Special trans taxi services to keep them safe

[BuzzShitbagBobbly]

Hey BBC, where's our front-page promoted article and video interview about all the things women have done for and by each other, for centuries, to stay safe in public? No?

The "look at poor ickle us suffering from these things nobody has ever had to worry about before" is so infuriating. We have been living this shit forever.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-49516092/the-taxi-service-trying-to-keep-trans-people-safe

How are the silent thoughts in a person's head, which with gc women tend to be about concepts rather than individuals, as or more dangerous than actions, including violent ones?

Wrongthink is worse than rape? Yeah we got that thanks.

This is possibly one of the most surreal threads I've ever been involved in.

The clip I posted about originally specifically reflected some tw's fear about their physical safety and "a safe way home" from a risk of male predators following/accosting/murdering them. (And nothing whatsoever to do with psychological protection from nasty women with bad attitudes.)

At no point did I say they shouldn't have this service or I wished harm on them. Those suggestions have been conjured up in clear bad faith by other posters purely to facilitate the responses they wanted to post regardless.

I also pointed out that when women set up female sex only spaces (exactly the same concept as the trans taxi), we don't get similar front page plaudits fussing and fawning over us as if we've done something groundbreaking. And worse, when we do do that, all too often, the service or facility is aggressively and often physically opposed to the point of closure (or not even allowed to start, as it is deemed sexist.

That is despite the fact women have had the very real and very high probability (as evidenced by real statistics) of attack, assault, rape, murder - overwhelmingly from male sexed people.

Which leaves us here.
Scenario 1: male sexed people who identify as tw, identify male sexed people as a risk to their safety and set up a service that proactively counters that. This is applauded.

Scenario 2: female sexed people are routinely prevented from identifying male sexed people as a risk and setting up services and facilities to counter that risk. This is blasted as sexist and exclusionary despite the statistics showing the risk is incredibly high and real.

Tbh, if pp want to act in bad faith and twist that into FWR MNers somehow not wanting tw to be safe or have their own services, carry on. The rest if the world has eyes and can easily see that that is utter shite.

They can also see equally clearly that women deserve the same level of protection from the same threat - the class of male sexed people, whatever they're wearing or identifying as.

There’s no trans taxi services in the uk, there’s dozens of female taxi services in the uk. I really don’t think this is the pinnacle of some sort of ‘the special people get everything and we’re left with nothing’ like some people seem to be making out.

It’s like when I give one of my kids calpol, the other one always kicks up a fuss because they want it. Despite the fact, when they are ill, they too have Calpol. No logic.

Glasgow appear to be the only council who have denied this (May be wrong) and that was on the basis of it being sexist, not transphobic. Still, there nobs for denying it. Was there much public pushback to the denial?

It's not a competition over who has it worse as well, there's female only firms out there too so all good says Roses.

So I am sure she will be quick to join us in condemning the mysterious activists responsible for the loss of the female-only taxi service JanesKettle was reliant on.

A female taxi company near me, which I used because they were female only (female drivers, will only take male passengers if accompanied by a female) gave in to activist pressure to change to a single gender company ie anyone who identifies as a woman can drive for them, or be driven for them. So it's mixed sex now.

Glasgow appear to be the only council who have denied this (May be wrong) and that was on the basis of it being sexist, not transphobic. Still, there nobs for denying it

Yep, agree with them being nobs for denying it. I mean, I don't see how it's sexist to have a women only taxi firm if there's a demand for it.
There's mixed ones too, so what harm would it do? None.
Can't see why there can't be a service for both.At least it doesn't seem to be a nationwide policy and just Glasgow from what I can see too, and ours definitely has a couple of women ones as I checked out of curiousity.

• Can't you see it's the attitudes out there they might not feel safe from, that they might want protection from

They might ... but the video clip is talking about fear of murder, being followed by men and physical violence. (In fact, exactly the same reasons women have for wanting female taxis etc). Kark is basically making stuff up to fit some narrative of her own.

By way of musing, I wonder what would happen if a tw in NY was sadly attacked and had not used this service?

Would they be "asking for it" because they chose to take an unsafe route home?
What if they got a regular taxi, not the special one?
What if they got a regular taxi wearing revealing clothes - and/or were drunk?
What if they flirted with someone beforehand?
And so on.

These are all questions routinely asked when females are assaulted, after all.

Is someone keeping a tally of straw persons? This thread could break the record

But there are two things surely we can all agree on.

1. No one on this thread is opposed a trans-only taxi service. No one.. I think it’s great and I support it. As I am not trans, I will respectfully self-exclude - Trans and NB people have a right to set their own boundaries.

1. We need female only services too (includes transmen). Councils need to stop blocking them. I’d expect all male people to rself-exclude not because you are a bad person (but because males commit 100% of rapes in the UK and we can’t tell who who).

I thought a proposed female-only was also rejected in Leeds, one was closed down in Warrington, a poster says it happened in her area.

I thought a proposed female-only was also rejected in Leeds, one was closed down in Warrington, a poster says it happened in her area.

If there isn't already, maybe a receipts thread for female only services/facilities/options that have been shut down, and why?

