Third Spaces

[OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon]

As far as I can make out, third spaces would be a way to:

• preserve sex segregated spaces for women who wanted to use them
• allow trans people to use a mixed sex space (that could have individual cubicles) which would afford them privacy and also prevent them from being outed as it would be a mixed sex space rather than a trans space
• prevent provision for people with disabilities to remain unimpinged.

Does this seem a suitable solution for loos/changing rooms?

I know there are wider issues but on this specific one, I think this would work for everyone and respects everyone's needs. Leaving aside those who will want to access women's spaces for validation, am I missing any legitimate concerns about third spaces?

I know the EA makes legal exceptions but how often are these exceptions invoked? If they aren’t being used in prisons and rape crisis centres then where are they being used?

They aren't being used because the cost of defending any court action brought by TRAs against the organisation could be prohibitive, the way GRA and EA are unclear on this subject and contradict each other mean outcome is not guaranteed one way or the other, and the organisation would likely fear poor publicity. Cheaper just to pander to the demands of TRAs.

Yes, the cheapest easiest option is to force women to shut up and give up.

Third spaces are the only sensible way to deal with this in a way that equally respects everyone concerned, but won't be accepted as the bottom line is about forcing people to conform to the lie and pretence that someone is of the sex they say they are.

You'll see plenty of posts from trans people stating that they will use the facility they want to anyway, and you can't check on the door, and ooh what about transmen who look really male - all the usual 'no boundaries allowed' stuff that confirms utter disrespect for women underlies this all. This is fundamentally about removing the right of biological women to have anywhere remaining that is about their biological definition where men can't go.

Some transwomen are or feel at risk because of being trans. Even today, many gay people don’t want everyone to know they are gay. How could a third space be labelled so as to prevent the assumption that use of the third space is outing?

I suppose this might be more of a public relations exercise as whilst it would be a workable solution that would protect everyone, sadly I know it won't be accepted by TRAs. However, I think there's still value in letting other people see the pushback that sensible solutions get and the underlying reasons as to why that might be.

Would that require someone to take it to court? Also what would the "it" look like? A woman suing a hospital for providing her with a transwoman when she requested a woman? A woman suing a rape crisis centre for allowing transwomen to be there?

Apologies for the avalanche of questions!

How could a third space be labelled so as to prevent the assumption that use of the third space is outing?

Mixed sex, or gender neutral? Since many women are lining up to say how very cool they are with sharing mixed sex facilities and many will just use whatever facilities are free, particularly if they're fully enclosed cubicles, they wouldn't in practice be outing in any way. It's another straw man. If however it becomes noticed that the now smaller female sex specific provision is crowded and that many women will only use that space, it kind of makes the point that sex segregated facilities are necessary. I suspect many women who in theory insist they're chilled would find in reality they're not quite as laid back as their theories.

It would simply be a mixed sex space. So men, women, transpeople, nonbinary people etc could use it. Individual cubicles to preserve privacy as is being advocated in unisex spaces currently but on top of that, retaining single sex as well.

I suspect many women who in theory insist they're chilled would find in reality they're not quite as laid back as their theories

This.

Not our problem! There seems to be no end of cajoling of "cis" people to display their pronouns in solidarity with their trans allies to normalise asking of pronouns, and lots are happy to. If they want to ask the women who vocally support to use the mixed sex loos in a similar, they can do.

There would still be women's only spaces for those that want them.

We do need third spaces.

I can't upload a photo, but the public toilets in Frome's Market Yard are pretty good I think.

The block is brick built and nice to look at (not been in). 24 hour access. From left to right (5 doors in a long block, all opening onto the car park)

1. Door with what I think is an all/either gender person ie the half dress-half trousers symbol (I took a pic but was too far away to see and the pic is a bit blurry), and a sign saying 'urinals'. Multiple urinals I am guessing.
2. Single cubicle, woman symbol, man symbol, changing table symbol and disabled symbol. I think this is a Changing Places room.
3. Single cubicle, woman symbol, man symbol, baby symbol, changing table symbol.
4. Single cubicle saying WC, unisex, man and woman symbols.
5. Last cubicle which says WC Ladies, woman symbol.

