Excluding trans women from women's single sex spaces is discriminatory - Human Rights Watch

[stumbledin]

Extract from letter to PM:

" ... We are particularly concerned by media reports suggesting that the government plans to exclude trans women from women-only spaces. This would be a seriously regressive and discriminatory step. The government’s own 2018 consultation on the GRA states clearly that “trans and non-binary people are members of our society and should be treated with respect.” However, this proposal would force trans women to use male facilities, despite strong evidence that this puts them at risk of violence. Conversely, there is no evidence that allowing trans women access to women-designated spaces, which has been the case for a number of years, puts other women at risk.

The World Professional Association for Transgender Health, an interdisciplinary professional association comprised of over 700 members worldwide, has found that medical and other barriers to gender recognition for transgender individuals, including diagnostic requirements, “may harm physical and mental health.”

In line with international human rights standards and medical best practice, Human Rights Watch recommends that the government reform the GRA to allow for a transparent, accessible administrative process for legal gender recognition based on self-identification. We urge you to reject any policies that would subject trans women to discrimination and expose them to harm, in particular by denying them access to safe spaces for women. ... "

www.hrw.org/news/2020/06/17/letter-uk-prime-minister-gender-recognition-reform

ie trans women have human rights - biological women dont, which seems to mean biological women dont have human rights or maybe dont even qualify as human!!

However, this proposal would force [some men] to use male facilities, despite strong evidence that this puts them at risk of violence. Conversely, there is no evidence that allowing [some men] access to women-designated spaces, which has been the case for a number of years, puts other women at risk."

This is a strange reversal of reality.
Thee is no evidence that males who identify as women are in any more danger in male facilities than any other males.
There is abundant evidence that far more sexual assaults take place in mixed sex facilities than in single sex facilities.

I remember when the MRAs made common cause with TRAs and were organizing on line to take influential roles in as many advocacy organizations as possible in order to use transgender rights to strip women of their rights and return us to conditions of total dependence on males for survival.
The speed with which they have achieved dominance is horrifying to behold.

I keep reading that NOT changing the GRA will take rights away from trans people. But how can it?

When they "got out in front of the law" they were basically breaking it. Now they are being expected to comply with the law and they are very upset about it.

Thee is no evidence that males who identify as women are in any more danger in male facilities than any other males. There is abundant evidence that far more sexual assaults take place in mixed sex facilities than in single sex facilities.

This. 90% of assaults on females take place in mixed sex facilities if I remember the statistics correctly.

And while you can bet if any TW had been assaulted in a male facility in the UK we would know the name and their case would (with justification) be all over the press and social media.

However I'd bet most women here can name at least Karen White and Katie D whatzit who have both sexually assaulted and abused females they accessed by being TW in female spaces, and are aware of the 'This Never Happens' thread, where more cases are described.

Bear in mind too: as females we know the names of perpetrators, but no one knows the names of the females those perpetrators damaged the lives of. And mentioning the existence, never mind the names of those females is seen as unkind and throwing a negative light on TW using female spaces in a very wrong way. However a TW who had been assaulted I would expect to encounter no such barriers in gaining public knowledge, sympathy and public anger that better protection should be a basic entitlement.

I am confused. What is the law at the moment?

Can TW access women's spaces legally?
Is a grc needed or can a tw access it without?

Can somebody help me to understand if this example could be equivalent to what is happening with trans rights and self ID:

I was born in England. Let's say I don't like that, I'm angry upset because I was born into a society with rules and regulations that I fundamentally disagree with following, and I didn't get the choice to be born anywhere else.

Could the reasoning being used for self-ID, extend to me changing my birth certificate and passport to say that I am now and always have been Canadian, and then get deported there? I am not equating this with seeking asylum as that is a separate issue.

I don't want to be reductive, I'm not playing ignorant. But I do have so many questions.

Could the reasoning being used for self-ID, extend to me changing my birth certificate and passport to say that I am now and always have been Canadian, and then get deported there? I am not equating this with seeking asylum as that is a separate issue.

As far as I'm aware its only sex (of passport/birth certificate details) which is possible to self identify into in/ out of. Age and nationality seem not to be available for modification in the same way.

There was a case with a Dutchman who attempted to self identify to a lower age but he was unsuccessful.

Interview with the Dutchman and Jane Fae (TRA) on BBC Victoria Derbyshire

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3421396-Transage-bloke-on-Victoria-Derbyshire

@WhatCFeryIsThis

Can somebody help me to understand if this example could be equivalent to what is happening with trans rights and self ID:

I was born in England. Let's say I don't like that, I'm angry upset because I was born into a society with rules and regulations that I fundamentally disagree with following, and I didn't get the choice to be born anywhere else.

Could the reasoning being used for self-ID, extend to me changing my birth certificate and passport to say that I am now and always have been Canadian, and then get deported there? I am not equating this with seeking asylum as that is a separate issue.

I don't want to be reductive, I'm not playing ignorant. But I do have so many questions.

There are those who consider the creation of this sort of legal fiction to be the thin edge of a wedge that will sow confusion throughout society.

'Thee is no evidence that males who identify as women are in any more danger in male facilities than any other males.'

To be honest, men who do not conform to the pretty narrow view of 'what men are', are probably at more risk of being beaten up etc. By who? Other men.

Male violence is the problem here. Women, feminists have been fighting for years to try to improve things. Why do single sex prisons, changing, etc exist in the first place?