Just looked at it and the one in Warrington closed because they wouldn’t licence their staff or vehicles correctly, which every taxi firm needs to do. Nothing to do with it being female-only.
Can’t see anything online about Leeds rejecting a female only one, does anyone have a link?
Scotland does seem to be behind the times on this. Why would Glasgow deny something that is already operating successfully across England?

Can't you see it's theattitudesout there they might not feel safe from

Oh dear God, trans people need to be safe from attitudes even unspoken ones. But women, you want a safe space from real violence nah.

There's loads around stuff which gets any funding from public purse and so has to do what they say or get cut eg that rape Centre defunded as not focusing on men or whatever it was.

Private business though different matter.

We know about travis and top shop (any old man allowed in with teen girls undressing behind flimsy curtains) and a couple of others but in general like with most of yaniv people they just get through it as best they can, not wanting bad press / or threats to stop.

Ok we have two aspects here. The existence of a service and the reaction to it.
Nobody in this thread appears to have any issue with the existence of either a trans taxi service or a female-only taxi service.
The reaction to the trans taxi service is being lauded on the BBC. No issues there, let's all cheer for an American cab company.
The reaction to female-only taxi firms is that it is made difficult or impossible for them to operate, and an assumption is made that their existence is sexist because NAMALT.
This thread appears to have been created to discuss the difference in reaction, not to debate existence. There are hundreds of responses clarifying that nobody is against the existence of a trans taxi service.
Why is the reaction to separatism for safety's sake a positive one when it refers to transwomen and a negative one when it refers to females?
Either separatism for safety's sake is a positive thing or it isn't.
Things like women-only train carriages I'm not 100% sold on, because in my mind not getting into that carriage (perhaps because it is full?) then earmarks a woman as "fair game" the same way that having a drink, wearing clothes or making eye contact somehow does. It puts the emphasis on women to keep themselves safe, not on men to police their own behaviour.
I think I'd pay an extra couple of quid for a female-only cab service. They are very few and far-between though. And not being able to call one shouldn't be taken as a personal acceptance of a certain level of risk.
I would be more impressed if the BBC investigated why driving for a living encourages shady behaviour. Lorry drivers hookup apps, all the porn shops on the A1M, all the prostitution aimed at lorry drivers, taxi drivers being key to the grooming/rape gangs (and refusing to install CCTV), etc. Is it the mobility? The perceived privacy of the vehicle? Being out all night meeting vulnerable and drunk women? Being in the company of mainly other men? That would be actual journalism though so I won't hold my breath.

I haven't RTFT because if a relatively trivial thread gets 500 posts all of a sudden, it's enervatingly predictable why.

But, for the record:

I don't give a flying fuck if the trans set up their own taxi service.

I think the BBC comprises a bunch of Woke wankers who wouldn't know actual oppression if it slapped them in the face with a wet fish.

Does that cover it?

It’s like when I give one of my kids calpol, the other one always kicks up a fuss because they want it. Despite the fact, when they are ill, they too have Calpol. No logic

Your analogy is that women only want to be safe because we are jealous that people are concerned about the safety of trans women?

Fuck. Ing. Hell.

Tentacle I think it would be more accurate the other way round

I agree that it's an interesting point as to whether this would then lead to questions about why you didn't choose the special service if a trans person was attacked. I suspect unfortunately that would come up.

I just don't understand why there's so much ire towards them when actually it makes me feel sympathetic that they're in a vulnerable position.

I do agree that women are more vulnerable as members of society.

What I don't, and won't, agree with is that anyone who has ever had a penis should automatically be seen as a threat.

I think trans women, in particular, but also trans men, face a unique type of discrimination, including threats of sexual and other violence. And including, yes, having to deal with the derogatory and hugely negative views displayed towards them, such as treating them, completely unfairly in my opinion and experience, as potential rapists.

I was chortling about the 'threat' and keeping trans people 'safe' from middle aged women who might raise an eyebrow at them. Who knew we were so powerful and dangerous?

Until the Calpol Analogy.

Then I remembered; some people just actually hate women.

I just don't understand why there's so much ire towards them when actually it makes me feel sympathetic that they're in a vulnerable position.

You don't?

You don't understand why people might be fucking angry that all a man has to say is 'I am a woman' and bingo; rapists are housed with women and children, men get awards for being stunning and brave, and put on special lists meant for actual women, and are able to beat women up in boxing rings?

It is state sanctioned abuse.

And agonisingly, it seems it's impossible on MN to post any kind of supportive view towards them without being accused of hating women.

I highly doubt anyone on this thread hates women simply because they are sympathetic towards trans people. And it's utterly tiresome to have to continually deal with being abused on FWR because you are sympathetic and supportive.

My first thought was "John Worboys".

Even taxis aren't always safe for women.

Transwoman does not equal rapist.

Then I remembered; some people just actually hate women

Because everyone who has a different opinion to you automatically hates women?
Nope, not me - I'm a woman and of course I don't hate them. Yanno, being one and all.

I highly doubt anyone on this thread hates women.

The evidence shows likewise.

If you cannot see why locking rapists up with women and children is problematic and shows no consideration for women and children, then that is your decision to make.