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.

The trans people that I know pass so well that you'd never know, and behave perfectly appropriately for the gender they identify as.

Presumably those people would not be challenged (my trans cousin never is).

I don't understand what the issue is with letting trans people into a women's space, if they identify as female and present as such.

That is not MandS's policy. Their policy is that changing rooms are labelled male and female but are actually mixed sex. Any man can use the female changing room regardless of how they present. The groups who have pushed for this would regard your expectation that someone 'present as female' to access women's changing rooms as deeply transphobic.

It is not brave, nor stunning, nor even basically decent, for males who identify as women to therefore expect to dominate and remove rights and spaces from women without interest or care for those women. It makes the whole 'identify' thing sound extremely shallow.

This.

I've yet to meet a trans person who transitioned primarily for 'sexual pleasure'.

I've yet to meet a Sweedish person but I believe they exist.

A guy who cross dresses because it gives him a boner and a trans women are two very different things, one of which is more complex than the other.

Not according to Stonewall. Many transsexuals who object to being lumped in with transgender people are subject to terrible abuse.

Or even a swedish person.

She doesn't demand lesbian-free spaces because of that one awful lesbian, because she knows that most lesbians aren't like that.

That's a poor analogy. Men commit 98% of sex crime. Not women.

Wtf?! Ok Gina, so upskirting is fine as long as it's in the form of some male leaving a camera in a changing room? Anyway, my rights are not yours to give away.

@Michelleoftheresistance I've yet to meet a trans person who transitioned primarily for 'sexual pleasure'.

There is any wealth of evidence (you can find plenty of it on threads here) that there are many males who do this, are counted as trans under the Stonewall umbrella and there is no way of drawing a line between what you're distinguishing as 'true trans' and others. There isn't. It can't be denied that males exist who do this, and do this in women's spaces, and do this for pleasure and enjoyment - this is a fact. I know it's a very inconvenient fact, but it is a fact.

It can't be denied that there is no way to distinguish between a male who is using female spaces for their sexual enjoyment and use of females, and one who isn't. And to be honest, any male who wants to use a female space is wanting to be there because it's the space where the females are, the whole point is the other females being present. There is an aspect of using female people in that respect, particularly as also can't be missed, many female people do not consent to mixed sex spaces.

People born female need to have access to female only spaces. What male people need is another issue to solve, and mixed sex spaces as an addition would seem a much better way forward than removing all provision from all females and punishing those who don't or cant conform by excluding them from any provision at all to benefit males. It's sexism, it's that simple.

And to anticipate the argument of 'well some males behave badly, but you shouldn't punish all males by banning all males from female only spaces' -

This just means females need to shut up and suck up the bad behaviour of the badly behaved males and all the disadvantage because their primary duty is to make the males in need happy and better cared for.

Again, rampantly differing standards of care and interest based on sex and extreme end sexism.

Add. Include extra spaces. Increase the offer and variety of the offer. Don't subtract and make female humans the losers.

There's no evidence of that. Most women don't actually report sexual assault either, because they are ashamed and are victim blamed. They are the best figures we have, so until you can prove otherwise, they stand.

It's not just about safety, either. Why are we expected to be uncomfortable, humiliated and/or scared, to validate other people's "identities"?

So because of predatory lesbians we should open up spaces to any man who identifies as a woman in the knowledge that some will abuse it? You need a better argument.

One would think the answer to predatory lesbians is to deal with the predatory lesbians. Like the answer to unpleasant males making other males feel unsafe in toilets or changing facilities is to deal with those unpleasant males. Using either as a reason why society should take female only spaces away from all females regardless of impact on females in order to benefit some males - it's not an obvious connection there really.

I've yet to meet a trans person who transitioned primarily for 'sexual pleasure'.

That's good. Crossdressing is defined as "transgender" by Stonewall. All trans-favouring policies mean them, just as much as they mean your personal trans friends.

If the majority of the trans people are doing no harm, then in the same way, they should be allowed into those spaces, because that's acceptance and tolerance.

No, because women have feelings and rights too. And need female only spaces sometimes. We're not merely the props in male trans people's lives, thanks. Why is your empathy only one way?

because that's acceptance and tolerance.

Ok, where's the acceptance and tolerance of the female feelings, needs, issues, reasons why they need female only spaces?

Because this is casting females as subhuman, that any female who can't prioritise males deserves to lose all provision. That's called male supremacism. It's no shinier than white supremacism.

There's no evidence of that.

There is some evidence that men don't report sex crimes and domestic abuse but no way is it enough to account for the discrepency. The evidence of our own eyes should tell us that men tend to be more aggressive, particularly sexually, than women.

Separate male and female changing rooms exist because of the societal concept that men somehow wouldn't be able to behave themselves appropriately around women and/or vice versa in a shared space, which is a bit infantilising.

There are a lot of women in developing countries who campaign for single sex facilities and would disagree with you.

Given so many cultures seperate by sex in situations where women might be vulnerable I'm surprised you think there is no valid reason for it. Presumably that extends to women's prisions and women's refuges? What about women's sport?

This just means females need to shut up and suck up the bad behaviour of the badly behaved males and all the disadvantage because their primary duty is to make the males in need happy and better cared for.

That's exactly what these people think. And they've never even questioned it once.

I've yet to meet a trans person who transitioned primarily for 'sexual pleasure'.

Humans don't lie, nope, never ever, and would definitely tell you if they were doing something for a reason that you would not approve of.

I don't understand why they don't just have a 'male', 'female', and 'mixed' changing rooms, or frankly only 'mixed' changing rooms.

I agree with the first suggestion. I think many, many people would be uncomfortable with the second. It would also exclude some minorities from getting changed in M and S.

You also need to have a better think about white supremacism as an example: based on simple moral disgust. No practical reasons.

There is no moral disgust here, just practical barriers for female humans that need the solution of female only spaces to be available. It is not considered 'normal' in the UK for males and females to toilet or undress in the same spaces, in fact it's set in law that they should not have to, because of privacy and dignity. There are additional reasons for females around vulnerability, borne out by statistics, and statistics around the world of why single sex spaces improve safety and inclusion for females in society.

This is requiring females to give up privacy and dignity, to increase their vulnerability, and in many cases to be unable to access female facilities at all (which is the primary purpose of those facilities, to serve females), in order to privilege some males to have more freedoms and choices.

It's nothing like the same thing, is it?

You also need to have a better think about white supremacism as an example: based on simple moral disgust. No practical reasons.

It's a ridiculous comparison designed to guilt trip women out of having boundaries. It doesn't work on me, or many of us here.

As you said, this agenda is pure male supremacism.

A guy who cross dresses because it gives him a boner and a trans women are two very different things

How exactly does one tell the difference when in a female space with a male?

Are we saying then that men who transition purely for sexual reasons or claim to be Transwomen so they can gain access to women might lie about their intentions?
Wow, who’d have thought it?