Gina Martin not happy women don’t want trans women in their sex segregated spaces

[happydappy2]

Gina Martin, who successfully campaigned to make upskirting a crime, has tweeted hat she is not happy that women referenced that particular law in regards M&S changing rooms becoming mixed sex. I suspect she has very woke friends leaning on her to speak out but even so, womens rights are not hers to give away. I wonder what she really thinks about denying teenage girls the right to single sex changing facilities.

womens rights are not hers to give away

Exactly. She has no say in how the law is used, once it's been made.

Gina if yr on here, please let us know yr thought process? I have much admiration for your perseverance with the upskirting law. Keeping single sex spaces, single sex is NOT transphobic.

Is she giving away rights? Or having an opinion on an issue? I don't agree with that opinion, but I think it's ok for someone to think things I disagree with.

Females are entitled to privacy and dignity but only in specific circumstances - ie ones that don't upset men?

Third spaces Gina. Go share a mixed sex space, enjoy, go nuts. But you're not turning every single female only space mixed sex for 100% of women, regardless of the feelings and needs of those women, so you can better enable the benefit and happiness of less than 1% of men.

Because that's sexism on crack.

The few trans/non-binary people who feel brave enough to ask to use a space they're comfortable in should be allowed to do so.

mobile.twitter.com/ginamartinuk/status/1268477782549581830

I totally support her right to express her opinion. It does seem that opinion is that people should lose their right to single sex spaces, specifically in M and S but also (one can infer) in general.

So a man maneovreing to see my knickers without my consent is bad and an offence against me, but a man maneovreing to see my knickers without my consent is also ok and my objecting is an offence against him?

And the difference is whether he can say magic words?

a man maneovreing to see my knickers without my consent is also ok and my objecting is an offence against him? And the difference is whether he can say magic words?

From her twitter I would suggest she thinks that people who say the magic words will never ever do that because they are Special and Very Oppressed.

The few trans/non-binary people who feel brave enough to ask to use a space they're comfortable in should be allowed to do so.

Even if this makes many females in that space not comfortable?

Why don't they and their feelings matter in the same way? Why should they suck up their discomfort for the benefit of males?

Because isn't that just good old sexism - people with penises being intrinsically more important than people with vaginas and people with vaginas exist mainly to keep the penis people ok and happy?

Or is that the bravery of males asking females to come in and get undressed with them - with no interest at all in how that impacts on those females apparently, what are they? Window dressing? Props? Mummy? - trumps the bravery of every single female in that space who apparently doesn't matter when a Male wants to come in? What about the individual circumstances of the females?

What do you plan to do with the females who now have no accessible spaces at all because you need to indulge your awwww bless protectiveness over brave and special males and give away female rights?

Get a fucking grip for pete's sake.

And incidentally how do you feel about the bravery of female people who speak up and say this makes me really uncomfortable and unwelcome, shatters female rights and excludes many vulnerable females, and female single sex spaces and female rights matter for half the human race, so no. Another option for these males is needed that doesn't stomp all over females.

Shouldn't they be heard too if bravery speaking out matters?

Or is it again that people born with penises are intrinsically more important, worthy, pitiable, valuable, and female 'bravery' is actually them being naughty for messing with preconceived and sexist social stereotypes that were created to benefit males?

@Barracker

So a man maneovreing to see my knickers without my consent is bad and an offence against me, but a man maneovreing to see my knickers without my consent is also ok and my objecting is an offence against him?

And the difference is whether he can say magic words?

Precisely. Some men have feelings that entitle them to look at your knickers and you're bigoted if you complain

Her point I think is the existing law of voyeurism would cover incidents in eg changing rooms.

However, in a communal changing situation ie lots of school and swimming changing etc, if the person is allowed to be in there they don't need to do anything to 'spy' as they can just see with their eyes. So that law couldn't be used I wouldn't have thought.

