**Solution** 'CIS' women and transwoman form a class together

[2BthatUnnoticed]

By ‘cis’ I mean only women who ID as ‘cis’ (CW). This is only a small proportion of the world’s 3.8 billion women, but politically very influential.

Most women want some sex-based protections, and access to certain sex-segregated spaces when in need – refuges, shelters, rape crisis centres, prison.

Some women, usually 'CW,' do not – they support removing sex-based protections for gender-based ones. [Many CW believe "TWAW" (regardless of transition) and that any risk of predators assuming a trans ID to access women’s spaces is minimal.]

To solve this fairly for all – why don’t CW form a class with trans women (TW)? Leaving women who want single-sex spaces to do so?

(Eg 1) In Vancouver, 2/3 rape crisis centres admit TW. TRAs are trying to get the one female-only one (VRR) closed (incidentally I've worked in a shelter - there are genuine reasons for single sex). Instead, why not have a 4th centre specifically for CW/TW - and respect the female-only centre as is.

(Eg 2) Youth hostels could have (1) male dorms, (2) female dorms and (3) CW/TW dorms. This would respect everyone and keep everyone happy:

• CW would be with TW as they wish – with gender ID in common.
• TW would be amongst those who believe TWAW - gender affirming.
• Women who want and need a female only space would have it.

I think there would be high profile people happy to champion the TW/CW cause (eg Sally Hines, Mhairi Black, Munroe Bergdof, Danielle Muscato).

What do you think?

Are there CW/TW posters about - would you support this?

Most “women’s” Refuges currently admit TW. They will lose their funding if they don’t. This policy is causing harm. Do you support it being changed as proposed?

Post edited by MNHQ at OP's request

Field.
Where are your sources for women assaulting other women being higher than male on male violence ? Does prison magically render women uber violent, is it something in the water?

apolitical.co/solution_article/prison-hurts-women-more-than-men-so-england-is-trying-a-new-approach/

Op I’m sorry to be thick but I can’t understand how your suggestions solves the problem.

What?
You’re being disingenuous GirlDownUnder. I’ve read Bunbury too.

I’ve read Bunbury too.

You may have read a Bunbury. 😀

Women, in a prison full of women, possibly assaulting other women, is utterly irrelevant to sticking men in there. (There's a doh in there somewhere.)

WDIT is, as I said, right down there with the barrel scraping.

Something like 60% of women in prison have already been subjected to male violence.

Just saying.

RosaWaiting I'm not the OP, but my take on it is that there are lots of very good reasons why single sex spaces are important for women.

People who are believers in gender identity ideology claim that to accommodate transwomen requires single sex spaces to be abolished.

If a 'third space' is offered for transwomen only, this is considered unacceptable by gender identity followers because they say they have no problem sharing spaces with transwomen.
So it's better to have a third space that also includes non-binary and women who identify as 'cis' along with transwomen. This gender inclusive space should be suitable for all those who subscribe to the gender identity belief system.

The rest of the population who don't believe in this type of faith can continue to use single sex spaces as they were intended.

NO

Women's spaces are for women only. Adult human females.

Wurzel I don’t know it’s probably a complex mix of factors. I’ve worked with female substance misusers and ex prisoners I’m not blaming anyone. I still don’t think TW are the greatest threat to women and girls.
Sources:

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/737991/sexual-assaults-reported-prisons-exploratory-findings.pdf

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2438589/

Something like 60% of women in prison have already been subjected to male violence.

Yes Datun I know.

I’m kind of more interested in comprehensively tackling the patriarchy at large than focusing specifically on TW. But that’s just me. You do feminism your way, I’ll do it mine.

Thanks Field. Quick look at both ( haven’t got time for an in depth read at them mo).
I can’t find where the first supports higher female violence.
The second had an awful lot of confounding factors: American prisons ( different crimes to the U.K.) with high African American population ( so not representative of the UK) much smaller sample size, data collection over 1 wk vs 3 months for men, the women had double the incidence of MH issues (60%) but the report excluded further information about this important factor when collecting data on self reported sexual assault ( thinking along the lines of triggers here ) , they excluded males with previous sexual offences/ violent crimes.

As said countless times before it isn’t mtf people that are a threat to women it’s males using the rights demanded by mtf, to access women’s spaces. The ability of any pervert or sexual offender to freely access single sex spaces under the guise of a TW is an enormous threat to women.

But that’s just me. You do feminism your way, I’ll do it mine.

Sure. And I'll not focus my feminism on WDIT.

What does WDIT mean please?

Women do it too.

Most “women’s” Refuges currently admit TW. They will lose their funding if they don’t. This policy is causing harm. Do you support it being changed as proposed?

I should have put that in the OP - might see if they can add it.

Nonnymouse yes that’s it - thank you 😊

@Fieldofgreycorn it sounds like the population you work with want to share with TW - is that right?

Because that’s fine. You can run a CW/TW centre and I’ll run a single sex one, and we can cross-refer clients as needed.

So if a TW or CW comes to me, we’ll let you know and have them driven over. And vice versa if a woman wanting single-sex comes to you.

Deal?

See bottom of second picture.

Rape survivors often want female support. But this is denied and women are even shamed for it.

Women and girls have self-excluded over this, it’s not theoretical.

@Wurzelsnewhead In many places, Handicapped Toilets have become Handicapped/unisex toilets. As someone for whom the handicapped toilet is essential, this is not a satisfactory situation.

You’re being disingenuous GirlDownUnder. I’ve read Bunbury too.

Actually I wasn’t - I thought you were referencing the thread.

I’m pretty sure I wasn’t the only person reading this thread, having no idea you were arbitrarily referencing something else.

Yes I wasn’t sure about the “disruptor” reference, but thought it was an in-joke?

Back on topic - this is what happens to places which provide single-sex for women.

CW and TW - set up your own safe, affirming spaces and leave these women alone!!

Its a neat solution. But third spaces have been rejected over and over. It's total capitulation or nothing.

My interest is in women and girls. We need to protect single sex services and put the onus elsewhere to meet the needs of men (including those who identify as women)

2B that’s disgusting and actual violence rather than ‘muh pronouns’

I’ve read the twitter thread and the comments are heartening. I’m also keen to see what response Ogre gives since being name dropped as partly culpable.

mobile.twitter.com/RosieKerrS/status/1162418782305996805

It’s the paragraph at the top of page 6 Wurzel.
Thanks for the crit of the other one, that’s true. There isn’t a lot published on it. I think it’s something people don’t like to talk about. One of the last taboos really.

Fieldofgreycorn do you agree with my comment of 23.09 (genuine question)?

@RosaWaiting no you’re not thick at all, my OP was wombly To sum up:

• “Cis” women (CW) have given/are giving away female spaces. We who want them are ignored, because TW are the priority.

• But if CW and TW had refuges together those needing “female-only” could have it.

• I agree with Field that TW are not “the biggest problem” women face (who said they were? (see eg attachment issues, poverty, ACE, mental illness)

But to support women with these... they need to access your service, right? If they self-exclude on Day 1 because “there’s dudes in here, TF!”) you cannot support.

(So this is a way to get single sex spaces back, in a climate very hostile towards them)

I also agree with field that tw are not the biggest threat we face, but it is easier to put a stop to something than trying to change once it has been accepted.