What's wrong with fighting for the third space?

[DJLippy]

Can't we resolve all these Trans vs feminist issues with a third space option?

Male/Female as well as unisex intimate spaces
Unisex for those who do not mind (or don't want to wait ages for the bog!) But M/F spaces respect those who have religious reasons for intimate spaces away from the opposite sex and also people who need these spaces because of trauma.

Prison's for transgender folk who feel threatened in male spaces.
Nobody should be at risk from sexual violence

Domestic violence and rape crisis support services for transwomen.
Don't trans folk deserve specialist services? If I was a victim of assault I would want people who understood me to provide support

This is all I want and I am sure many women on this sight feel the same. Is this a valid working compromise?

Do you really think thats a gotcha?
The sign on the door says 'women only'. Its a social contract. Activists are trying to destroy the concept of the consensual social contract and boundaries.
Don't try to dress it up as progressive or feminism.

RatRolyPoly "Except they may have permission from the people who actually have control over the space"

That would be fine if females had been asked originally if they actively agreed [consented] to have their space opened up to everyone else. They never have been asked though.

"Except they may have permission from the people who actually have control over the space, and therefore have the capacity to grant or withhold consent in the first place."
Don't know much about women's history , do you, with this sort of statement.

When you open the door to a women's changing room it's an act of consent, to see women naked and to be seen naked. It's based on the common understanding of what a woman is. Do you understand that?

You've bizarrely philosophised this situation; it isn't an "act if consent", no matter how wonderfully emotive it would sound if it were.

When you yourself consent to using a changing room owned by someone else you tacitly accept that you will abide by the rules of that space. If the rules include sharing it with someone you don't want to share it with - perhaps your neighbour hates you and you don't feel safe around her, I don't know - the way you withhold your consent in that instance is not to use the changing room. You do not have the power over that space to refuse them entry; you cannot "not consent". Consent is not the right word for what you want to do there. What you want to do is "object". That's fine, object away.

Don't know much about women's history , do you, with this sort of statement.

Hello, I don't believe we've met. I know a fair bit; as much as most here I would say. I've been knocking round these parts a while, perhaps you have too?

That door is a Boundry that says I can get my kit off in the assurance that there will be no mail bodied people around, hence the door being marked women. I remove my clothes on the understanding that only women are allowed in that space, so I am giving my consent to removing my kit on that condition. To allow a male bodied person through that door is a breach of the consent and agreement of that space, and a breach of the consent of the women within.

RatRolyPoly "Actually it's looking more and more like you don't understand consent and "personal" boundaries... "

You seem to be suggesting here that consent applies only in relation to sexual intercourse rather than beyond that to other relations between females and males.

It's not in any way philosophical. When you enter a women's change you consent to be seen naked and to see people naked. Two centimetres away, outside that door, unacceptable. Inside: to be expected.

You sound desperate.

Do you really think thats a gotcha?

God, what is with everyone calling everything a "gotcha" these days? No, it's not a "gotcha", it's a "why do you think it's appropriate to use that word? Genuine explanations gratefully received". Has everyone forgotten how to have a conversation?

The sign on the door says 'women only'. Its a social contract. Activists are trying to destroy the concept of the consensual social contract and boundaries.

So it's the concept of consensual social contracts is it? What is that please, it's a completely new collection of words to be shoehorned together for me. Is this something everyone else here has heard of and that's why you all think "consent" is the appropriate word for someone who doesn't want to share someone else's loos with other members of the public?

Sea lion. You can't be this dim.

RatRolyPoly "When you yourself consent to using a changing room owned by someone else you tacitly accept that you will abide by the rules of that space."

Indeed .. and the 'rules' are being changed without any females being asked to actively agree [consent] to those changes. And those 'rule' changes are actually against current law as written in the Equality Act 2010:

sisterhoodispowerful.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/how-legislation-protects-women-only-spaces-and-services-an-overview-june-2016.pdf

You seem to be suggesting here that consent applies only in relation to sexual intercourse rather than beyond that to other relations between females and males.

Well, way to read only the words that were written. It's called an example.

What I'm actually saying is that your consent, surely, is only meaningful when you apply it to something over which you have the power to confer it. So I can't consent on your behalf, I can't give consent for someone to do something to your property, I can't consent to someone babysitting your children and I can't consent to who you let in your front door - regardless of whether or not I'm sitting in your living room.

Pratchet, you at least a little bit know me. I'm neither a sea lion nor dim.

Anyway, meeting, brb. Can't wait to see what abuse you've posted behind my back. Ta ra!

If you think it's ok to go into a women only space with a penis because the legal owner of that physical space says it's ok, I'm not sure you really get it.

That door IS a boundary. As I said upthread, countless times Ive had a wee with the buggy jammed in the door so I can keep an eye on the baby.

That’s just one example of something that wouldn’t be safe in a unisex space.

Why the obsession with penetrating every single women owned space there is? It’s like women cannot possibly be allowed any fucking privacy.

I demand my safety, my dignity and my privacy from the male gaze. I demand it, I will fight for it.

RatRolyPoly

RatRolyPoly "your consent, surely, is only meaningful when you apply it to something over which you have the power to confer it"

Yes .. and being in the designated Women's Room, as women we do, have that power to confer it, while we occupy that room. That's the point.

The fact that the room is designated as a private space for females gives every female the power to give consent or not to men.

Three runners before lunch!

Those damned facts we keep presenting, eh? They do keep getting in the way of the opinions of these men.

Still catching up with this very long thread, but wanted to echo my support of re-assigning the men's to "gender neutral" facilities. Snappity seems awfully worried that the ladybrains won't know how to work the urinals in there - well, 80% of the ladybrains will find it easier than ever before! (see pic) And to be mindful of "reaffirming their gender identity", some of the urinals could have pink sparkles!

NewbieSpartacus wins the answer to the question:
How do you make urinals gender (or sex) neutral?
with A funnel.

Women's spaces as a general principle are a collective boundary

Personal boundaries are found within that collective boundary ie I don't enter a cubicle whilst another woman uses it

Consent is both personal and collective but it's not just down to personal power

I personally need to give my consent for some things to occur to me as a person ie non emergency medical treatment

Society as a collective agrees with that personal consent (broadly speaking) being required unless it says I have to consent by law. In the case of emergency treatment for example, where I can't give my consent.

This is not a simple concept just related to power to choose. It doesn't work that way, rat. In addition under 18s can't legally consent to all sorts of things. It's not that clear cut

Perceptions are another thing entirely and I've no time

Things are being conflated

Imagine that - we have to explain consent and privacy to transadvocates. Who knew.

Rat

By your logic a woman in a swimming pool with unisex changing rooms has 3 options:

1.Submit to unisex rules

1. Not go swimming
2. Object and withhold acceptance of rules

Can you see how the rules become a barrier to equality of opportunity for some women?

Yawn

We may not own the changing room, but we own the right to our privacy dignity and safety.
We have the power to confer consent over that.
We don't consent to having our boundaries violated. We don't consent to having our spaces invaded.
No
No
We are saying no.
Why aren't you listening?