Center Parcs upholding single sex spaces?

[gcnotterf1]

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

The sort of people who want grown adult males in a changing space with youngsters are exactly the sort of people who shouldn’t be allowed in. Same goes for the sort of people who place their own comfort or validation above the comfort and safety of young people and children. That sets off every single alarm bell.

Once again, transgender women are not males, they have transitioned or are in the process of transitioning. To keep saying they are always males is rather silly. A GRC can be issued regardless of having had GRS or not, but to get one is dependent upon a 2-year process and evidence requirements. Even self ID would still have a process and evidence requirements. Look at Ireland, they already have it and there's no reported problems. A transgender woman with a GRC is legally female just like all females. If you want everyone in the female changing to have been through the process and got her GRC we'd have to speed up the process because it currently has a 2-year lived experience requirement. Don't forget these only apply to UK residents. What would you do with a Canadian visitor? They would never have a GRC and probably wouldn't bring their Birth Certificates on holiday with them. I very much doubt checking people's genitalia at the door would be acceptable. Then you have the issue of transgender men to consider. Do you want them in the female changing room with their new genitalia? According to your rules they can't use the men's changing room because you consider them to be women. If a transgender women is a threat to you, why isn't a transgender man also a threat? You don't want to apply the same logic?

Once again, transgender women are not males

How can women in the changing room tell the difference?

Christ almighty @GirlOnTheRoof. You’ve just done a c&p on every daft trope ever written. Transition does not alter sex. It modifies and mimics characteristics associated with sex. That’s a whole different kettle of fish. I don’t mean that in a mean way, it’s just factual.

You’re mixing up social and legal too. Legal recognition does not automatically guarantee social recognition. You can ask adults to tap dance on altar of gender identity and adapt their thinking or behaviour but you can’t ask that of children. Nor should you.

As for Ireland, that’s nonsense. Totally different system of self ID to the one proposed here (it’s way more restrictive) and pretty much every single person interested in this topic knows there’s a natal male sex offender currently residing in Irish female prison. If that’s not something you recognise as a problem, I don’t know what to say to you to be honest.

Only male people can be transwomen.

Exactly, DuLang. The one single pre-requisite for being a transwoman, but you’re supposed to forget/ignore/obfuscate that fact. It’s all so utterly incoherent.

Wait, I forgot to add that no, transmen are not a threat. Sure they often tend to pass much better (I use that term because I understand it’s relevant to/used by trans people) but generally speaking no, still not a threat. Also females as a sex class are infinitely less dangerous than males. We know that. We’ve known it for as long as we humans have been gathering data and writing stuff down. It’s almost like there’s a reliable, statistically robust pattern....

It's slanderous to say they are a threat, a misrepresentation of the reality and truth.

What’s the accurate reality and truth of Katie Dolatowski sexually assaulting two girls in toilets in Scotland?

@nolongersurprised Really well articulated comment, that's exactly how a lot of women feel.

It's slanderous to say they are a threat, a misrepresentation of the reality and truth.

Stats say that transwomen are no more likely to be a threat than anyone else born with a penis, but also no less likely. We have single-sex spaces so that nobody has to work out who’s dangerous and who isn’t.

Although as many others have said, I don’t want to be naked around any of the nice, non-threatening males either.

Once again, transgender women are not males

You can keep telling us this, but our senses and years of experience (and millennia of evolution) tell us otherwise

”However, if transwomen were kinder and used their own spaces and appreciated how women’s experiences of male violence affects women’s responses to male bodies then they’d be much more likely to be accepted and supported.”

Absolutely.

How can these ‘family oriented’ businesses -or well, anyone really- just throw women’s and kids’ safety, privacy and dignity to the winds like this? What special magic have they been told now removes their legal obligations to protect and not mislead their customers? Do they think sense of righteous misogynistic wokeness will stop these businesses being sued for letting men into women’s spaces without prominently warning women of the known, proven dangers of that arrangement?

Why does Centreparcs think single sex toilets were ever needed and provided in the first place? Just for fun?

Do none of their management think about personal safety when they’re out alone at night, do none of them keep their PIN numbers private? Are they all happy for their kids to chat online and give out personal details to everyone they play with, then go off and meet them in person alone? Because, dont be ridiculous, who would go out of their way to play a kids’ game or to pretend to be a child, just to try to meet kids for bad reasons? Because things always turn out just fine don’t they and nobody ever behaves in way that the stats and life experiences tell us they will behave, do they...?

