Ladies bathrooms and trans acceptance

[RosettaStoned]

After reading many trans threads on here and other articles online I have come to realise I may have some internal conflict.

I'm generally a very open-minded live and let sort of person, always have been and I can't stand the thought of a person, be it man, woman or whatever, being unable to have their human rights acknowledged and dignified.

However I am opposed to self-identification as I feel it is prone to all sorts of abuse. That's just how I feel and various evidence backs up my concerns.

Anyway, I was reading an article (published 2 years ago) written by a woman about ladies public toilets and the fact that even when they were invented, women of the Victorian era were simply too embarrassed to use them in public.

Tying the point in to trans-issues, the author of the article goes on to say:

So where does that leave the transgender woman who would much rather endure the dirty looks of the ladies' room than the potential fists of the men's room? In a brutally unfair position, unfortunately. They are pioneers, and pioneers have never had an easy time of it. They live in a society that hasn't yet grown to accommodate them, just as ladies' bathrooms once didn't exist because society wasn't ready for women to pee in public. It sounds ridiculous, but that's how it is.

I must state that I don't wish to see a male in a female space unless there is a legitimate reason. But the author's comment about "transgendered people (sic) live in a society that hasn't yet grown to accommodate them" got me questioning my own belief system.

Will my children or my grandchildren (or anyone for that matter) one day look at me as someone with bigoted, old-fashioned views because self-ID will have a more common place in society as time goes on?

I'm perhaps not making myself very clear and before anyone jumps on me, no I am not calling anyone who opposes self-ID bigoted or old-fashioned. I am trying to get across that society changes all the time. In ten years time, self-ID may well and truly be as normal and everyday as wearing socks or drinking a brew. And society will adapt to it whether we want to or not.

What I'm asking is, what if the author makes a valid point? What if one day we do look back and see we were once 'out of touch' with the modern world? I dunno.... has anyone else questioned this?

In ten years time , self ID may well and truly be as normal and every day as wearing socks or drinking a brew.
This won't happen, because it's impossible to change biological sex and everyone knows that. Identifying as something doesn't turn us into that thing.

No it doesn't @noeffingidea and I truly appreciate what you are saying. But isn't that the point of changing the GRA? To enable people to use facilities aligned with the 'gender' that they feel more akin to rather than their birth sex?

Less pioneers than colonisers. The Native Americans weren't seen as 'ready' for the modern world when their territory was taken over, they were redefined, re organised and modernised. That's what is happening here.

If transgendered people were fighting for a third space, for their own provision, everyone here would be fighting right with them. Likewise an end to male violence, toxic masculinity and gender hierarchies that is the root cause of transwomen being afraid in mens facilities, and a hell of a lot of teenaged girls desperately trying to identify out of having to be women in this society. 70% of the children identifying as trans are girls. A modern society that has safety from harassment, assault and sexual violence - that I'm ready for. A modern society that cares about privacy and dignity for all - that I'm ready for.

But the trans movement is not about privacy and dignity for women at all, it doesn't think women are entitled to it. It uses highly misogynist and sexually violent language, threats and actions to silence, intimidate and control women. It polices and controls women's language and wants to remove women's freedoms. It doesn't care about women's religions or cultures. It wants to use police time and lawful punishment for those who commit blasphemy against what are quasi religious beliefs. You must obey, and lie convincingly to be safe.

That isn't modern at all. It's all very 15th century.

Or have I completely got the wrong end of the stick with Self-ID? It's open to abuse and the last I checked that's what people (mostly us women) don't want, so I don't understand how 'it won't happen'. I thought you didn't have to 'change sex' (even though you can't). I thought you just had to say you were man/women/non-binary etc

I know what you mean and I think it is possible that at some point, society will accept self-id and/or move to a stage where mixed sex facilities are the norm. It certainly seems as though we're on that path at the moment.

But... Will that be the end point for society? Will that norm endure for hundreds of years as being the norm for a tolerant society? Or will it be exploited by people who want to take advantage and commit crimes?

If we believe and trust the TRAs, then self-id/mixed sex facilities will become the norm with absolutely no threat or harm to females, and we'll all wonder what the big deal was. I hope they're right. I really do.

If they're wrong, females face a time where we need to accept anyone, absolutely anyone, in our spaces, and that could make things very uncomfortable and potentially very dangerous.

Personally, I'd like the right to debate such a huge change- not just the GRA, that's just a tiny part of it, but the wider societal changes. And I'd like to understand why some people are so sure that we'll get the fluffy, utopian version and not the scary one.

