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.

I genuinely don't wish to be goading.

If there was a man, dressed as a man, who suddenly claimed to identify as a woman, this is easily identifiable. If they turned up in a women's group, that would raise my suspicion straight away. It's almost too obvious to have any impact.

If you look at the hospital situation above, I would be far more concerned about male doctors or nurses with predatory tendencies. Why assume a trans person is any more likely to be there for anything untoward?

What about predatory gay men who have always had full access to boys changing rooms and spaces - look at the church, boarding schools and so on?

Arghhhh but that's the point !! Identifiable as what? a man claiming to be a woman ?? Yes. That's exactly what they would be but with political backing not to be discriminated against for doing so or questioned on this .

That's the whole point of the petition

I have ignored all these threads till a few weeks ago, assuming it was a bit of a fuss about nothing , and ‘identifying’ as a progressive leftish person. Now I have started reading around both sides of the debate am truly shocked at the lack of regard for the impact of proposed changes on biological women, and the extent some TRAs are going to to try to stop a discussion about these impacts.

That’s why I signed and hope thousands of others will too.

If there was a man, dressed as a man, who suddenly claimed to identify as a woman, this is easily identifiable. If they turned up in a women's group, that would raise my suspicion straight away. It's almost too obvious to have any impact.

They could raise your suspicion all you want but you couldn’t challenge them on it. You would be in the wrong if you asked them to leave. If you don’t think there are a sub set of men who would thrive on invading a female space whilst knowing it makes the women uncomfortable and knowing the women can’t say anything then I can only assume you have led a very charmed life.

It's almost to obvious to have any impact

Eh? What does that mean? He will be legally in there with you, You can't ask him to leave.

Personally, I would feel quite impacted !

Just signed.

Thanks to everyone replying, to everyone signing and also everyone sharing.

Men who want to harm women will take advantage of self id. And it's not just your mother/sister/wife that they could be 'perving' on. It's your children too.

This argument makes little sense to me, regardless of gender if you are perving on or assaulting someone you are breaking the law...?

And in women's refuges surely the people they are most vulnerable to are their individual perpetrators, and they wouldn't suddenly be allowed access just because they're IDing as a woman?!

Because I was told that identity politics could never go too far, and political correctness couldn't cause harm.

Because I was told that anyone who talked about risking their jobs by being un-pc, or being afraid to speak out for having the wrong views, was a bigot who deserved it.

Because I was told that no-platforming was fine for certain views, and that free speech was another word for hate speech.

Because I was told I was complicit in the crimes of people who's views I didn't even share when I critiqued the arguments above.

Because when I warned of the potential consequences, I was called a bigot, a dinosaur, on the wrong side of history.

Because I see the same faces who believed in the above now back pedalling desperately, using the same language I used to mock when misogynists whinged about women in formerly male spaces or taking on male roles 'destroying manhood.'

And seeing them writhing in the world they created is hilarious.

Mainly though because separating biology from gendered-behaviour seems a great way to destroy the latter, which I think is ultimately good for equality, but I can't deny the delight I take in seeing hypocrisy exposed.

And I'm still waiting for anyone to give me any evidence of people posing as trans in order to abuse someone? I mean surely predatory men would be doing that already?

There's masses Pug. You just aren't looking. You could look at transcrime uk?

And in women's refuges surely the people they are most vulnerable to are their individual perpetrators, and they wouldn't suddenly be allowed access just because they're IDing as a woman?!

What even if it's illegal to deny them access based on this ?

Once again that is the whole point of why people are against self Id

How about this puglife?

Glitterati how about prisons. Predator self identifies as a woman, gets locked up with women. That will be the law. Sports, half decent runner but not elite, self ID as a woman, wins an Olympic medal. Crime figures will be affected because men who rape who say they are women. Your daughters girl guide leader could beca predatory male identifying as a woman. You want to complain the law will not be in your side.

Yes women commit crime, yes women are predators. But in far low numbers than men.

This debate is simply about self ID.

Because there are more important things to fight for at the moment.

The public sector- including education and health care- is being asset stripped.

Who uses which changing room is not something I can worry about in the face of that.

No of course he wouldn't deny a debate OP, but since he doesn't agree with the wording on the petition, he doesn't want to put his name to it - even if he agrees that self-ID is not a great idea.

I've signed because I see it as an objection to self-ID, even if I don't necessarily belong to the groups stated - but he won't.

(You did ask why people wouldn't sign it!)

People want proof of it happening, then they say 'but it's already happening'

Neon. Have you actually read the the thread. This isn't about changing rooms. It's about protecting woman's safe places from men who will use the law for their own purposes.

It's about refuges, healthcare, sports, women's shortlist's, education. Changing rooms is used as just one example but it's about much more than that.

It's about allowing men to self identify as woman and nobody being able to challenge them. The law will be in their side.

Why all the rumination on whether or not sex offenders will use this as a loophole?

This petition is about representation. For women. Those who stand to be most affected if self ID comes into play.

So far, women have not been represented at all in this conversation. Only men, maybe a select few female MPs, and basically groups of trans activists.

If you haven’t seen TRAs at work, then I urge you to google. They use misinformation to support their cause; they hound women, especially lesbian women, about their transphobia; they no platform any woman who dares speak out about their concerns or fears.

Personally, I think one person using self ID as a loophole to attack someone is too many. So I’m not in favour for that reason.

But if you won’t sign it because of the ‘what ifs’ around potential sexual attackers then I really fear for this country. Because it would appear that nothing women say is taken seriously or even considered at all. Ever. And when it looks like it might be - it’s shouted down with whataboutery or cries of bigotism.

Wish me luck. Am going to share it.

Scottish Government has stolen the word female and women and given it to men

This is a National Scandal

fairplayforwomen.com/scottish_stole_woman/

What a sad state of affairs when women have to petition to even have our voices heard. And that our government will quietly take away our sex based protections based on the loud voices of (mostly male) people that make up less than 1% of the population.

Don't be afraid twofalls

Good luck!

I'm normally the first to roll my eyes at all the trans threads on here, but the people claiming it's transphobic, have you actually read the petition? It's not even anti-self ID, it's just saying the consequences of the law should be discussed before it's passed.

Mephistopheles, I totally get where you're coming from (I was inwardly fist pumping while reading your post ), but I think sticking to your principles while feeling smug is better than refusing to help your opponents in applying them hypocritically. Not to mention that the most vehement supporters of no-platforming are going to be anti the petition anyway.

Because I genuinely think the whole thing is transphobic as fuck, whether you say it is or not.

I'm also keen to distance myself from the sensationalist woman who went to the male only swimming session. I don't believe that trans people are lying about their feelings around their gender in order to access single gender areas they couldn't otherwise come into. I think they are, you know, telling the truth about how they feel.

Every time I read one of the numerous anti-trans threads around at the moment I'm reminded of how bigots in the 80s used to talk about gay people - the assumption that they are somehow lying about their feelings in order to cause harm was around then too

x 100