Help me reply to Lord Lucas now before debate on Monday

[refusetobeasheep]

He has responded to my email asking him to ensure the definition of women is born female at birth.

His question: How in a women's communal toilet can you reasonably ascertain whether another person is a woman or not?

Please give me your best answers now before I reply.

Especially safe guarding points!!

Will mention the way men walk, talk, look ... that entirely possible i have not spotted a post op trans before. but i would spot a bearded man or someone who made me as a woman feel unsafe. And the new self -ID would mean I would have to ignore my instincts and happily allow any man who says he is a woman to access my communal changing area / that of my 9 year old daughter ..

It does look like he is fairly sensible on this but this quote I cannot imagine how, in a pleasant and civilised society, a group of women in a toilet can practically determine that one of their number should not be there explains his question to you.

We women can almost always tell if a person is male or female, regardless of whether they look masculine or feminine.

And My starting position in this debate is that it is not possible to separate humanity into two genders

But he gets that sex and gender are different, so lets go back to separating by sex rather than socially constructed gender presentation. perhaps?

Finally, where he says Some public buildings have converted their ladies and gents communal toilet facilities to gender neutral I have found that in practice it tends to be single sex for males and relabelled ladies toilet marked gender neutral (Derby University Enterprise Centre I'm looking at you). Which is isn't, it is mixed sex.

It's so bloody tiresome!!

65 to 70% correct sexing when humans look at movement of lights attached to side of a body

citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.2.266&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Authors use gender, but bio sex is understood, its only in recent times when the terms have gained more precise definitions

Also assumption I suspect is that the person has not been trying to hide their sex

"I would like to see Stonewall lay aside its kimono and baseball bat, and Fawcett hear the call to courage, and sit down together to sort out a commonsense solution." ??

No, I'm not having Fawcett Society or anyone else 'negotiate' on my behalf.
The common sense solution is only girls and women in women's spaces. I am absolutely fucking sick of this constant 'negotiation'.
"What about cockless men"
"What about men who wear dresses"
"What about men who..."
NO.

I see you have already replied, I am such a slow typer! Thank you.

Regardless of the exasperated tone of my previous post I am grateful that he is hosting this debate. And it does appear that he is looking for answers to the 'how can you tell?' inevitable question.

The short answer is we can't, but evolution has enabled us to be pretty certain, and where there is ambiguity we need the law to be on the side of those willing to challenge an apparent male in female spaces. Not a law that terrifies women into thinking knowing someone is male is a hate crime! I'm assuming this Lord Lucan is only a lord because the previous one disappeared?

Sorry, I have read everything, but I always think it is a like a mother pretending that their is under five so as not to pay the fare. Probably one or two transsexuals will be able to continue to use women's facilities, but they will be there illegally and not want to draw attention to themselves.

I would put it another way,
If you allow all the toilets of the UK to become unisex then how are we meant to tell if the man in the toilets is a pedophile, rapist or sex pest.
Why takeaway safeguarding from 52% of the population for the sake of 2% who could have alternative 3rd space provision.
All research shows that shared sex areas has a higher rate of crime against women.

How many times has he chatted up a person of the wrong sex for his orientation?

If we want to have sex/procreate I’m pretty sure we can “tell”. I’m straight and have never accidentally fancied a woman. Stop pretending to be stupid.

Unless you ask to see in someone's pants then you cannot possibly be certain what kind of genitals they have.

And a sign on the door won't ensure that only people with vaginas enter the room.

Signs don't have that kind of power.

Adam's apple?
TBH usually it's the size of hands and feet that is a 100% giveaway.

I think the person who asked this question is kind of missing the point.

OP - you have to challenge the mantra "transwomen are women".

So many of these discussions start from the premise of including transwomen in the category "woman" - when this has no biological basis.

A high proportion of transgender women retain their male anatomy - estimates are at around 85%, possibly higher - and are attracted to women. It is unfair on women to be expected to run this gauntlet in spaces where we will be vulnerable or undressing.

Transwomen are male. I'm sorry that nature can be unkind, but I don't see why women should have to bear the brunt of this.

Regina, what is the benefit to women (female ones) of losing single-sex facilities?

I am not sure I would bother, he knows fine well what a woman is, sigh they all do, and is just using the debate to bully women.

@DodoPatrol Regina, what is the benefit to women (female ones) of losing single-sex facilities?

I never said there was a benefit.

that their child is under five

Sorry

How in a women's communal toilet can you reasonably ascertain whether another person is a woman or not?

This is a straw man question.

I probably can't spot 100% of men, but with all-female spaces I can challenge the 90% or whatever I can spot, and should someone I hadn't spotted behave in a way that makes me uncomfortable I can challenge them then. So while I don't have 100% accuracy, I can protect my boundary 90% or better.

But if that space is redefined to admit 100% of men, I can't protect my boundary at all.

90% is worse than 100%, but a hell of a lot better than 0%.

Arguing that because we can't do something 100%, it's not worth doing at all is a false dichotomy.

I have a fairly large number of friends who are trans (double figures, anyhow, which is probably quite a lot considering what a small proportion of the population they actually are: I don't really believe a figure of 2%, where did that come from?) and am often in social circumstances at which trans people are found.

I have yet to mistake for a woman, for more than twenty seconds or so, a trans person who was born male.

The trouble is that I have no easy answers about how I know so immediately, even in the case of people who have been passing as female for twenty or thirty years, whether someone was originally m rather than f. I would in fact be suspicious of any easy answer on the subject, because I strongly suspect it is different for each individual some of whom I like very much and trust, others of whom I have very little time for, and everything in between. There is some sort of cognitive dissonance "she presents as female but that doesn't feel right" -- but blowed if I can say how I arrive at it.

I think the person who asked this question is kind of missing the point.

Men often do.

Women developed the ability to discriminate between males and females because it is a critically necessary survival skill. Not so important for men, so they have neither developed the ability nor see the need for it.

Unless you ask to see in someone's pants then you cannot possibly be certain what kind of genitals they have.

I don't care what kind of genitals they have. If they're male they should stay out of female spaces.

Signs don't have that kind of power.

Those signs have huge power. They are why the vast majority of men will categorically refuse to enter a female space. Which is also why those men who do wish to break the taboo and disobey the sign are justifiably treated with great suspicion.

Sigh.

You could genuinely do some research on this (though hampered by birth certs and other ID being re-written).

Large sample of male/female/transgender male/transgender female people, in gendered or gender-neutral clothing and hairstyle, videoed or just observed by male/female/transgender volunteers.

Similar sample of male/female etc etc voices.

How accurately can adults tell? How about children and babies? Are men worse at it than women? Are transgender people similar to the men or the women in their ability to distinguish male from female? It could be really interesting.

reginafelangee
As another poster has pointed out, we manage to obey all kinds of social conventions (queuing, not driving on the pavement, knocking on a door - not bursting in and so on).
Men and women simply need to respect and follow the convention of respecting single sex spaces. It's bloody simple.

The answer to the question is another, better question: how can a woman tell the difference between a transwoman and a man? Answer: we can't because they are both biological males.

I think that research would be fascinating- from my own small sample (anecdote) males seem to find it harder to tell... easily distracted by the wrapping as it were

Men and women simply need to respect and follow the convention of respecting single sex spaces. It's bloody simple.

Exactly. I don't understand why a man who claims to support women-only provision wants to undermine this convention with pointless musings about 'gender'.