Hampstead Heath Women's Pond

[Gacapa]

Hampstead Heath ladies say swimming pond is not gender fluid

dailym.ai/2El0eLA

Here we go...

'it is tempting to assume someone’s gender simply by their appearance, it’s important to try to avoid doing so and to be aware of the needs of genuinely transgender women.'

But the problem is not with assuming their gender, surely? The problem is with identifying their sex. Its a sex rather than gender segregated area.
Also: genuinely transgender women? that reads as though they know there will be chancers. But how can we tell the difference? so we have to wait for our boundaries to be violated in some way before we complain?

'You may need to do some education work with other centre users who may be concerned when sharing a space with a trans person, especially if a trans customer looks to have different physical characteristics to the gender they are identifying with i.e. a male to female trans customer who has not had top or bottom surgery may still look like a male to others,'

Because they do look like a bloody male, they are biologically male and the gender they identify with does not make it any easier on the privacy, dignity or decency for women suddenly expected to abandon all socialisation and get their kit off around men. Despite that privacy, dignity and decency being written into all other legislation. So 'education' means basically 'shut up, you can't say that' and 'either get over your discomfort or leave this space'.

Stop the fucking planet, I want to get off. The sheer incoherence of it all is infuriating.

No one's doing any fucking education brainwashing on me thanks.

I don't get it. (And it may be starting to get to me to the point I need a break, admittedly.)

Why not just abandon ALL sex segregation, because there's no longer any need for it, everyone has to be fine with any biology because it doesn't matter any more? What is the point or logic of maintaining the illusion of segregation?

Just a question so don't lynch me... but surely this also means it works in reverse? That female to male transistioning people are allowed to use the male pool... therefore were not losing a pool but also gaining a pool? Secondly... if either mtf or ftm trans people want to use pools... who is going to stand and check what their DNA says? I could have been using pools with trans people for years and not known about it and still lived to tell the tale. I don't like getting changed in front of ANYONE, male or female, but I don't insist on my own locked cubicle everywhere I go... incidentally I do think this is what should happen, and with toilets too but that's by the by.
The point of the equality act (law so don't lynch me personally I'm not saying I agree) is that a trans female for all intents and purposes are female and can't be discriminated against and is on the same level as the other 9 characteristics. Including race. We would never dream nowadays of saying I'm not sharing a pool with someone based on their race, the law also means you can't do this for whatever trans status someone might be.
I'm going there to swim not check out what genitals people have.

JumpedOverTheMoon

What about women from other cultures than your that are prohibited from swimming with biological men?

Its just not good enough for women to to complain that feminism is white and middle class, and to call themselves intersectional feminists, and at the same time be so exclusive.

Telling women to shut up and stay at home is the precise opposite of what feminists have spent the last 100 years doing.

*Irk , I don't know, but what is to stop a "convincing" trans person having been swimming with me for years? Regardless of what culture I am assumed to have?

A woman once told me how bizarre she finds it that her husband can't tell when a man is dressed as a woman. She thinks it's utterly obvious to anyone with eyeballs, but all he sees is a long blonde wig and lipstick and concludes "woman".

I think it's because men's lives don't depend on being able to distinguish the threat of men from the non-threat of women on a daily, lifelong basis. Maybe in certain limited situation at night in a high-crime part of town, but not the vigilant hyper-awareness in ALL arenas of life that women are forced to learn as little girls.

JumpedOverTheMoon

Firstly, most transwomen do not pass. Particularly in a swimsuit.

Secondly, it doesn't matter if they pass or not, as that doesn't alter the fact that they are male.

Thirdly it would be considered highly transphobic to make passing any kind of condition at all. Not to mention sexist.

Fourthly, of the transwomen who are autogynephiles, not passing is almost a plus. As long as you forced to regard them as female.

And finally, you seem to be able to completely ignore the inherent power dynamic between men and women. Men commit 98% percent of sexually violent crime. Whether they transition or not. Did #metoo pass you by?

In the power hierarchy, men are at the top and women at the bottom. None of this changes due to identifying as the opposite sex. None of it.

I'm copying a comment I made elsewhere to see if I can explain.

Only women care about this.

"Man don't care. Because women identifying as men are no threat to men, whatsoever. No threat in the toilets, locker rooms, or in sport, rape refuges or shelters.

Women identifying as men are not becoming man of the year, or taking public posts designed for men.

There are no diversity programs necessary for men, so women identifying as men can't take them.

Men are absolutely not being told never to mention their prostate or their biology in case it is exclusionary to women identifying as men.

Men are not being told to call themselves people who ejaculate, or penis bearers. By women.

Men are not congregating to try and mitigate the effects of the amendments to the GRA. Neither are they worried that women might be transferred to a man's prison.

Men don't give a shiny shit.

Because it simply doesn't affect them.

You can call them cis all you like. They don't care because they know full well it won't make the slightest dent in their status.

The one possible issue which might be to women's advantage, that of primogeniture, is exempt.

