necessary as it has had no impact on offending? Can you evidence that?

Iv signed already .
I despair when I read the "you're transphobic " screeching .

Do those people actually know what self id is ?? Because that's the only reason I can think of that you would be so naive .

Don't think for one second men who wish to harm women and children won't use this to their advantage , the lengths that men like this will go to are clear to see every time another awful story comes out.
And potentially they will be Allowed in women only spaces without challenge . And no they won't have to dress like a woman or have any intention of transitioning or actually any desire to be a woman whatsoever.

Why would any woman want this or not see how insane it is ??

But ska you said you wouldn't sign because that would associate you with terfs. That means you must think the trans people who support this also associate with terfs.

I didn't know what a terf was until a couple of weeks ago.

This is about self ID. And many trans people are concerned.

is of course possible that some men may identify as women purely to get into female spaces. But this would be so obvious, surely, they wouldn't get far

Yep you've made my point. Why would it be obvious ? The person needs to do nothing other than self identify as a woman. How will people be allowed to discriminate against that ??

But if only one side wants to discuss the issues then what happens - no debate whatsoever? We bury our issues because the opposing side want what they want without discussion?

You say you want a debate, but then you dismiss genuine questions as "goading."

glitterati is being deliberately naive.

Sex segregated spaces have been carved out by women, for women, over the last century or so - to give women privacy and protection from men.

But according to glitterati, we should just allow that to be waved away, because "sexual assault happens anyway" - what a bizarre argument

My 7:17 was to the DH of dek.

just signed

twofalls I think that the majority of TERFS will sign it, that doesn’t mean I think everyone who signs it is a TERF. Is that clearer?

Asking whether I think trans people are trans exclusionary is just ridiculous.

Girl Guiding now says on overnight camps a trans girl (born male, so a pubescent teen or pre-pubescent boy) should be able to choose to sleep in with the biological female girls and parents of the girls should not be informed.

Our local council now has the same guidance for schools, which will of course become law very soon. Reading through the pages and pages of guidance there is zero mention of any possible issues arising or how they could prevented/dealt with. It also goes on and on and on about the rights of trans pupil with no mention whatsoever about the rights of all the other pupils. No, girls are no longer allowed privacy to deal with menstruation etc.

It's all very well saying it doesn't bother me, as a confident adult female I'm not particularly concerned with how these changes will affect me personally at this moment in time as I have no issues standing up for myself (other than the fact I will be reported for a hate crime of course). But one day I'll be older, physically weaker and more vulnerable than I am now, my concerns are mainly for those members of society who are vulnerable, the elderly, children, domestic violence victims etc who may not be able to stand up for their selves. This was brought home to me last week when a friend who works in a hospital mentioned an incident involving a preop transgender patient exposing her penis to patients in a female ward, they had no idea of course they were sharing a ward with a biological male and it really made me think how vulnerable you can be stuck in a hospital bed.

Does anyone know anything about foster home guidance on this type of thing? Surely they would be hot on safe guarding?

Haidees, I referred specifically to victims of violence inflicted by women. It's very telling that you avoid that point and deflect it to refer to rape.

There are no single sex local authority care homes in my authority.

Glitterati

What genuine questions do you mean? I think people have already answered you.

In order to access woman's spaces/sports/jobs etc , men won't have to "lower" themselves by even dressing like a woman . There will be no nervous pretending, hoping real women won't notice they are male.

They will have full, legal entitlement to Self ID as a women, and go anywhere. With no changes to their bodies, and no attempt to "pass".

It's already happening in Canada, and Scotland are well on the road.

I think G1itterati thinks that 'identify as a woman' means either publicly dressing as a woman or actually declaring outloud that they identify as a woman.

Under self id none of that would be necessary.

That's what they don't understand.