Zuzanna Mroz in The Spectator

[TimeLady]

"Take it from a trans person: Corbyn is wrong about self-ID"

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/10/take-it-from-a-trans-person-corbyn-is-wrong-about-self-id/

I'm just going to nail this right here because the Buck Angel argument is so dumb.

'women only space' does not mean 'women must use this space' nor does it mean 'all women use this space' nor does it mean 'women may not use other spaces' nor does it mean 'all people must use spaces specific to their sex'. It is internally and logically coherent. It means only women can use this space. There is no illogicality.

As for Buck Angel, the reasoning for BA to use the gents rests on pragmatism not logic (or lack of).

1. If BA and people like BA use the women's, it becomes impossible to maintain a female only space.

1. BA has no reason to use the women's.

1. BA plainly passes as male, and the only reason for BA to use the women's would be pure mischief, an attempt to break down sex-specific spaces and thus remove the women only space.

So it's not illogical to maintain a women only space, and it is pragmatic, and not illogical to say it should not be used by people like BA.

Some women wouldn't mind BA in their spaces. I don't speak for all women at all. My only point is that it is not illogical to maintain a women only space, while at the same time not requiring every woman to use it.

Charliethefeminst has said what I wanted to express, but with far more clarity and eloquence.

But there are plenty of people who have a dysphoria diagnosis, but have no intention of being castrated. That Labour women’s officer who told people to “suck my big lady cock” being a case in point.

Castration isn’t a part of being given a GRC. I feel that the GRA was sneakily put through on just this basis, that there is the assumption of wanting castration as part of “living as a woman” so it wasn’t enshrined in law as essential.
I note the language often used about “transition” makes this assumption , without stating it. Most people I know assume a transwoman is someone who has been, or is waiting to be, castrated.
If we see a person who is clearly not female, in a female only space, how can we tell whether or not they have had SRS ? It isn’t remotely enforceable to only allow in someone who has had their penis removed.

As ever Datun has summed it up for me very succinctly:

A man rejecting manhood is not a woman. And I'm sick to death of hearing it.

It's utter rubbish to think you get to appropriate womanhood by denying inherent and immutable masculinity.

Buck Angel argument is so dumb

'women only space' does not mean 'women must use this space' nor does it mean 'all women use this space' nor does it mean 'women may not use other spaces' nor does it mean 'all people must use spaces specific to their sex'. It is internally and logically coherent. It means only women can use this space. There is no illogicality

The argument used by gender critical rad fems is that changing gender presentation does not change biology. It is frequently said that every cell remains xy or xx as appropriate.

For the purposes of this argument I am not in the least bit interested in whether trans men like BA pass (he does)or whether he would ever want to use a ladies loo (he wouldn't) But if you are arguing only biology matters then BA is still a woman. So your assertion that "only women can use this place" includes him. There is nothing logical in your argument other than you are trying to find something which alllows you to exclude both BA and Zuzanna.

Make your mind up - if only biology matters what he looks like is irrelevant by your (rad fem you) definition of what a woman is. Or are you (rad fem you) now saying , actually biology doesn't matter when the biological woman presents as a very macho man?

Except biology does matter to you in the case of Zuzanna despite her very feminine looking, penis- free body.

Are you talking about Anne Ruzylo scots? She's very unfeminine but I don't see a man when I look at her face. A small child might be confused but rarely an adult. Also, masculine-looking women still usually sound like women.

Surely the point is keeping women safe, both from actual attack, and from fear of attack ? The Buck Angels of this world are a minute minority, and in practical terms we all know that someone like Buck isn’t going to use the Ladies.
So theorising in this way is like the arguments against animal testing, that ask you if you would test a drug on animals if it would save your child, when many of us would probably test something on our next door neighbour if it would ave our child, never mind on a bunny.
All male people should be kept out of female space. If someone female really looks so convincingly male that they would frighten other women, then they are obviously going to want to use the gents. If on they did want to use the Ladies then that would be tricky, perhaps they need to be able to reassure women in there that they are female, somehow. Another reason why allowing anyone to change the sex on their passport is insane.

Turph gave an interesting account of her experience and thoughtful choices in another thread Sun 16-Sep-18 06:23:09:

I'm very butch. I've been asked to leave the women's toilets before. I've been challenged plenty. I've also seen the looks of discomfort on women's faces as they don't challenge me. I have joked about it to friends who never realised it happens all the time. Many women look at me with fear, when I go to a public toilet.

...I feel uncomfortable because of how uncomfortable other women are. If I'm out in a pub, for example, I leave my jacket behind with whoever I'm with, so that my breasts are more obvious, whatever I'm wearing. I don't make eye contact and I'm in and out as quickly as I can be. I've always used public toilets like this and I'm entitled to be in there! Maybe it's my female socialisation that means I'm acutely aware of how unwelcome I am in there as a natal woman who looks fairly masculine....So although I'm identifiable as a woman, a: some women still think I'm a man, b: some women look at me with fear, c: some women challenge me. So I can't see how a trans woman is likely to have used women's toilets "for years" without incident. Most women aren't confident enough to challenge but some are - and there are only a very small number of MtFs who pass. So what is actually happening is what previous posters have alluded to, and women are uncomfortable, scared, etc and unable or unwilling to say anything. What is telling/ironic/infuriating/all of the above is that the trans women who make the argument are unable to see that discomfort and fear, possibly due to a lack of female socialisation.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3364094-Debbie-Hayton-in-the-Times?pg=4&messages=100