If a woman wants to identify as a man and inherit the title, the estate and take her seat in the House of Lords. Guess what? She can't. Because there is an exemption forbidding it.

It's amazing how every man in the government will consider men as women when it's only women at stake, but switch it back and hello, a sex change? that's impossible!

Ask yourself this. Why are transwomen feted and celebrated as woman of the year, the first women's officer, the first female directors of a trilogy, the first woman to win this medal, the first woman in the Forbes 400, the first woman on the front line?

Whilst transmen are famous for giving birth and being raped.

Biology innit.

It bloody matters."

Many if not most trans men quietly use womens' provision as safer. The poor sobbing transman who was raped in a taxi told the police 'I kept telling him I was a man', but the rapist was only interested in making use of their biology, their gender identity was of no interest to him.

JumpedOverTheMoon
Irk , I don't know, but what is to stop a "convincing" trans person having been swimming with me for years? Regardless of what culture I am assumed to have?

Try to make this not about you, and think of women who are not from your culture. Why are trans people more important to you than other women?
Whats wrong with the third space option?

I know men who are bothered that they have to share their changing rooms with ftm trans. And yes it suck all the stuff about house of Lords but they are a 50years behine everything including sexism and I sometimes wonder what planet they are on but that's a different issue.
Of course they need diversity stuff for them too. 2weeks paternity leave compared to a year maternity? No support for post natal stuff for them either? Mental health charities specifically for men because of the rate of suicides... could go on. Yes the power balance is shocking and so wrong not denying that.

Irk you are making assumptions about my culture and it's not all about me as I said I prefer to get dressed in private and singular (unisex) locked cubicles are what I'd prefer so I'm not dressing with either males or females. My body is private and so is everyone elses.

Diversity quotas aren't paternity rights.

It's entirely conceivable that if a company wanted 50 percent women on the board, they could have 50 percent men and 50 percent transwomen.

I'm sure there are men who would feel uncomfortable changing around women. But they're not threatened by them, which is the difference.

Not sure what suicide or men's mental health has got to do it.

We would never dream nowadays of saying I'm not sharing a pool with someone based on their race

Completely different thing. If you don't want to share a pool or changing room with someone based on the colour of their skin or their sexuality it's because you have a prejudice against it and you're offended. That's the limit of the offence against you. The colour of their skin or their sexuality has no practical bearing on you other than to challenge your view.

You're arguing in effect for the end of sex segregation - which is a rational POV and conversation to have. Why have we kept sex segregation when we got rid of race segregation etc so many decades ago? Not because of silly prejudices, but because of privacy, dignity and safety of women. Men in women's intimate spaces involves risk. We also in this culture believe it's not ok for people to be expected to get undressed in front of the opposite sex, for reasons (I quote the Equality Act) of privacy, dignity and decency.

My point is that all this ideology is about maintaining sex segregation for exacty the reasons above. However at the same time, if that person with the biology of the opposite sex verbally identifies as a woman then you are supposed to trust unconditionally in their good intentions, switch off both your concerns about privacy, dignity and decency on the spot and abandon any concerns about risk. It's insane. If the person says they identify as a man then the risk/privacy/dignity stuff is stood by firmly. If they say they identify as a woman however, any issues you have about risk/privacy/dignity are suddenly a silly prejudice in your head.

How is this in any way sane?

JumpedOverTheMoon

Show me where I made any assumptions about 'your culture'.

Stop telling women to get over it, many of us cant share with biological men. We are already protected by the Equality Act on the grounds of sex, race and religion.
Its illegal to remove those protections.

In the case of The Ponds; there are 3 ponds. One is for men, one is unisex. Trans people have 2 other ponds to use. they dont have to oppress women by insisting on using the women only pond.

Its a no brainer.

Yes but that equality act also protects trans too and a trans female is a female. But there are no trans pools. They can go in the mixed if theres the option or go in the male session dressed as a female? Who would be unsafe then? In this instance there are other available options too but often the trans are also vilified and assaulted by men so the safety of the women's pool might also appeal to them for the same reasons.

So again, you're saying that the safety of a trans person overrides the safety of a woman.

No I'm saying what the law says

Women are also frequently vilified and assaulted when in he company of men. Which is why they don't like the idea of being naked and in swimwear around them. Any type of men, including the subset of men referred to as trans women.

A trans woman or otherwise gender non conforming man would be very safe in the men's pond at Hampstead. It's definitely not the sort of crowd that are heavily invested in policing masculinity!

It's not about safety it's about validation.

One here we go...we've GAINED A POOL EVERYONE!

Fucking. Hell.

JumpedOverTheMoon
No I'm saying what the law says

No you arent, the Equality Act cannot legally be overwritten by rights for one group at the expense of the others.

I'm saying what the law says

The law is in an advanced state of cognitive dissonance and getting more confused by the day.

Ah Irk I've never actually understood what happens if two rights are conflicted. Interested in a genuine answer there.
Otherwise I'm out, Monday calls :(