It’s offensive how little they would seem to care for protecting women and children’s personal safety and sense of security in a public space that they offer and are responsible for. Why don’t they seem to care about the terrible long term affects of sexual harassment, voyeurism and at worst sexual assault and rape, perpetrated by men on women and children?

Feels like the boards of directors of these businesses need to openly meet with women’s and children’s groups as an urgent priority, to help them understand better the very serious short and long term risks that their businesses would be asking their customers to take on. Or just you know, honestly survey their customers and staff? Because we all know at heart that no special expertise is really needed to know that policies doing away with single sex provision are dangerous and therefore not welcome to the vast majority of people. And that providing single sex facilities are positively valued by most people, especially women, as a good thing in their own right.

If the aim is to provide a 100% safe environment you will need to focus on all persons intentions, not their gender identity or sexuality. All groups will and do contain people with bad intentions. The problem of course is how do you identify them and prevent them from entering?
For example, you can't stop all the green people just because one of them was bad in the past. That would be a prejudice against green people.
(My apologies to green people).
Also how are you going to police any system you come up with? It's impossible to filter out every bad actor based on the criteria of gender identity.

Wouldn't you self-police. GirlOnTheRoof?

After all, you had the decency to ask CP if it was OK in the first instance; if they had continued to say no, would you have gone in anyway?

What special magic have they been told now removes their legal obligations to protect and not mislead their customers?

Maybe they phoned up the Stonewall legal team for advice?

girlontheroof - changing areas are not split by any other characteristic other than biological sex, because of the dramatic difference between sexual offending by males and females.

People born male commit 97% of sexual offences, people born female commit 3%.

”If the aim is to provide a 100% safe environment you will need to focus on all persons intentions, not their gender identity or sexuality. All groups will and do contain people with bad intentions. The problem of course is how do you identify them and prevent them from entering?”

Presumably we should apply the same criteria to access to schools? Because a DBS check won’t tell us someone’s intentions, therefore no point bothering, right?

Presumably if you think intentions are the only relevant factor, you think these spaces should be completely openly mixed sex?

As I said above, I wouldn’t feel comfortable getting undressed in front of any male-bodied person except DH. Even those male-bodied persons I know and trust absolutely and completely.

It’s not just about nefarious intentions and worst-case scenario, it’s about dignity, respect, vulnerability.

It’s not just about nefarious intentions and worst-case scenario, it’s about dignity, respect, vulnerability

THIS

It's impossible to filter out every bad actor based on the criteria of gender identity.

Correct. That is why we filter out based on the criteria of the attribute that 98% of sexual offenders have in common: male sex.

Please, everyone, do contact Centre Parks about this-they urgently need to re think if they are actually allowing XY people access to the womens changing area, even if XY person then changes in a cubicle to protect their dignity & privacy-this offers no protection to women & girls undressing. (Who wrongly believe they are in a single sex space)

If the aim is to provide a 100% safe environment you will need to focus on all persons intentions, not their gender identity or sexuality.

98% of all sex offences are committed by males. Therefore sex segregation is the single, most effective, risk reduction.

All groups will and do contain people with bad intentions.

See above.

The problem of course is how do you identify them and prevent them from entering?

In the same way that we have done for decades.

You seem obsessed with my body. That's just weird and slightly creepy to be honest.

20% of women will suffer from some form of sexual violence. You deliberately interpreting their discomfort over being forced to disrobe around male born individuals, as prurient interest in your anatomy is more than 'slightly creepy', tbh.

Strewth. Little wonder #NoDebate was considered the most sensible game plan.

There has been long threads at what age little male bodies, need to use the other changing room.
As said before it is understood that penis's over this ages do not enter the female gentile space.
Why can this not be understood.
Do we now have to embarrass tranwoman each and everytime , something most of us would hate to do, just so pre op transwoman do the decent thing?

All groups will and do contain people with bad intentions. The problem of course is how do you identify them and prevent them from entering
That's a tricky one.
Off the top of my head we have DBS checks to protect children from adults seeking to harm them
Clare's law to protect women from men with histories of domestic violence
Single sex spaces to allow women to undress free from the male gaze and those men with potential to harass and assault them.
Self regulation where people understand where their presence may cause others distress / alarm so they self regulate and don't impose themselves on others.
It's all worked with considerable success until a group of adults came along who believe that respectful and thoughtful consideration for others doesn't apply to them

It’s true you can’t literally and completely remove every risk. So what you do is everything you reasonably and feasibly can to reduce it as far as possible. Why is one of the reasons why single sex spaces were created in the first place.

The reasons single sex spaces were created haven’t magically gone away. So why are those spaces being taken away without even consulting those for whom they were created?