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.

^@AccidentalKylie
I wish there was a petition for all these fucking boring TERFs to have their own separate spaces to fart on about absolute fiction forever^

😂 There is such a petition right now for women to continue to have their separate spaces. Just sign and maybe your wish will be granted 😉

Bless you, sinceyouask... The movement you've just described is the very reason we need our voices heard.

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 haven't heard anyone argue that. I have heard people raising concerns that, as it allows anyone to access same-sex spaces, self id is ripe for exploitation because history has demonstrated again and again that self-regulation isn't an effective safeguarding measure. But that's a different point.

But just because "people know he is a man" doesn't mean they will be able to do fuck all about it. It will be the law that their rights trump yours.

I will ask you again, why do you think trans people are concerned about self ID?

I actually think you are being deliberately obtuse now. And you can "whatabout" all you like, it doesn't change the fact women are set to loose protection and rights if self Id is pushed through.

G1itterati's posts actually make me want to hang my head against a wall. Either goady or just unable to understand clearly written information.

Bang not hang!

Fuck it, just shared this on facebook. I don't have a sensitive job/public sector employer, so am doing my bit for those who feel they can't.

It is a perfectly legitimate petition. It goes through a process to make sure it is ok before it is put out, then it goes to the petitions committee in parliament.

Ok I'm goady or thick because I don't necessarily agree.
You can give a whole loaf of "what ifs", but nobody else.
I just don't necessarily link self-identification with a greater propensity for attacks on women.

×Camomila* 👍 ♥️

G1itterati's posts actually make me want to hang my head against a wall. Either goady or just unable to understand clearly written information

Goady I think .

@g1itterati
I just don't necessarily link self-identification with a greater propensity for attacks on women.

Fair enough.

Why do you think the current system should change to self-ID?

"Implying a gay man pretending to be straight would become a scout leader to prey on boys

FFS do a little reading paedophilia is nothing to do with being gay

You are insulting"

Paedophillia is also nothing to do with being transgender or identifying as a woman.

A pp raised the "what if" of a man identifying as a woman to become a guide leader, the implication being that that would clearly be predatory. Why presume that?

You keep stating g1itterati that if a obvious man dressed in male clothes etc walked into a women's changing room then you would do something. We are saying that under this law you wouldn't be able to. What is your response to that?

My response to that would be that, legal or not, people have a right to not share spaces with anyone, male or female, that makes them feel uncomfortable. A man would not bother me simply because he has a penis. If there was something about that man that made me feel uncomfortable, I would articulate what that was and complain, if possible. It's the behaviour that matters, not what someone identifies as. Similsrly, if there was something about a woman that made me feel uncomfortable, I couldn't have her segregated on the grounds of sex or gender identification, but I could still state the reasons why I'm not comfortable staring a space with her.

How is saying that abusers can be gay, anti gay fgs. Abusers can be ANYONE. That is my whole point. Most abusers are within your own family. Am I now anti-family as well?

But g1itterati there are plenty of women who would be uncomfortable with that person in a women only space because they had a penis. They wouldn't be able to use that as grounds to say anything or complain. You are ok with penises in women's only spaces but lots of women aren't, often due to previous assualt etc.