Center Parcs upholding single sex spaces?

[gcnotterf1]

www.pinknews.co.uk/2019/10/30/center-parcs-trans-woman-changing-rooms-equalities-act-victoria-hodges/

I’ve long been saying we should replace door signs with a crude graffiti style cock and the equivalent for a vulva!

A starting point would be to accept that transgender men and women are the gender/sex that they tell you they are.

Err, no. The starting point here, on this board, is women's rights. That includes women who can't share intimate spaces with male-bodied people. You clearly haven't given any thought to the needs of these women, so who are you to talk about 'denying people's existence'?

Yes, what ThePurported just said.

And yes, either transwomen accept that women have a right to have boundaries or there is nothing to be discussed. I suspect that what happens if women as a whole (half the population) decide that there is no longer anything to be discussed has not entirely sunk in.

If it's not legal to have mixed sex toilets with cubicles with gaps under the doors - how on earth is it legal to allow a male bodied transwomen into the open plan female changing area, as CentreParcs have just done? That makes it a completely open plan, mixed sex space.

This was surely what the exemptions in the Equality Act were written for. They're just not being upheld.

What our visitor seems to be trying to do is to spin the exemptions in the Equality Act as being intended to apply on a person to person basis. They're not. They're intended to apply on a space/situation/service basis. Open plan changing rooms would be an excellent example of a space where the exemptions could and should be applied, and that would mean excluding everyone male.

You can't deny people's existence and still expect a meaningful discussion or cooperation.

Nobody is denying your existence. We're pointing out that your body is male, which would be impossible if you didn't exist, as, indeed, would this conversation. To be blunt, it seems rather as though we're saying things you don't want to hear, so you're falling back on that daft slogan because you don't, actually, have better answers.

A starting point would be to accept that transgender men and women are the gender/sex that they tell you they are.

That would be your starting point, yes. It's not ours. Just as we wouldn't dream of insisting that you accept our view on this, you have absolutely no right to insist that we accept yours. We think sex is real, that it matters, and that women need single sex spaces for our own dignity, privacy and safety. We also accept that trans people have every right to live in safety, happiness and dignity. You have every right to make good choices for your life, and in the way that best serves you. But when you walk in on us when we are naked, your choices have suddenly become our business, because at that point, two sets of rights come into play. And you don't have a right to be with us when we're naked without our consent.

You think biology is irrelevant. I'm going to assume, given your feminist values, that you think gender stereotypes are too. So can you please define what a woman is? What exactly do you mean by 'woman', if you're eliminating biological sex from the picture?

wellbehavedwomen: "You have every right to make good choices for your life, and in the way that best serves you. But when you walk in on us when we are naked, your choices have suddenly become our business, because at that point, two sets of rights come into play. And you don't have a right to be with us when we're naked without our consent."

YES.

This thread went weird.

GirlOnTheRoof: 'This is me! This is me! this is what I did! I am Vicky!'

Other posters: 'Oh yeah, you're Vicky. This is Vicky everyone, here's what Vicky did'

GirlOnTheRoof: 'How very dare you know who I am!'

but also

GirlOnTheRoof: 'How very dare you deny my existence!'

A proper discussion can only take place once both positions are respectfully accepted. That's clearly not the agenda here. A starting point would be to accept that transgender men and women are the gender/sex that they tell you they are.

That's not a starting point that's pretty much the entire thing we need to debate in a nutshell.

GirlOnTheRoof says that both positions must be respectfully accepted. Well my position is that sex is immutable and gender is an oppressive hierarchy that shits on women. That's my starting point. Respectfully accept that.

And of course these two positions cannot both be accepted at the same time because they are mutually exclusive. That's why there is a fucking debate.

wellbehavedwomen: "You have every right to make good choices for your life, and in the way that best serves you. But when you walk in on us when we are naked, your choices have suddenly become our business, because at that point, two sets of rights come into play. And you don't have a right to be with us when we're naked without our consent."

Vicki: fingers in ears lalalalala. Also, respect who I am.

So I'm guessing that you choosing to leave without answering my question means that you don't care. You don't care that you would have made women and girls uncomfortable.

That's very male behaviour

Vicky does not care about women. Vicky can cares about Vicky and Vicky's needs.

Vicky can force companies to betray women in Vicky's name. But Vicky can not force women to stay in that changing room or return to such rooms, whilst Vicky is present in them.

In real life women will simply withdraw from any mixed sex facilities and find alternative places with other females only.

Let's see how well family based holiday parks do, with a reduction in families visits, once this story gets out in the papers again.

Go woke, go broke.

