I used the girls' room for the first time today

[GrinitchSpinach]

from reddit mtf:

all comments affirming. They are delighted to have actual women apologizing for being in the 'wrong' place in the women's room. Absolutely no understanding of the fear any woman or girl might feel encountering a male person in a vulnerable, isolated space. Also: "little girls' room" for a 19 y.o. person...

•But trans people with GD are not the same as fetishists and pedofiles.*

No one is suggesting they are. Rather that fetishists and paedophiles are identifying as trans, as it gets them access.

If you are admitting transwomen with gender dysphoria, on the basis that they're not fetishist or paedophiles, then why not all the other men who are not fetishists or paedophiles?

If you are saying it's because transwomen are vulnerable, then why not all the other vulnerable men?

Gay men, effeminate men, elderly men, disabled men, men with learning difficulties.

Seriously, what would your answer be to that?

Because they don't identify as women

Exactly. Because they say some magic words.

“I disagree, the law currently allows GRC holders to be seen as their preferred sex and therefore access facilities accordingly, no one seems very happy about this.”

It seems like there is a push in the UK by TRA to use lawsuits to make this accurate, but at the moment the EA appears to allow exclusion of any trans person if it’s proportionate.

I’m actually in the USA where every state has a unique set of legal guidelines.

There have been a mess of lawsuits on both sides where the law is unclear. Eg the planet fitness case where a woman sued for her membership fee as she was told the gym had single sex changing but she found a naked man w/penis in changing room, but on the other hand students in states with laws protecting gender ID over sex suing public schools.

So, overall, the convention remains single sex means that, but laws are being passed to force compliance with gender ID.

FlyingOink under current GRC criteria, you must have lived as your chosen sex for atleast 2 years and intend to for the rest of your life, you must have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, must detail any hormones you are taken, must provide proof of surgery/date booked or a reasonable explanation as to why you have not had it. Along with supporting documentation and medical notes from your dr. It is then assessed by an independent body. Personally, I think the current laws on the GRC do a good job to differentiate. This is what I support.

Self ID is ridiculous imo, I partly understand why TRAs want this as it’s less ‘invasive’ but I just don’t see this as ever being a realistic option. Not to mention the fact that changing your gender is a huge change for anyone, and being able to self ID it will likely lead to many confused kids making decisions they’ll regret because it’s easy too and you can pick and choose.

If you are admitting transwomen with gender dysphoria, on the basis that they're not fetishist or paedophiles, then why not all the other men who are not fetishists or paedophiles
Why would you admit men without gender dysphroia into woman’s facilities? They don’t wish to be a woman or suffer from a medical condition telling them they’re in the wrong body. Most men I know wouldn’t be seen dead inside a woman’s bathroom.

Yes the law does allow exclusions from woman’s only spaces if deemed necessary by the provider. I’m unaware of any public restrooms that have used this though? I don’t recall ever seeing signs etc?

So the only reason is what they want.

What's in it for women? Just give me a few examples. Any benefits. For women.

You think it’s what they want? Do you think gender dysphroia means these people just wake up one day and decide to be a woman? Click there fingers, walk into a ladies toilet and go home happy as Larry? Give over. I’m unsure if you’re deliberately being obtuse or genuinely so privileged in your own life that you see this (something which you earlier said was a mental illness) as what they want.

Do people choose to be depressed? Is that what they want?

‘What’s in it for me’ typical narcissistic approach.

Oh come on early. Your entire point is that access to female space for these men is because they are suffering a lot and they really want it to help them feel better and maybe be safer. You've made this case repeatedly and insisted you're all about the middle ground.

So, you've laid out what trans people get from the arrangement. It's not outrageous narcissism to ask the obvious corollary of "what about women, then?" Its part of the 'middle ground'.

What they want is for non gender dysphoric men, women and children to collude with their mental illness and validate their internal sense of self. This is not possible.
What they need is a third space.

Earlywalker so we've established you believe the difference between transwomen and men is that one group identifies as women. And that a GRC means that identity is heartfelt. We've established you believe that other men wouldn't want to be seen in a women's toilet. Finally we've established you believe that being dysphoric is difficult so anyone who claims to be should be treated with sympathy.
Are these your beliefs?
Because as datun pointed out earlier, there are other groups who are vulnerable too. Should we not treat gay men or elderly men with sympathy? What about short men? What about someone who has a heartfelt belief that they are non-binary and the GRC system is exclusionary?

