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...

Naming it for what it is will be the best place to start.

So too is the case for male-pattern violence, abuse and control when directed towards women and children.

Nopes grintich. Reads to me like a wee guy at home writing his fantasy.
Simple as that
And he knows he’s putting women down in his fantasy
Bossing them
He does know hat he is doing that
Sticking it to women
Orvwishing he could
He don’t like women
Look at the way he writes about us
Yuck creep

Yet a transwoman who feels as if she is a woman or who feels threatened in the men’s toilets is often told that their feelings don’t matter.
Really?? By who?
All I have read is that mens violence needs addressing ( by men ) and that noone should feel threatened.
Young men ARE more likely to be violently assaulted (i.e punched) by a stranger. Weaker men ARE at risk ( from other men), In toilets, on public transport, in prison.
I worry about my son lots and have always, for example, told him to never use public toilets in a park.
None of that has anything to do with "feelings". And none of it is relevant to protecting spaces for women.
It's a seperate issue. Otherwise we have a situation where all but the most neanderthal men are crammed into the ladies because those other men are dangerous..
Women ARE SAFER when men are not allowed into their intimate spaces.
Again, not feelings.
I don't "feel" less safe alone in a changing room with a man. I AM less safe.
These are called facts. They're good, you should get some.

ChakiraChakra

Welcome to the debate. It's good to see someone prepared to read what is written and reconsider their position based on new information. Allow me to give you a tiny flavour of what it's like to talk about this in real life.

I went to a meeting - a publicly advertised meeting where anyone was permitted to buy a ticket. At that meeting, were a group of normal women ranging from 20s to 70s, some men, and some transsexuals.

During the speeches and Q&A (by a Law Professor and a barrister), some people who didn't like us meeting started banging on the venue doors and windows to intimidate us and security guards had to ask them to step away.

When we came to leave, we were advised to use the main doors for our own safety, as there was CCTV and staff. The back entrance was not safe, due to these protestors (as in, significant risk of assault).

I was wearing jeans and a jumper. I walked out to be faced with a mob of (mostly) men, mostly taller than me, all with their faces covered with scarves and hoods (again to intimidate and scare). They were hissing and jeering under their voices at us. I believe Security had advised them about keeping a minimum distance or else we would have been physically surrounded.

There were more of them further along the pavement who hissed slurs at us as we walked past.

All of these aggressive, threatening men were welcome to buy the same tickets we did and discuss their objections in a civil manner.

But they chose this, classically male style intimidation and threatening, tactic instead. You should ask yourself why.

I listened to the professor on the link from last nights radio4
He mentioned inclusivity. He more or less said that it means nothing.
I can’t rember what link it was on willtry as it was really relevant to,this discussion
But he mentioned ideaoligoes and said it’s coming from the left.

Rowan wonder if you can link it being the goddess of everything ?💪

Can a transwomen be safer in a third space than in a men's toilet? If so, then arrange for the third space.

If the argument then becomes that a third space doesn't validate transwomen's sense of seeing themselves as women and that this has to take priority over the actual safety of women, then this shows that the priorities are well out of whack.

Do you mean this link littlbrowndog?

from PM [Radio 4] yesterday:

^www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0001ygp^

The segment starts at 27:30.

Young men ARE more likely to be violently assaulted (i.e punched) by a stranger. Weaker men ARE at risk ( from other men), In toilets, on public transport, in prison.

It needs saying that younger men are more likely to be violently assaulted by a male who is a stranger to them.

For some reason, the use of 'stranger' in media etc is nearly always sex-neutral.

This is going to look goady but isn't meant to be. Thinking about inclusivity, if Stefonknee wanted to be enrolled in a Year 2 class, would you consider a refusal to be justifiably non-inclusive?

Of course I wouldn't. Luckily, the ability to choose ones age isn't a protected characteristic so that wouldn't be hard.

I (think,I!) get your point.

Likewise the transwomen who achieve woman of the year status in sports while clearly benefiting from a male musculoskeletal system is fucked up.

A person being turned down for a job (and not one with an obvious conflict of interest) because of LGBT+ characteristics IS a thing that I have a problem with.

...Unless MN is going to blow my brains again 😂😂😂

Ohh that’s it
It’s great
M
Nauticant 😘

Chakra have a wee listen to that
It’s no long and so worth a listen
I liked the 15000 dogs genitals oh haha

But. It does turn the inclusivity stuff inside outb

I see what you mean Rowan. Although stranger means man really, as in its a given, because if it's a female stranger doing the attacking it would be "woman attacks young man on train" or whatever.

Look at the way he writes about us

Quite. I mean, presumably the decent men would prefer not share spaces with red flaggers like this either, but they're just going to have grin and bear it (and not beat anyone up).

I still believe that there are people who were "born in the wrong body"

Chakira
I realise you're on quite a steep learning curve, but I'd urge you to think about what this actually means. If you're religious, I suppose you might believe that a soul could somehow end up in the wrong body, but without that belief in a soul which is separate from the body, how could you actually be 'born in the wrong body'?

There is also the issue of not really knowing what it is to be the opposite sex. You might feel discomfort with your body, or a dislike of the stereotypes which are applied to your own sex, but a man can no more 'feel like a woman' than he can feel like a horse or a dog.

The acceptance of the 'born in the wrong body' narrative is what has given the trans lobby their strength, even when many (or most) of them are driven by autogynephilia. We feel sympathetic to people who have the misfortune to be 'born in the wrong body', but this cannot be literally true, and we need to find a better description of the discomfort suffered by people with gender dysphoria.