So women have the choice of 3 cubicles plus the disabled cubicle if applicable.

Men have the urinals plus a unisex WC. Men won't be sharing the urinals with transmen as biology prevents that - unless surgery does allow it?

Non-binary people can use the unisex WC if they don't want use the men's urinals/women's WC.

Transpeople of either sex have a unisex WC cubicle, or urinals as may suit some TW, or the female WC for transmen that wish to use it (seems unlikely)

The unisex WC is something my DH would use over urinals any day, even for a pee.

And importantly there is a dedicated women only WC, which respects women's needs and somewhat allays fears of stealth cameras and men peeing on the seat and floor.

Doesn't this set up cover all reasonable needs within reasonable constraints (space and budget etc)? Like you say PainInTheEar, what would be the objections to this amount of thought and effort to provide, and how would they go down?

Who wants third spaces? Do any trans-identifying people want them? Do any non-binary people want them? Do any gender-fluid people want them? Or do they all actually want to use the single-sex space that they feel fits their identity on that day?

I wouldn't be at all surprised if the voices arguing the loudest for third spaces are those of women. Women socialised to 'be nice'. Women socialised to find the best solution to keep everyone happy. Women socialised to put themselves last.

How could a third space be labelled so as to prevent the assumption that use of the third space is outing?

Most people aren’t fooled for a second. It’s not like being gay where you can be surprised to learn someone is homosexual. Every transwoman is ‘out’ by virtue of being instantly recognisable as Male.

Aspie that is so true. I have not yet seen anyone trans who passes except in pics and then the pics are tweaked I expect. And yet we all have to pretend...

My point is that in rejecting a workable, suitable-for-everyone solution, it becomes clear what the underlying motivations are.

Not safety, as there isn’t pushback from most trans people about using unisex provisions now.

Not privacy from the opposite sex, as cubicles would resolve this.

Not the fear of being outed, as third spaces would be mixed sex used by men and women who did not mind sharing facilities, so it would theoretically not be able to discern who was a man, a woman, a trans man, a trans women, a non binary person etc as the space is for all of them.

Why then would men want to gain access to women’s spaces? This is the question I’d like the average person to eventually ask so that they can see exactly what is driving this.

All of this is not to benefit trans people, although it’s a happy consequence. I sympathise with genuinely dysphoric people though that is not the purpose of this. It is to retain single sex spaces for women. That is the primary driving force.

So you want transidentifiers to reject a reasonable proposal, in order to demonstrate the fact that they are unreasonable?

Said so in my third post on this thread

It’s also a reasonable position to hold when talking about women’s loos/spaces and I think it’s worth espousing in public to show people it’s not necessary to make women’s spaces mixed sex spaces - there are other alternatives. If there’s pushback, then that’ll add to demonstrate why single sex spaces are necessary. Win win I think.

I disagree with a blanket fuck kind. Too few men are generous with their kindness and look where we are. Their pragmatism generally serves men better.

Surely we can be kind without having to go to the extreme of being stupid and naive and shelf-harming though.

Third spaces are the way forward.

Third spaces are the way forward.

Only if / when biological sex is understood to be a permanent state and that these facilities are sex-based eg male sex, female sex, mixed sex.

The medical, political, legal and trans rights organisations which have conflated, confused and obfuscated the realities of this will need to accept sex as a fixed truth.

There are many males who are prominant activists asserting that they are both women and females for all purposes.

#wordsmatter

How much of this confusion originates with doctors describing 'sex change operations'?

Third space is the only practical solution

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3203454-What-do-you-use-the-womens-toilets-for

There are so many reasons why we need to retain single-sex provision.