Debbie Hayton in the Times

[Igneococcus]

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/women-are-right-to-have-concerns-over-trans-reforms-5kj5k28sd?shareToken=aa090ad90f6f886db629247a0d6ca19b

Thank you all for your comments. I come and go from the thread not because J do t want to participate - I have no problems with robust debate - but real life gets in the way.

The issue of spaces is real and I understand the anger and the concern. That needs to be debated properly and objectively but solutions need to be workable.

As for my platform, yes my voice is heard and I would be crazy to imagine I could have got there if I was not trans. But equally I would have been crazy not to take the opportunity.

Debbie

I think it's perfect workable for women and girls to have female only spaces.

Just popping on to thank Debbie for engaging in a dignified and measured way with the debate, we may not all agree but let's try and show by example how it should be done.

One specific point: no, I don't have a GRC. I could get one if I wanted but it offers me no benefit.

When it comes to spaces it must be for women to decide the boundaries but as I said above the rules need to be workable. There is no point devising rules that cannot be enforced. To be honest I think GRS is more important than a GRC.

@ZuttZeVootEeVro It's only workable unfit can be enforced. How do you keep males our of the motorway service station female toilets, for example?

^ sorry this stupid phone of mine. if it can be enforced

Good grief. By not promoting an environment where it's normal for men to enter women's spaces. To give women the right to say no to men.

I am conflicted. I respect Debbie's view and approach - and I know several trans women who I share spaces with - because I know them and have confidence in them.
BUT I look at the plethora of porn addicts, flashers, sex offenders and promoters of fetishes who are promoting TWAW and think - nope. Not for my daughters, my grand daughters or any of the thousands of young women who I work with. Hell will freeze over before I accept these people as the same as biological women.

Your voice is vital Debbie , Miranda's too. I cheer every time I see you stand up and speak, and I have some idea of the courage it takes. And you prove that it's possible to have this debate calmly, sensibly, politely, and talk about different perspectives even when it's intensely sensitive ground. Don't need to agree with every word in order to respect the hell out of that.

Your voice is vital Debbie , Miranda's too

Debbie is a self id transperson lecturing other self id transpeople about trampling over women rights? Debbie's voice isn't vital, it's the same voice as every other male self id transperson justifying why women should lose sex segregation for their benefit.

Female spaces such as toilets Male pre teen children and disabled dependent male teens allowed when accompanying a female carer. Otherwise female only.

And disabled dependent teens only where there isn't a suitable disabled toilet

Debbie's voice isn't vital, it's the same voice

A voice from a trans person who stands up against the extremist TRA voices and shows there are other trans positions than the violent ones. And acknowledges risks to women and the need to consider their safety, and that gatekeeping is necessary. And demonstrates that trans people are perfectly able to discuss these issues without threats, hysteria, accusations of hatred and #nodebate. And that the TRA political lobby does not speak for all trans people. I think that's absolutely vital.

Yes, I agree that women's facilities are women's facilities and the time is here to be clear about that line and move to third spaces. But I can respect someone able to join in civil debate with opinions different to mine, and certainly when speaking out as a trans person about a trans position that doesn't blindly obey the TRA political lobby and questions even some of it is a scary thing to do requiring courage.

And acknowledges risks to women and the need to consider their safety, and that gatekeeping is necessary.

What gatekeeping are you imagining?

I'm astounded. I thought you were positioning yourself as 'different' from the other self-ID trans people on the basis that you had a GRC, that you believed in the GRC gatekeeping process because it limited numbers. Yet you are indistinguishable from anyone who has self declared themselves to be the opposite sex.

With no GRC Debbie is legally male, and absolutely no different from any other male self-ID person.

How you can possibly advocate against self-ID whilst practising it yourself is the height of hypocrisy.

In light of this I must amend my earlier statement. You have neither a legal nor a moral mandate to override women's boundaries.

Debbie, I think many of us would still like an answer to the question about whether you use female spaces ? and if so, how you determine whether consent was freely given by the females using those spaces?

I think it's a bit of a low bar to set for a vital contribution - not being a deranged bullshit spouting aggressive TRA.

I bristle at words like 'objective' and 'workable' coming from males when discussing women's rights. To often they translate as 'women don't know what's best for them'.

I chose the service station toilets example quite deliberately. In that environment nobody is going to conduct any ID checks. Those spaces are protected by social norms and taboos. My concern over self ID in that context is that it emboldens men who have no intention of making any effort to pass to go in and intimidate women, and dare anyone to challenge them.

Other situations need different approaches. In female spaces where nudity or semi nudity is expected, GRS is more important than a GRC. Unlikely that you would notice a trans woman in the showers following GRS. Not sure how you are going to police any attempt to keep them out.

Refuges can make checks. They could ask to see a birth certificate or a mechanism be set up for them to check the register of births. That wouldn't be an issue for me. Even with a GRC, I would never seek to use one without making it expressly clear that I was transsexual. But self-ID makes it harder to screen out those with a GRC.

As for bursaries, scholarships and benefits targeted at females, and all women shortlists, they should check someone's sex in order to prove that they have discriminated legally. But hell would freeze over before I took any of those places from a woman.

That needs to be debated properly and objectively, but solutions need to be workable.

Female-only spaces should be just that. If males are included it makes it unworkable for many women and girls, and no, you might not know they object, they might not voice it, but they still count.

We've tried debating it properly and objectively. We were told #nodebate (not by you, Debbie, and I do appreciate it, we have respectfully disagreed on Twitter on several occasions).

If it's to be fair to women and girls this workable solution has be something that doesn't involve males in female-only spaces, or removing female-only spaces.

I am not so fussed about 'policing' arguments. If women feel we have the law on our side, backing us up, then we can probably police ourselves okay.

Although it is none of my beeswax, I think SRS is unethical, so I wouldn't support a solution that would encourage people to go down that route.

@BarrackerBarmer. Thanks for your post on the previous page. As for the point about having a GRC or not, what difference does a piece of paper make? GRS makes a far more profound change. My argument is that is more important. Given the choice between a penis owner with a GRC or someone with no penis or testes but no GRC, who do you think is the greater risk?

I'm hearing unhappiness about a male discussing women's rights. I understand that but there is nothing I can do about being male. So either I discuss this as a male or I leave. I'm not sure this is technically a female space but that is how it I see it.

How would anyone know by looking at a fully dressed male transperson whether they had SRS or not?

Im hearing unhappiness about a male discussing women's rights. I understand that but there is nothing I can do about being male. So either I discuss this as a male or I leave.

Males are allowed to discuss women's rights, just not decide on them.

It is treading on eggshells to have sympathy and want to help the oppressed when one is from the oppressor class. It takes some very delicate footwork.