Diva magazine is trans inclusive

[daimbars]

Statement on trans inclusion in a tweet from Diva, the UK's biggest lesbian magazine.
I'm pleased they've made their position clear, and support it.

Sex segregation is a thing Snappity. The majority of people don't want to give it up. Which is what you are in effect suggesting.

Males go to male spaces and females to female ones. Plus there could be a third space or option where possible to accommodate trans people.

Can you really not see why history suggests that is a terrible idea and why ethically it is so abhorrent?

We already segregate on sex lines in the very few places/scenarios it’s relevant. History shows it lowers the rate of violent attacks on women.

There's surely a workable suggestion out there, I'm just not sure what it is

Third spaces.

We also do it for reasons of privacy and dignity.

It's worth noting that the government have just issued guidance that reminds schools that they must provide sex segregated toilets and washing facilities in schools. Discussed here:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3291461-New-government-guidance-on-Gender-separation-in-mixed-schools

Back to the third space. Segregation of everyone who is biologically difficult. Can you really not see why history suggests that is a terrible idea and why ethically it is so abhorrent?

Can you really not see that you taking the word segregation and pretending it is akin to apartheid, is abhorrent. And very silly.

Of course we have sex segregation!

I honestly don't have enough durs.

When men stop raping women, objectifying and assaulting them, then we won't need it.

The thing with the EA exemptions is that the originations where these exemptions are designed to be used are aware of them they do routinely base approachs on this either through interview process, hr in reltion to employment or through approach to service users and considerations in fields like vulnerable adults where this can and is a issue on occasion. These exemptions are not currently design for the provison of changing facilities or toilets if and when the EA is reviewed then you will be able to campaign for the exemptions to be reviewed. Also the exemptions are not tested in practice as to do that would need people to challenge them and usually solutions are found before this on both sides when needed

It's definitely worth noting, enough, thanks.

But Snappity, you have agreed with the principle of a third space, for women who have issues sharing spaces with transwomen.

Would it help it feel less abhorrent to you if it were framed as these women choosing to segregate themselves away from everyone else?

This third space thing... there seems to be a blind spot there.

Trans women and trans men would be using the third space, right?

So there's a mix in there of natal male and female genitals (people who have not had bottom surgery) and surgically altered to resemble male and female genitals (people who have had bottom surgery). So how is safeguarding and risk management meant to work in that scenario?

The response to that point here is often that trans men would be welcomed in women's spaces I need order to keep them safe, but that doesn't hold up at all because it would open up women's spaces to anyone claiming to be a trans man. For a predatory male that would be a hell of a lot easier than going the self ID present as female route, and unless you're checking pants you're not going to know for sure.

Oh hang on, I think you wee meaning third space as in one where only natal women are permitted. Sorry. Wrong end of stick. The phrase gets used in both contexts, so please excuse my confusion.

Yes that’s sort of what I was getting at SuperDandy.

If the third space was for women who had issues sharing with transwomen, would this be less abhorrent?

I’m not saying going any further than this eg how workable it would be in different scenarios, just in principle would it be acceptable?

A third space for natal women, is the same thing.

Yes, a third unisex space would be a mixture of sexes. But as the provision does not need to be big in scope, I'm sure it could be self-contained.

Transwomen who want to use the ladies are perfectly happy with a mixed space. Evidently.

Transmen not passing can use the women's Space. Or if they do pass, the men's, or the mixed. How many more options do you need, for goodness sake.

Segregation of everyone who is biologically difficult.

This is totally illogical and incorrect! And no one is 'segregating' anyone except by sex. As examples posted above show, not everyone who would be (non)-segregated would be 'biologically' anything, let alone 'difficult'.

So, we have two spaces segregated by sex (just plain ole biology). For those whose appearance in the correctly-sexed space causes inconvenience/risk/confusion (transmen, butch dykes, drag queens, intersex, blokes in dresses, drag queens, effeminate gay men in full-on swish mode), or just anyone who doesn't want to use multi-person single-sex facilities for any and no particular reason, there is the alternative of (single-cubicle) 'gender-neutral', unisex, any and everyone able-bodied spaces.

Which gives everyone a choice!

Who knows my missus might even like to use it when the constant re-iteration of 'Oi mate, that's not the gents' gets to be too irksome.........

It's only the wilfull neglect and erasure of all these other groups and none that makes it look like transwomen choosing not to use the ladies (cos they pass so amazingly well you know), would automatically out these wonderfully-passing persons as transwomen.

If it's a space anyone can use it's not segregation. And for the sexed spaces, as long as (unlike my place of work, much grrrhhhhh ) there are equal numbers of cubicles for each sex, then there is no sex discrimination either. After all, given that some trans activists argue for all gender neutral facilities, how can the choice to use them be segregation? The only 'segregation' here is enforcing single-sex spaces, which then lets you see why some trans activists really, really want to get rid of these as well!