Nobody denies that you exist, Vicky. You introduced yourself. You exist. We know. It's OK.

Transwoman are male. Most women do not consent to male people in their spaces and will never accept transwomen as female*. You and other males do not have permission or consent to use our female spaces. For all the reasons listed in this thread, which you appear to have ignored.

I understand that this is not what you want to hear. Start campaigning for third spaces and many of us will be right behind you.

*I say 'most' because this is what statistics appear to indicate.

You are posting on this board are you not? So how do you not exist? How are the women responding to you denying that you exist if they are answering you?

Women are saying no, we haven't consented to this, we do not consent, we will never consent to this but you're not just not listening.

”A starting point would be to accept that transgender men and women are the gender/sex that they tell you they are.”

That’s your starting point. That’s your opinion, not shared by most people. Accepting that someone else is correct in their personal belief isn’t the starting point of a debate. The starting point would be both sides accepting that they believe different things, and trying to come to a resolution which involves respecting beliefs without impinging on or affecting or forcing them on others. Saying the starting point should be everyone agrees with you is ludicrous.

”You can't deny people's existence and still expect a meaningful discussion or cooperation.”

Who is saying you don’t exist?

I always find the whole "you are denying our existence" pathetic and childish. I always wonder how they can say this with a straight face while conversing with others

Yes I am denying you exist as a female/woman. I can do that because you are Male.

I do think its females who exsistance is being denied.
We don't exsist therefore we do not need safe spaces, safeguards, protection, rights, dignity or boundaries apparently.

A proper discussion can only take place once both positions are respectfully accepted.

Yeah, I'm not sure you've quite grasped the meaning of the word discussion here.

Still, I guess that's what comes of re-redefining any words that get in your way.

Yeah, I'm not sure you've quite grasped the meaning of the word discussion here

Also 'respectfully accepted'. By which Vicky seems to mean 'dictated by one side.'

Which, of course, is no kind of discussion at all. Aka #nodebate

”A starting point would be to accept that transgender men and women are the gender/sex that they tell you they are.”

Why on earth would we do that? In what other situation do we pretend to accept a belief which is provably, materially incorrect? You are proposing a theocracy.

@GirlOnTheRoof

You said:

"A proper discussion can only take place once both positions are respectfully accepted"

• Sweet, this is our position, we are not comfortable with you rewriting science in order to gain access to our safe places.

"That's clearly not the agenda here. A starting point would be to accept that transgender men and women are the gender/sex that they tell you they are."

• Oh, sorry, you don't want to respectfully accept our position, but in order to have a discussion we have to accept yours.

"You can't deny people's existence and still expect a meaningful discussion or cooperation."

• We are not denying your existence, you exist, we are talking to you, we aren't sitting here going "oooooh, who posted that? Must be ghosts!" We are denying that you are a woman because you aren't. You are a Male bodied person who would quite like to be a woman for whatever reason (honestly mate, 90% of the time it's not all that).

I'm a poor person who'd quite like to be a millionaire, do I get to tell people I'm rich and they must therefore allow me all the privileges of rich people without me having the means to pay for it all?

I hope our favourite Canadian doesn't get to hear of this opportunity to mingle with semi-clad women and young girls.

Because if Vicky is allowed access, so is #waxmyballs. I'm not sure Center Parcs has fully appreciated the ramifications, particularly since Vicky has publicised CP's decision by going to the press.

TBH, at ca. £100pp a day, (based on current offers) I would have expected Aqua Sana to have come up with something better than a communal changing area in this day and age. I loathed communal changing rooms at school and that feeling has never gone away.

Why on earth would we do that? In what other situation do we pretend to accept a belief which is provably, materially incorrect? You are proposing a theocracy.

Exactly.

Hence:

I'm singing off this thread...Over and out.

Very illuminating contribution there - there was no acknowledgement that women could or would feel uncomfortable with a man walking through their changing area whilst they were in a state of undress. Their feelings didn’t matter so long as Girl got what they wanted.

”Very illuminating contribution there - there was no acknowledgement that women could or would feel uncomfortable with a man walking through their changing area whilst they were in a state of undress. Their feelings didn’t matter so long as Girl got what they wanted.”

Yes, that was completely ignored wasn’t it? I do find it very difficult to understand why someone would want to be part of a group of people they have no empathy with or respect for.

Women who have XY chromosomes and complete androgen insensitivity syndrome would be weeded out by a male DNA rule.

You can define Male as having a fully functioning Y chromosome though, and female as no functioning Y.
I think that covers AIS type disorders, includes everyone it should and excludes everyone it should.