Jenni Murray Woman's hour today (trans)

[Notwhatiexpected]

Hey,
Did anyone hear Jenni Murray on woman's hour today, her guest was India Willoughby. India is trans and was advocating that it was correct for the Dorchester to dictate that their female staff shave their legs.

India was very spiked in her conversation and implied Jenni was transphobic because the panalists didn't agree.

Again, a woman being called transphobic because they didn't agree with a transwoman's opinion.

Thank you Jenni for standing up for women!

Actually, diem that would be restrictive, punitive towards women, and generally unnecessary, what with most public places being open and well-populated
But given that potential (some studies show as high as 1 in 8 men have commited sexual assault or rape,) it is best to be cautious. Which is why keeping males out of places where females are more vulnerable to sexual assault or rape, is so important for the safety (actual and perceived) of women and girls.

My point remains consistent. Reductionist arguments based on genitals are dangerous. Particularly since the same arguments have been used to keep women in their 'safe place' by men and women who 'care for their safety' for centuries.

I think the suggestion of self-defence is a great one. Should be compulsory. Especially when so much assault happens in marriage/from intimate partners and not in public toilets with a fake transwoman.

"Interestingly, pre -operative male transgenders can commit the offence because they are still legally male, whereas post-operative female transgenders cannot commit the offence because they are still legally female."

Your post has lost me. Under Scots law the "legally" male or female is not a concept.

Rape in Scotland is committed by the insertion of Person A's penis in the vagina, anus or mouth of Person B without Person B's consent. Penis includes a surgically constructed penis. The sex (or gender) of Person A and Person B is irrelevant.

The equivalent English Act refers to "his penis" but I don't believe for 1 minute the application of the law would be different- I. E saying but "it's her penis, not his" would result in it not being prosecuted as rape.

A person can be raped by a person with a shampoo bottle in a shower

Nonsense. That is sexual assault by penetration, not rape. Rape requires a penis .

They're not reductionist though. They are based on science, statistics and conviction rates.

Your points, Diem, slip away when challenged only to reappear in different format. Men, including transwomen, commit 98% of sex crime and 90% of violent crime. Lesser crimes like peeping and filming are carried out by men against women, often in intimate settings like public loos.

Women have solid reasons, therefore, to insist on sex segregated spaces for our privacy, dignity and safety. A long term study of the entire transgender population of Sweden found that transwomen commit crimes at the same rate as other men. Allowing men, however they identify, into these spaces is very much against women's interests.

Moving back to the article. There are more comments, and I have to say I'm loving the fact that most of them are boiling down to "who cares". Massive blow for attention-seeking India .

Lass

This is the link I took it from. Third and fourth paragraph. Although I have heard that the law around this issue is different in Scotland.

www.blmsolicitors.co.uk/2014/03/is-the-law-on-rape-sexist/

My point does not slip away. But nice try.

Some want safe spaces - fine. Some want to transbash and indeed menbash - not fine. Even to get safe spaces - NOT FINE. I want freedom and human dignity for all.

I don't want our daughters fed crap that they are small and weak and vulnerable to attack, or our sons hearing this horsehit about their rape potential, or some dick telling me that rape with a glass bottle is 'actually' sexual assault, unless they are actually a) in court and b) actually defending some sick mf for shedloads of cash.

Argue for three types of loo - strict segregated, mixed and strict segregated. Just do not increase steretyping and spread fear. Simples

Just do not increase steretyping
You see, I though India, with her ever-so-wise understanding of leg shaving, was increasing stereotypes.

Or did I just not understand?

Apologies. I didnt mean to call you a dick. I lost my cool. You were finding information.

She was - and she is clearly wrong to do so. We should not do the same.

Datun as others have said the convictions of females are either for attempted rape or intact trans women.

or some dick telling me that rape with a glass bottle is 'actually' sexual assault, unless they are actually a) in court and b) actually defending some sick mf for shedloads of cash

Charming. I am a lawyer , although civil not criminal. Whether in or out of court what you have described is a serious sexual assault, not rape.

You want to get an argument from me, Lass, because that's what I thought, but then I read this.

A woman can legally rape a man however if she acts as an accomplice.

So either those solicitors are misinformed, or there seems to be an additional definition in extreme circumstances.

I too, wholeheartedly agree with three separate toilets. But I don't understand someone would want that, if they perceive no threat in the first place.

A woman can be convicted of rape in Scotland on an art and part basis if she helps a man rape another woman or man. In England she'd be convicted as an accessory.

Diem your posts don't make much sense so PFO with telling women what to do.

don't want our daughters fed crap that they are small and weak and vulnerable to attack

That is just basic science. Women tend to be smaller and weaker than men.

Science doesn't exist in lala land, merry...

Physically we are weaker and more vulnerable to attack unfortunately. Most men are much bigger and stronger than me. I want my safe space and if I had a daughter I'd want it for her too.

err.. I don't want my kids fed crap that women aren't smaller and weaker (by about 6 inches and 2 stone) - since that is the scientific truth, and I do like to be accurate.

Diem

I don't want to warn my daughter against rape. I wish we lived in a world without it.

However we live in a world with rape, so yes, I do have to warn her.

I don't honestly care if transwomen are rapists or not. The fact remains that if you allow anyone to enter any space solely on their say so, there is no point in having segregated spaces at all.

Modern feminism needs women to fear men or colloquially "fully cocked" people, it doesn't work without it. The logical conclusion of most feminist logic is more segregation. Segregation that would require to be enforced by men, ironically.

That said the idea you can "feel like a woman" is complete nonsense.

I don't know how you get that from what's been said, flaxenhair. Feminists want sex segregated spaces to stay segregated because they are settings in which women are particularly vulnerable. Public loos, showers, hospital wards, prisons, refuges: if these facilities were unisex they would offer rich pickings to predatory men. They are sex segregated for very good reasons.

Once transwomen are permitted access to such spaces then any man will be able to come in. It strikes me as pretty rich that those who sympathize with the risks transwomen claim they face in male loos don't seem to register that by demanding transwomen use women's spaces they extend this risk to all women.