So there's a mix in there of natal male and female genitals (people who have not had bottom surgery) and surgically altered to resemble male and female genitals (people who have had bottom surgery). So how is safeguarding and risk management meant to work in that scenario?

So that’s a bad thing, yes? I’m glad you agree, because That is what will happen if self ID comes through.

A third space however, would need to be self contained.

Going back to your point daim about the motivations people have to transition and obtain a GRC.

It all worked really well when women trusted those motivations. It used to be accepted common knowledge that the people who transitioned were gay (I mean eg transwomen attracted to men), there were a tiny number of them, they usually had surgery as well as hormones, and they had a doctor supervising and adding a level of safeguarding to the process. Women, on the whole, trusted this.

Now we have for example, in prisons:

Ms Crook, executive director of theHoward League for Penal Reform, added: ‘These men are not transitioning because they like women and want to be a woman, but in order to exert a new kind of control and dominance over women, a sort of infiltration

The trust is gone.

I think it might be possible to get trust back, but this won’t happen if women’s concerns are dismissed and legal processes and protections are not open for women to scrutinise and satisfy themselves all is above board.

That’s why I asked you about what you thought about the Lib Dem LGBT twitter quote. It is both belittling women’s concerns and obfuscating the legal implications.

That is never going to win trust back.

Thanks for the explanation Datun

Are there any campaigns or petitions fighting for this third space? I've only heard it suggested here on Mumsnet.

I can see the logic in your suggestion but practically and financially I don't think it is viable. It would be a huge investment when such a tiny proportion of the population is trans.

Also I tend to agree with Snappity - history shows segregating people with biological differences doesn't end well.

There must be another way. I still think some kind of time lapse between getting a GRC and having the full rights of being a woman (single sex spaces, shortlists) is a practical solution.

LemonJello I think the Lib Dem Twitter thread is goady.

The problem is there are a lot of GC women who fall into different categories. There are reasonable, intelligent, thoughtful and passionate feminists who have a good grasp of the law - for example Hadley Freeman.

And then there are people who really have no idea what a GRC is, don't know the difference between the GRA and the EA, have never met a trans person in their life but don't fancy the idea of being in a changing room with a perverted man. It is these people that are getting scared by the things they read on FWR, who think that self ID means men will just be able to walk into female spaces unchallenged and assault women.

These people think they will be unable to challenge a man in a female space for fear of being transphobic. It is these people I believe the goady Twitter thread is addressing.

These people think they will be unable to challenge a man in a female space for fear of being transphobic. It is these people I believe the goady Twitter thread is addressing.

Man in my changing room. I say excuse me this is the ladies.
He says I am a transwoman.

Then what do I say?

who think that self ID means men will just be able to walk into female spaces unchallenged and assault women.

Men will be able to walk into female spaces
And you can challenge them but if they have a right to be there you will get nowhere.

So I’m half dressed, some chap wanders in and normally I’d tell him to bog off and inform the staff at the gym.
Under self ID, I will have to lump it.

How is that not worrying?

Lemon is right, Daim. It's the transactivists that have done the harm and removed the trust women had in the motivations of the old school transsexuals.

Now we hear and see prominent members of the trans community bringing up overtly sexual and even predatory motivations - , finding breaking women's boundaries exciting, and a wide range of mostly strikingly misogynistic paraphilias. Little age play 6 y.o Stefonknee Wolscht is a leading light of her local transgender community, for example.

Oddly enough paraphilias are almost unknown among women.

And then there are people who really have no idea what a GRC is, don't know the difference between the GRA and the EA, have never met a trans person in their life but don't fancy the idea of being in a changing room with a perverted man.

With respect I would dispute there are many people who fall into this category. The people who are aware of the issues all know their stuff, or find it out pretty fast. There are threads on here dedicated to getting people up to speed with lhe issues inc GRCs and the EqA.

But ok.

It is these people that are getting scared

How would you go about reassuring these people?

There must be another way. I still think some kind of time lapse between getting a GRC and having the full rights of being a woman (single sex spaces, shortlists) is a practical solution.

No it isn't. Most women don't want males in female spaces. The end.

The third space is the only fair solution. Expense is not a reasonable barrier in most cases. You are trying to dismiss it because you want full inclusion.

I'm also waiting for a response to Datun's question. I have asked this before.
Realistically, I no longer feel like I could challenge someone who I perceived to be male, in a space I feel should be reserved for females.
For fear of repercussion, whether that be awkwardness, verbal aggression, physical aggression or perhaps even the police being called and the fallout being widely broadcast.
On my own, I may well dare to. With my children present, no way would I risk it. I would just hold my tongue and leave, acquiesce to being pushed out of a space I previously thought I was safe in.