ChakiraChakra

I hope you're not feeling overwhelmed.

It's undeniable that people other than you will be availing themselves of the responses to your posts. There are 12 million unique users per month on mumsnet. Many of whom access the site via these boards in the first place.

So don't feel, please, that all the responses are only aimed at you, despite them being addressed to you. If you see what I mean! Remember the lurkers is a phrase often used.

The transactivist narrative is very definitely that transwomen are women, and therefore acquire the same behaviour pattern as women.

This is simply not true. But it necessitated compiling statistics to prove that. As it was such a large part of the argument to begin with.

So women compiled trans-crime UK, and 'this never happens' videos. Quiet literally, hundreds of men identifying as women, commit henious crime. Including rape and murder.

Other, more creative, ways of disadvantaging women are compiled here.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3348290-It-will-never-happen-resource-thread

To understand how it's necessary to dehumanise women, before you can treat them like animals, the website terf is a slur is fairly enlightening.

terfisaslur.com/

Terf stands for trans exclusionary radical feminist. But now it basically means anyone who disagrees with even an atom of the ideology. Originally it was feminists who first objected to the very concept of a woman meaning a man, because of their hypersensitivity to sexism, honed by being feminists!

But now it gets applied liberally to anyone and everyone who isn't a died in the wool transactivist.

*dyed in the wool?

I see what you mean Rowan. Although stranger means man really, as in its a given

YY, it obscures the reality though that the violence is male (gender identity is not relevent)

The viscous attack on the London Underground by a group of males (who were I think strangers to the man who was attacked) all of whom identified as women was not reported as being by males.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3289427-Four-women-viciously-attack-a-defenceless-man

Young men ARE more likely to be violently assaulted (i.e punched) by a stranger. Weaker men ARE at risk ( from other men), In toilets, on public transport, in prison.

Yup, toxic masculinity assaults and indeed kills, women and men.
We have an epidemic on the streets of London.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46128268

Indeed, murder rates for men are on the rise:
www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/homicideinenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2017

Am pretty sure placing MtF trans rights above women and children's rights, isnt the solution however.

“When adult males call the women's toilets the 'little girls room' it sends out a great big red flag. I don't understand why people are letting this behaviour go unchallenged.”

I heard about a social experiment where people were asked to look at three lines on a bit paper and say which one (a, b or c) was the longest. One line was clearly longer than the other two, it was simply undeniable or so it seemed. People would take it in turn to give their answer a, b or c to the group, one at a time.

Thing was 9 of the 10 were actors giving the wrong answer on purpose to see if the actual test subject would lie to go along with the group after hearing everyone else give the incorrect answer first. The actual test subject was always last.

Only 7% of people gave the right answer when everyone in the group gave the wrong answer.

However, if just one of the 9 actors gave the correct answer then 37% of test subjects would give the correct answer. People who have reservations about something are very unlikely to speak out if they think they are all alone, but their bravery to speak out rapidly increases if they know they are not alone.

When asked why they gave the wrong answers the test subjects said things like: I was scared to go against the group or I didn’t want to stand out or I didn’t want to upset the group or when everyone else gave that answer I thought I must be wrong or even I genuinely started to believe it.

That’s awful CallMeSir and yes it’s a good point about their method of objection. The meeting was open to anyone with a ticket, they could have discussed their differences in view at that meeting.

I noticed a post on Twitter today from a TRA responding to a public meeting coming up, #WomenStandUp (In Washington DC) by encouraging protesters to ‘put the boot in’. When asked directly if they were encouraging violence their response was ‘yes I am advocating violence against bigots’. Plain sight.
Now reflecting again why women don’t speak up about their rights, say anything to men in women’s toilets or challenge men in any other space.

People who put agenda before the truth and an ideology before the truth

Reads to me like a wee guy at home writing his fantasy.

Oh the person did it, lbd. Check the Imgur link in the post for the photo documentation, if you have the stomach to. (Hmm, more selfies in private women's spaces; are we beginning to see a pattern?)

Luckily, the ability to choose ones age isn't a protected characteristic so that wouldn't be hard.

As I've pointed out to my MP, if it goes into law that a person's biological reality is trumped by their personal choice of identity, and that means they can identify into a protected group and access the resources reserved for that group, it sets a very difficult precedent.

Trans age is a known thing. Trans abled is a thing. Once the legal precedent is set, it is going to be very difficult to draw a line to say this person with gender dysphoria who deeply believes they are a woman, should be able to access all women's areas, take a woman's reserved seat on this organisation just like any other woman, and be given fertility support for their infertility disadvantages. However this person with body dysphoria who deeply believes they would be happier as a paraplegic should not be able to have personal carers and a funded wet room for showering/hoist at home like any other paraplegic. (In fact these will be privileged paraplegics who are lucky enough to naturally have the body that matches their self concept.)

It would have to be asked: why is one group allowed to self identify into spaces and resources, but another group isn't?

When asked why they gave the wrong answers the test subjects said things like: I was scared to go against the group or I didn’t want to stand out or I didn’t want to upset the group or when everyone else gave that answer I thought I must be wrong or even I genuinely started to believe it.

Its really worth watching the statement by a member of Liverpool Resisters, Mayor Joe Anderson's reply and the the response from the council.
September 2018
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vq7MJ5YDR4U&feature=youtu.be&t=963

current thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3470743-The-ReSisters-movement-is-growing