Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Sarah Vine weighs in on gender-neutral loos in the DM

79 replies

BoreOfWhabylon · 17/08/2018 10:13

And for once I find myself in full agreement with her
www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6069359/SARAH-VINE-writes-sums-modern-world-better-gender-neutral-loos.html

Whitehall is not the only culprit. Everywhere you look — in schools, prisons, universities, local authorities and businesses — you will find people in authority too cowardly to push back against this relentless drive to enforce the whims of the few at the expense of the many.

To dismiss those of us who oppose these so-called gender-neutral spaces as non-inclusive bigots is one of the biggest collective acts of sexual aggression towards women we have seen in recent years.

In seeking to uphold the rights of men to re-cast themselves as female, we are invading precious and vital women-only spaces in a manner that is offensive and even intimidating towards women.

OP posts:
ginghamstarfish · 17/08/2018 12:12

Sorry, missing the point but £8000 for a sign? Great use of taxpayer money there.

theOtherPamAyres · 17/08/2018 12:12

This wasn't an article about trans femme men accessing women-only spaces. I don't understand why people are saying that she should have mentioned this or that about transfemme men and their penises.

She was mocking the woke.

She was putting forward reasons why unisex facilities are a crap idea (see what I did there?).

She gave some pointed and personal examples of when the Ladies was her refuge and a place to express milk.

Give her a break and a round of applause. Maybe next time, she'll turn her attention to the GRA.

HotRocker · 17/08/2018 12:13

I must add though, for the record, that my views don’t come from a place of transphobia. I doubt very much she gives any more fucks about womens’ rights than she does about the rights of transpeople, where as I give plenty of fucks about both, just not at the expense of each other.

MnerXX · 17/08/2018 12:16

Great article.

TerfsUp · 17/08/2018 12:29

Ah. Thanks, Bore.

that doesn't mean I agreed with the murder of 6 million Jews.

This is a bit of sore point with me. Hitler targeted the disabled, trade unionists, Slavs etc. 12 million people died in concentration camps and to ignore their deaths is a travesty and a distortion of history.

ErrolTheDragon · 17/08/2018 12:32

The reality of the problems of 'gender neutral' (ie badly designed unisex) loos really isn't mostly about trans people. They may be the reason they're being introduced but the problem is that for all sorts of reasons women don't want to share a loo with men. (And some men doubtless don't want to share with women either). I think SV does a fair job on explaining this.

But I really didn't like her shoehorning in the Jack Whitehall issue - apart from serving her (and the DMs) 'PC gorn mad' agenda, it's a very different case.

scepticalwoman · 17/08/2018 12:35

Most people don't want gender neutral toilets - it's just that nobody ever asks the public. Those in power just follow the demands of trans lobby groups.

Lottapianos · 17/08/2018 12:42

It's unsettling how this debate has put gender critical feminists on the same side as people like Sarah Vine, Nick Ferrari, Piers Morgan etc. Hmm Grin A stopped clock and all that...

Hangingaroundtheportal · 17/08/2018 12:59

This is a bit of sore point with me. Hitler targeted the disabled, trade unionists, Slavs etc. 12 million people died in concentration camps and to ignore their deaths is a travesty and a distortion of history.

Sorry, fair point, you are totally right.

TerfsUp · 17/08/2018 13:14

It wasn't mean as a criticism! It just happens a lot.

And thank you for being so gracious.

Datun · 17/08/2018 13:17

You don't have to have a political affiliation to understand and agree with sex segregation.

It's been mentioned before that the goal is to publicise the details of gender law so people understand the implications. Resulting (hopefully) in an agreement with sex segregation.

Most people do agree. They just don't know it's under threat. Therefore you are, by default, going to be agreeing with people who's politics and attitude you otherwise vehemently oppose.

It's unavoidable.

Datun · 17/08/2018 13:17

*whose

hackmum · 17/08/2018 13:26

But I really didn't like her shoehorning in the Jack Whitehall issue - apart from serving her (and the DMs) 'PC gorn mad' agenda, it's a very different case.

It is a different case, but I think she's right. Sorry for going off-topic but a thing that has really wound me up this morning is a Guardian article about how wonderful it is that white characters in a new version of David Copperfield will be played by black actors. I agree that it's a good thing - I don't have a problem with it - but this is the same publication that only a few days ago had an article about how terrible it was that Jack Whitehall was being allowed to play a gay character.