1. To reduce risk to women and girls
2. Privacy and dignity (it is not a cultural norm in the UK to do these things with men around when outside the home

WHY are trans activists not fighting WITH feminists to break down the strict gender roles and tackle male violence.

If men who fall outside the strict gender roles are at risk from other men (which I imagine they are) then how come one group of at risk men get to come in the ladies (and changing, prison, hospital wards etc) and not the others?

Why don't the trans movement care about men who are at risk in these places in the same way as gender non conforming trans identifying men are?

Why are they really going for WOMEN? In particular feminists?

We all know why but it's shit.
It's so male as well. It's the 'non man' idea that puts women as the mop up for the men that other men don't accept.

The thing that pisses me of as well is all this 'how would you feel if you were scared when you went out, getting verbal abuse, funny looks, sexual assault' etc etc. Zero interest in the actual female experience.

How have we got to the point where rapists with penises are put in women's prisons, girls at swimming clubs are expected to get undressed with any man or boy in the club who fancies coming into the female communal changing, women's toilets being relabeled anyone while the gents stays the gents etc etc.

And without much push back at all.

It's properly mind boggling.

I haven't been able to find any cases of transwomen being attacked in men's bathrooms but there are several instances of them being beaten up by men because they used women's bathrooms. Women's bathrooms are MORE dangerous for transwomen it appears. It's really frustrating that the entire narrative about trans rights is based on bald-faced lies (murder rate, suicide rate, safety) and mainstream institutions and media just ignore that they are LIES and play along.

"To be honest, men who do not conform to the pretty narrow view of 'what men are', are probably at more risk of being beaten up etc. By who? Other men."

Yes. Often these other men are the fathers or relatives of young boys or men that don't conform to the gender stereotype of what a man should be. The ones that don't play with the correct toys, aren't interested in the correct sports, enjoy ballet/cooking/sewing. The list goes on. Even without identifying as a woman these males are often at risk of violence and abuse in their own homes, sometimes from as young as toddler age.

I've seen numerous campaigns put out there to 'empower' women, to do things like play whatever sport they want, go for whatever career they want, to love their bodies even if they're not stick thin. I'm pretty sure I've even seen these campaigns include transwomen, on a Boots advert.

But I don't believe I've ever seen a similar campaign for men.

So for as long as nobody bothers to campaign for men on TV or online or billboards, wherever, a lot of men will continue to believe there's only one way a man 'should be', they won't be tolerant of effeminate men using their bathrooms/changing rooms/ whatever, and women will continue having to host the safe havens for outcast men to run to after they decide they must not be a man after all.

But do I think that will happen? No. Men aren't interested in broadening the definition of what a man is. It's much easier and far more fun to expect women to continually have to question what they are at a fundamental level for eternity, while they walk around confident that they are 'man'.

This is so depressing because human rights are essential for everyone. Are women not humans any more? With rights like everyone else?

I can well believe that HRW they are close to government. Their UK CEO tweets that Theresa May ‘promised’ to make these changes. mobile.twitter.com/Benjamin_P_Ward/status/1273284285747941377

This is so depressing because human rights are essential for everyone. Are women not humans any more? With rights like everyone else?

Apparently not, because let's face it, self ID is a bonfire of women's rights.

It's not just toilets and dressing rooms.
This is an attack on our right to organise separately and our ability to identify sex-based discrimination. What is the point of monitoring things like pay, if 'women' means women + men with self-declared gender identities? It's 'non-men', like a pp said.
Why are we in the same category as someone like Bunce (although in his case only 50% of the time) - what is it that we all have in common? I rarely wear dresses or lipstick, like Bunce does on his woman-days.

I can see why this idea appealed to some Conservatives, but it's a fucking travesty to see orgs like HRW on board with this madness.

I would
Like to write to my mo about this
Does anyone have a template letter I could use? I know that's lazy but I'd like some ideas to help qualify my position and I'm just so tired

" ... We are particularly concerned by media reports suggesting that the government plans to exclude trans women men from women-only spaces. This would be a seriously regressive and discriminatory step."

There, fixed it for them. Showing the ridiculous, regressive demand for what it is.

Excluding Transwomen from women’s single sex spaces is discriminatory

Excluding male people from female spaces, and vice versa is discriminatory for obvious reasons.

Also, how are they defining 'transwoman' I wonder. I tend to be able to understand a bit more where people/places are coming from if their definition is post op transsexual.

However, if its the current definition of trans, then its just nonsensical and basically, we might aswell do away with single sex spaces all together. Makes no sense arguing for single sex space, then arguing that the opposite sex should be able to use them

Conversely, there is no evidence that allowing trans women access to women-designated spaces, which has been the case for a number of years, puts other women at risk."

Well not transwomen specifically.

But I thought it was fairly well known that mixed sex areas are quite bad for women, stats wise.

And theres been plenty of evidence of this thing that will never happen happening, yet its still parroted that it will never happen for some reason..odd.

As usual, its not the trans part..as people keep trying to make out. Its the male part!

Is it not that excluding transwomen from mens single sex spaces is discriminatory?

That would of course make sense.

It is transphobic and discriminatory to say a male person cannot use male areas because of how they look/dress/etc. Rightly so.

If saying transwomen cannot use male areas, that is clear discrimination. As its not allowing someone to do something specifically because they are trans.

Not letting male people in female areas is different.

Trans people have the same rights as others in that..they should be able to use single sex areas. Associated with their sex. Its transphobic to not allow this.

But not letting male people (regardless of 'trans status') into female areas is not discriminatory at all.