Building Bridges

[AuntMsVanillaRose]

Let's show that trans-excluding people and trans-including people can work together. You give me an example of a school or leisure centre of swimming pool where the mixed changing area (a) doesn't include lockable cubicles and/or (b) does include nakedness-allowed showers. We all work together to politely lobby the school/leisure centre/pool. A win-win situation for everyone!

Darwin award (Thankfully)

Let me give you this teeny, tiny concession so you’ll shut up and do what I want.

Single sex space for women is much like same sex marriage or abortion. If you don't want or need it, don't use it. But don't advocate for it to be taken from those who do

I agree, which is why single sex provision should exist alongside gender neutral provision and people should be able to choose the provision that matches their natal sex or the gender neutral option.

Of course, many TRAs do not support this. Some because the absence of gender neutral means they think this strengthens their demand to access the provision of their choice, others because they simply want to eradicate sex as a category and replace it with gender.

no.

It isn’t a negotiation, OP. It’s a no.

Are you one of them what thinks a no is the start point of a negation?

Answer is no. No, no no.

Thank you Bowl.

Yup. We've thought about it. Thought long and hard.

Are transwomen women? No.

Are there such things as lady-penises? No.

Are we prepared to share intimate spaces where we're vulnerable (changing rooms, rape crisis centres, domestic violence shelters, overnight accommodation, women's prisons) with penises? No.

But, but, but, what if, but, what if...

No. The answer is still no.

If you can't understand why many women and girls need single sex facilities, can I suggest you go check your privilege?

I'm not a TRA, Floral. I'm just a very ordinary feminist. And aunt.

@ Betty: I'm sorry, but I can't really complain about something that happened in 1997 unless you're saying the design of the changing rooms is still flawed.

I went swimming today. I noticed that the lockable cubicles have wire mesh overhead. I don't think anyone could look over the top into someone else's cubicle.

I went swimming today. I noticed that the lockable cubicles have wire mesh overhead. I don't think anyone could look over the top into someone else's cubicle.

How very transphobic to use a cubicle. Do you think trans women want to look at you? They just want to get changed like everyone else.

Right. You're a very ordinary feminist who wants us all to work together for the purpose of getting women who have said a firm no to accommodate the wishes of people who aren't very happy about that?

Which side of the hypothetical bridge are you on, btw?

I'm not sure it's a case of which side of the bridge, Floral.

Sorry - I didn’t realise trauma caused by sexual predators had an expiration date 🙄

Fermats, I was going to work that in somewhere, but I suspected it may be a deletable offense these days so I hung back. But yeah, that too.

the lockable cubicles have wire mesh overhead I would certainly empathise with a battery hen in a cubicle with wire mesh overhead. That it was considered a necessity would really worry me and make me feel very unsafe and insecure.

Or people who need them could campaign for a third space of their own. Like we had to.

Last i heard, cameras and eyesifht were not blocked by wire mesh.

Unless it is Sturdy Wire Mesh of course. That blocks everything. It is what we make the Pyjamas out of.

Wouldn't it make more sense to make all men's toliets/changing rooms unisex or gender neutral? Maybe I'm being thick but wouldn't that solve all the problems? Trans men/women would have access to spaces that suit their gender, queues for women's toilets wouldn't be as long, women who are worried about sending young boys into male spaces could go with them and women could keep their own spaces private.

I don't know the statistics but I'm guessing men are more likely to be assaulted by other men so they wouldn't have to be worried about assaults going up if their spaces were opened up to everyone.

Then keep prisons single sex but call them gender neutral if needed same for sports as the physical differences between females and males are what divides them not gender. I'm happy to give up gender as a compromise as it's a load of bollocks anyway.

No. Gender is a load of crap so why should it have any bearing on what spaces people use. Dicks in one space, females in the other. To bring dicks into female only spaces excludes women.

It's not a bridge if only one side is expected to reach out - it's a pier.

I'm just a very ordinary feminist. And aunt.

Not if the "bridges" you want to build involves males coming into female spaces, you're not.

Feminists centre females in their feminism. Females - you know the ones - born cunty.

Aunt Lydia more like.

Lockable doors, walls that go all the way down to the floor to stop people peeping, wire-mesh roofs, etc. are all an admission shared-sex spaces don't work.

They are sticking plaster 'solutions' to problems created by sharing in the first place.

You don't have to come up with solutions to problems you don't need to create.

the suspension is killing me, how exactly are you going to span the gap when the overarching opinion is that women do not want males in their spaces.

*Susan, lay off the OP.

Cantulever alone?

Cantulever alone?

Does anyone else read OPs like this, in the voice of Delores Umbridge, complete with "tinkling" laugh?

Delores wore a lot of pink, a mask of "unthreatening femininity" to cover her (fictional, obviously) deplorable philosophy and actions.

Lockable doors, walls that go all the way down to the floor to stop people peeping, wire-mesh roofs, etc. are all an admission shared-sex spaces don't work.

Exactly.

The OP wants to target individual places. Make sure there are floor-to-ceiling cubicles, no possibility of getting a phone in, under, over, or slipped through a gap in the door, etc.

So basically turn a changing into a fortress to protect the women that are already protected by it being single sex.

The first question to ask is why? Why does mixed sex conclude that you need to be locked in your own individual pod?

Could it be because of the risk?

And the second question is, who is this supposed to benefit? Because it certainly ain't women or children. Or the management. Or the owners.

Just a handful of men and all predators.

So yes, in the words previous posters, the answer is no.

NO.