Also today's article goes on to say how great it is that transwomen are now being cast in women's roles - without mentioning the huge furore that happens whenever a woman is cast as a transperson. Double standards galore.

As you were...

IAmNotAntiWomen · 17/08/2018 13:51

The Guardian is failing the DM isn't, I can see why.

The vast majority of people know that men can't become women.

Happy to shrug at people who read the Guardian and work at the BBC believing in Tinker Bell plays games with her pinkie dust allotting a bank of male/female souls into the wrong bodies for giggles? I assume this is where the source of the mix up is happening, it's never explained?

The Guardian is like a company that takes over another, that once had a good name for producing good quality products - then turns out inferior ones under the trademark for the same price. Think Thornton and Cadbury, that's the Guardian.

The Guardian should not be doing a Ron Hubbard, if people don't believe in fairies, Tinker Bell and wrong souls floating around, its their right to not believe.

I am sure Sarah Vine believes the earth is round, that gravity exists and that the sky is blue also.

Wanderabout · 17/08/2018 14:55

Can someone tech savvy tweet a screenshot of Datun's Self-ID briefing post to Sarah Vine. It said:

if Sarah Vine is reading this, please note that yes it's quite true you don't have to have any kind of modification whatsoever, to be trans. Your husband could be trans this afternoon. And you and everyone else would be considered transphobic for challenging it.

You might ask your readership to consider the difference between a cross dresser who gets sexual kick from accessing women's stuff, and a transwoman. According to Stonewall, there isn't one.

Datun · 17/08/2018 14:56

Take my name off, if you can. Sick to death of being the dog whistle for abusive transactivists.

Wanderabout · 17/08/2018 15:08

Sorry Datun didn't mean to direct unwanted attention to you Flowers

TransplantsArePlants · 17/08/2018 15:31

I might have to go and have a lie down because I like something Sarah Vile has written. Euuurgh.

MrGHardy · 17/08/2018 15:41

"I agree with that quote but that leaves me so-o-o-o conflicted."

Why? This is exactly what breeds extremism and polarization of society. It is exactly what the trans cult thrives on - no one can even begin to question one bit of the dogma, else they are ostracized. You are with the full program, or a mortal enemy.

Who cares if you generally think this woman is wrong/terrible. What matters is she is correct on the topic being discussed.

TransplantsArePlants · 17/08/2018 15:47

MtG

You are right.

nauticant · 17/08/2018 16:11

If you're going to quibble over the first part of my post MrGHardy, don't leave out the second part:

Ahh well, if someone says something that's right, then it's right.

To make it clear I'm just recognising the uneasy bedfellows feeling many of us have, but then go on to say that what is right is paramount.

PeakPants · 17/08/2018 16:17

Sarah Vine is a misogynistic idiot and I would never retweet her or anything, but what she says there is correct.
Although tomorrow she will be back to saying that nobody over 45 should be allowed to wear a bikini or something.

Radardetector · 17/08/2018 16:30

I can't understand who the gender neutral toilets ate for.

If self id comes in, then all trans people can use the single sex facility of their choice, and TBH I get the impression even the most dubious "women" are already using the ladies anyway. Plus trans people want the validation of using sex segregated. So I don't think trans people want them.

I assume men don't want women moaning at them about what disgusting pigs they are in public toilets. Plus most would probably rather wank and shit without women present.

Women obviously don't want them.

So who are these toilets for, why spend all that money? No one is happy with them. I would actually prefer occasionally bumping into an autogenaphile in the ladies then having to share with all of man kind. I'm not sure I could actually use a gender neutral loo at all.

Are these just for non binary people, or do they think gender neutral stops the argument between woman and trans people. Like take the toy away and then their is nothing for the kids to fight over.

PeakPants · 17/08/2018 16:33

Not sure who they are for either. Tbh I am in favour of some gender-neutral self-contained cubicles as I think it's good when male caregivers are out and about with kids and stops the reinforcement of women as carers mantra. But I wouldn't like stalls and sinks- it would have to be self-contained and opening out into a public area.

Socrates11 · 17/08/2018 17:07

I agree with some of the GC feminists on Twitter who use 'unisex toilets' rather than gender neutral to better describe what the changes might entail.