So where does that leave the transgender woman who would much rather endure the dirty looks of the ladies' room than the potential fists of the men's room?

I think what this shows is that those with the fists in the men’s room are the ones who need to take a long hard look at themselves.

^this.

I think what this shows is that those with the fists in the men’s room are the ones who need to take a long hard look at themselves.

And that they are the real danger, the real transphobes who need to be dealt with and reeducated.

My starting position on this was a very accepting one. I sympathised with transwomen and didn't want them to come to any harm and I was happy to have them alongside me in public toilets.
Then I started to learn more and question more and my position started to wobble.

The notion of self-id, the reality of the transwomen demanding access to women's spaces and the abuse I have witnessed from TRAs to women who ask questions, share concerns or speak out, my position has completely changed.

I do still sympathise with people who experience body dysphoria but everything about gender identity strikes me as harmful for both men and women and segregation must remain by sex.

I'm with JellyFisz, it really bugs me that it's always, always women who are called to solve these issues.

Absolutely agree with you there @MrsKCastle I would love to have a debate as to where this could lead and the wider societal impacts. I can't see many people are bothered though apart from on here. I don't know any TRAs so perhaps I am in my own little echo chamber, but I think keeping communication open on all sides is key.

Knicknackpaddyflak never have I read a more articulate, well written, well thought out but absolutely unequivocal statement of how it really is.

Interesting passage in the article I assume OP is referencing:

I was surprised. It was a nice enough store, and the ladies' dressing rooms were on the other side of the building from the men's. But these two women were not about to remove their clothing in public, even with the partition walls and locking doors.

There's a long history of women feeling ill at ease when expected to perform a private act in a public space, and this history is worth considering as the national debate rages over transgender individuals and bathroom laws. Comfort, privacy, and fear all played a part in creating our sex-segregated bathroom system, and will continue to influence whatever system we create going forward.

theweek.com/articles/621109/brief-history-ladies-bathroom

Ultimately, society needs to decide which facilities, if any, should be single sex. An appetite for single sex facilities is based on a desire to segregate by sex. It makes zero sense to decide single sex provision is warranted and then ignore the sex of some individuals on the basis of their identity.
It may be the case that some single sex provision is not suitable for some individuals. These people need to be catered for, but eradicating single sex provision to do so is not proportionate

I see where you're coming from, Rosetta, but you're missing fundamental parts of the issue, not least that sharing bathrooms is the least of our worries. Extrapolate it and multiply it by the 80% of trans women who have penises and you get the idea that, at the heart of it, safety is what motivates me.
Of course, it's not just about safety, but the privacy and dignity of women too. Furthermore, if we agree that TWAW and there is literally NO difference between them and a natal woman, how can we talk about privacy, dignity, safety and fairness without making a distinction between transwomen and natal women? We can't, it's impossible. If a person who was born a man retains EVERY aspect of maleness but simply says "I'm a woman" and goes on to commit offence/s of violence or sexual offences, self-ID will cause that crime/s to recorded as committed by a female.

Trans women are trans women; they absolutely have a right to be treated fairly and equally but fairness and equality does not always equate to being able to use whatever facility you want to. Men aren't treated unfairly by being told they cannot use women's facilities are they? I am deeply sympathetic to the plight of trans women but how can you have a proper debate when you refuse to acknowledge that biology, not gender identity, is the fundamental reason for segregation. Nobody is saying trans women are all rapists or murderers - well, I'm certainly not. I'm just stating - and will continue to do so - that there's a difference between a male and a female body and that those with female bodies should be entitled to separate spaces with no male bodies. Gender identity does not come into it at all.

Society will change. Of course it will, it always does. Who knew twenty years ago that people would look back on Friends and rip it apart for its 'bigotry' - the show that had a lesbian wedding as a major, positive event.

But society doesn't do that in a vacuum. The things we do now affect the direction in which the world will travel. We are not passive creatures watching some entity called 'society' change around us.

There are people pushing for a whole new kind of woo, a way of looking at the world that ignores material reality. I'm unapologetically a religious person, but I have no desire to see material reality subjugated to a new gender mysticism.

People can have their beliefs, and advocate for them freely, and I totally support that freedom. But I am not a passive being who will watch physical reality being obscured, and rights dismantled, and not say a damn thing about it.

I will campaign for an actually scientific society, and if future generations get stuck in a new dark ages, I will be content that it wasn't because I rolled over and said 'Sure, guys, whatever you want'.

Yes, that's the article I've just read heresy. Bathroom laws in the US and Bruce Springsteen brought me there

I am trying to get across that society changes all the time.