Campaigning for a law doesn't mean that you own it and can dictate how it's used in later cases.

Also not convinced that "brave" is the correct word for, say, Travis Albanza demanding to be able to change with the teenage girls at Topshop.

So many women think they will never need a single sex space such as a DV shelter, prison or psychiatric ward.
I wonder if this means they see themselves in some way superior or more resilient to the other women.

More caring
More kind
More inclusive
Less bigoted
All round nicer
More liveable
Better than

She calls it "my law". Is that a thing that people normally do?

I'm not sure.

I thought going into communal changing was a thing of the past until my daughters started swimming lessons / clubs.

They are mainly held at schools which of course have communal single sex changing and a mix of adults and kids of all ages.

I suppose a lot of people just haven't seen one for years and so think what's the fuss about.

I've also stayed in a mixed sex ward in hosp when I was 18. I was the only female in there, it was really uncomfortable. Sitting in bed in your nightie with a roomful of men you don't know. 3 of them just sat there staring at me. Nothing happened, but I wasn't keen. Luckily it was mainly orthopedic patients so most were pretty immobile

I have stayed on mixed children's wards a lot which were great tbh, they mixed all ages as well but there were more nurses around, the kids were pretty Ill so probably had other things on their mind. Having said that I had my first snog with a boy I met there

Anyway I digress.

I doubt many people for it have stayed on mixed sex wards either...

So that may be a reason.

A lot of men don't even know women and girls used to have communal changing in lots of clothes shops! DH was shocked when he found out, he'd never been in one like that for men.

Anyway. Inexperience maybe. Is a big part of it.

Girls and women, don't speak up about feeling uncomfortable.

In reply to something further down the thread, she responds to someone by saying 'Exactly, it's men who are the problem, not transwomen/GNC people's and honestly, I smacked my head off my desk at that point.

Yes, it is MEN who are the problem. Regardless of their personalities/grooming habits/dress sense/inner identity/religion.

Why are these people always talking past this? What exactly about a male claiming a trans identity means that he is no longer part of the group 'men' for the purposes of avoiding risk? That's the crux question and these people never answer it, they always side step and it fucks me off.

for fucks sake!! i despair i really do

i'd day another one for the baroness but she must be drowning at the moment

Sorry, off topic, but - how does one address you now, O Baroness?

As for the idea that means a male becomes a woman by saying so - it's an incredible thing that people buy this idea. Of course, they know it's not true. In the back of their minds is the knowledge that it's a polite fabrication (be kind, etc). A man who does this is a special kind of man. One that is somehow emasculated, rendered magically weaker, and can't possibly present a threat.

That is what Gina Martin is saying. A transwoman or a non-binary person is always safe. Is never a threat, no matter their sex, weight, height, build, penis, sexual proclivities.

Sorry, Gina. I don't share that belief.

Gina Marin has gone full "Do it to Julia" on that twitter thread.

Scrimpshaw, 'Floral' is fine. I might even answer to it in real life these days .

The thinking is so odd, isn't it? And hugely appropriate for a quasi religious belief, because it's basically saying that being trans confers a kind of holy aura, a bit like sainthood, that means the individual is beyond reproach. It's like the 'No true Scotsman' fallacy and the Catholic Saint system made a baby and it was called 'No Transwoman could or would ever sin'.

I see she justies it by comparing it to discrimination against black and gay people. Nope.

The few trans/non-binary people who feel brave enough to ask to use a space they're comfortable in should be allowed to do so.

Knowing that they are not supposed to, that it causes harm, that it causes distress, that it will stop women/girls entering spaces designed for them, knowing that they are bigger and stronger, is NOT brave.

Barracker’s point is well made.

Upskirting law was made because of the behaviour of men. The logic is that it’s not ok to for a male to view non consenting women’s/girls underwear with a phone, but it’s fine to do so in person. Er, no.

Gina should take a look at this. I wonder if she believes that any of them are transwomen?