And describing the need for some justification as narcissistic is hilarious. Give me half your salary. Don't ask what's in it for you, that would be narcissistic. Just send it to my PayPal. PM me for the address. Cheers.

I don't care about a GRC. And my mum in hospital is sure as hell not going to ask to see one from the bloke in the next bed. She wouldn't even know what it was.
Neither is my 9 year old niece in McDonald's toilets going to ask some dude to show his. It's a ridiculous idea that female people should have to have that responsibility. Women and girls need privacy from male people. That's all.
Wether that male person is a pervert or not is not something either my mum or my neice should have to worry about.

What they want is for non gender dysphoric men, women and children to collude with their mental illness and validate their internal sense of self. This is not possible.
What they need is a third space.
Good point, succinctly made.

Some of you are master manipulators I’ll give you that, thank god for the freedom programme or I’d really be questioning my sanity right about now.
My asshole father-in-law was talking about refugees the other day, he said why would we let em in when they’ll probably be extremists and sponge of our taxes. I told him that if it saves children who would otherwise bombed, It’s the right thing to do. He said it was tough luck really on them as we couldn’t risk our own being bombed in the process, there not our problem.
He reminds me of some of you

Anyway I’m off, just going round in circles and twisting and turning.

I stand with women and children, and I do so at the expense of gender dysphoric men.

The socio-demographics of gender dysphoria is pretty privileged, and their advocates even more so: Pritzker.

The TRA community fights very dirty, and have made few attempts to challenge the extreme misogyny and fetishim with their ranks, this make it almost impossible for me to be an ally.

There are serious safeguarding risks to facilitating male bodied MtF access to single sex toilets. As a mother of young children and a woman who has been on the receiving end of male violence that will always trump men’s feels. Always.

Earlywalker I'm descended from refugees. None of whom demanded vulnerable people give up their rights to them. Try harder.

I hope I was included as a master manipulator.
I just remember I'm replying for the lurkers.

So, Early, in your book sex segregated toilets are not there to protect women from male violence, unless transwomen need to access them in order to be safe from the male violence they face in the men‘s toilets? Is that your point?

This is an actual discussion in which you are putting forward views that are being disagreed with and you are being asked to justify your claims. You've repeatedly thrown out little passive aggressive taunts about how we don't care, or we are master manipulators or selfish narcissists, and you're probably going to have a jolly good moan about it with the people who agree with you on another part of the board because you've been 'rounded on' or 'bullied'.

Which is complete nonsense. Your points have been disagreed with and you're now having an odd little gripe about your father in law in what is, I presume, a further attempt to cast those disagreeing with you as bigots or whatever.

It's tiresome and transparent, and I think I'm probably done with trying to explain to you why it's a basic feminist idea to put women's needs higher up the priorities than men's, however much the men suffer.

Go well.

Some of you are master manipulators I’ll give you that, thank god for the freedom programme or I’d really be questioning my sanity right about now.

The Freedom Programme is excellent.
Recognising DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim & Offender) very important.
I learned about how it works on this board seeing it being it being used.
It was a vital life lesson.

So too the Duluth Wheel, the dynamics of coercive control, narcissism etc

thread with links:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3452784-Coercive-Control-a-need-for-better-awareness

I attended the in person course rowan a few years back. Would highly recommend it to any woman in that situation.

Some of you are master manipulators I’ll give you that, thank god for the freedom programme or I’d really be questioning my sanity right about now.

Oh good lord. And women wanting sex segregation are narcissists.

I've listened to plenty of women talking about the freedom programme. All of whom maintain that women's rights to draw their own boundaries is vital.

And you're busy telling women they're wrong, and invoking the freedom programme and your father-in-law to back it up!

Like all TRAs, you have zero argument, other than be nice.

And you're actually justifying it with the freedom programme. You honestly could not make this shit up.

And don't think it's gone unnoticed, early, that you have tried as hard as you can to justify women merely saying no, without any other justification, as wrong.

Earlywalker

If "gender dysphoria" is "real" how come it is frequently expressed by adult heterosexual males yet not expressed by adult heterosexual females.