It hasn't changed though, has it, and it doesn't look like it's going to change any time soon. At the same time we are supposedly entering this brave new world of 'gender identity' where sex apparently doesn't matter any more, women and girls are being sexually assaulted (see the other thread about epidemic sexual abuse of girls in schools), perpetrators are rarely brought to justice, women are paid less than men, women receive horrendous abuse for daring to participate in political life, we still fight for bodily autonomy etc.

Nothing has changed but we are being expected to just ignore all this, dismiss our fears (from personal experience of male sexual assault and violence), stop talking about our bodies because it is exclusionary, to not be able to name male violence and misogyny for what it is, to remove the ability to accurately measure things like the pay gap and male sexual violence against women etc.

If society changes into one where biological sex genuinely doesn't matter, then we'll talk but, pretending it doesn't matter - and doesn't even exist, removes the ability of an oppressed group to name its oppression, protect itself and to fight for our rights.

I think most people just don’t care that much about loos. The sign on the door is just a social convention anyway. There’s no law that you can’t nip into the loo of the opposite sex (at least if there is I’ve broken it many times). There is a law against causing threat or harm to someone in a loo though. Personally I’d like to see more mix sexed facilities. It’s much easier for families getting changed/out with parents of opposite sex. I have reservations about the effect of self ID on prisons or women’s shelters but I just can’t get worked up about toilets.

Exactly, MsBeaujangles. As a society, we need to discuss the reasons behind sex segregation, and the circumstances where it is needed or preferable.

I can see absolutely no reason at all for segregation by gender. Especially as many people don't experience gender identity.

I honestly do think society does change. It may be gradual over time but I honestly believe societal attitudes change as the generations go on. But yes we still have a long way to go, it's far from perfect.

The problem with that is that the whole trans thing is backwards and regressive. We have been slowly working our way towards a gender less society. Just when we reached the point where we were really letting go of the last scraps of gender differentiation when raising our children (girls can do what boys do, dress are for everyone etc) this whole trans thing has somehow jumped from people with gender dysphoria transitioning to everyone who is gender non conforming being trans even if they say otherwise. It's just social conservatism dressed up as rainbows and unicorns. There is nothing professor about saying that if you like dolls and wear dresses you must be a girl.

"They live in a society that hasn't yet grown to accommodate them, "

It's men who need to learn to be accommodating. The piece says that much with looks vs fists.

There are lots of sorts of men who are at risk from other men, they can't all be put in with the women. Society needs to face up to and address the issues of violent crime and sex crime which are predominantly committed by men - and this is why women have certain things that are segregated by sex, why some people see them as safer and want in, and why we are saying no hold on, on what basis?

It would be better for all of society to make things safer for everyone, rather than shunting people around (and potentially putting people who were already separated due to heightened and specific risk, at even more risk).

There are certain things I really hope don't become normalised. Male-bodied people in female sports, for one.

So where does that leave the transgender woman who would much rather endure the dirty looks of the ladies' room than the potential fists of the men's room?

I have been pondering on this one. I don't think it is as clear-cut as that. In most cases, trans women will NOT be beaten up for using the men's toilets. If they were to use them in some dodgy pubs, then yes, they would probably be at risk of violence, as would an effeminate man or cross-dresser. If however, they were out and about at e.g. a service station, the library, at work, I do not think they would encounter fists. It is more that they use the ladies toilets because that validates their identity and makes them feel like a real woman. It doesn't matter to them if women give them 'dirty looks' because their chief concern is validating their own feelings. In their minds, the only reason a woman could have for giving them dirty looks is bigotry.

That leads me onto the second point, which is that women do not think that they will automatically get attacked by trans women in the toilets. We are not being hysterical by imagining that they are all boogeymen. I know that if I used the men's room at work that my male colleagues would be unlikely to attack me. There is another reason for it, which is privacy and dignity. I am entitled to get undressed in a space without male bodies because I legitimately feel more comfortable doing so.

TRAs do not condemn sex segregation. If they did, I would have more respect for them (although I would disagree). They support it, but say that some male bodies are allowed into female spaces because otherwise it would offend those males. So what they are saying is that trans women have a right to privacy, dignity and safety by using women's facilities but that women do not. Women who object to male bodies in their spaces are nasty and transphobic bigots. They are accused of being obsessed with genitalia and told to educate themselves. If the argument is analysed carefully, there can be no other conclusion than that women's rights to safety, privacy and dignity simply don't matter. We have no right to be free of male bodies, ever.