Have TRA offered a solution to single sex spaces?

[vivariumvivariumsvivaria]

I don't care how adults live their lives, if you aren't hurting other people and you have informed consent then crack on, mate.

The loss of single sex spaces hurts women, so, I object to male people accessing hospital wards, prison cells, changing rooms and toilets that should be solely for female people. Some male people hurt women and so all male people are excluded from those spaces - even if they identify as women.

It's a basic conflict of needs - women need to be safe, transpeople need to be included.

Iv'e been having a long argument on FB with friends who keep saying "but, my trans woman friend is lovely and wouldn't hurt anyone", which is great, but, my husband is lovely and wouldn't hurt anyone - doesn't matter, he's not getting into a single sex space.

Has anyone seen a solution offered by the TRA to this? What DO they propose should happen for an elderly, frail woman who wants a female carer, and not a male person?

Is their stance like my friends? Just "too hard to figure out" but, we should all be kind to the trans people and it's just tough for the older woman who just wants to be helped to wash without showing her tits to someone she sees as a man - EVEN if they are a trans woman?

Is there any consideration for our most vulnerable women in the TRA position?

And I'd second banana's arguement too - most people find it a bit of a shock at first but it makes people stop and think

Vivarium when you try to use the Alex Drummond argument they either come back with, "Women with pcos also have facial hair. Are they not women?" or "Why are you judging someone by their femininity if femininity isn't important." It is unbelievable it has come to this.

Thing is, you will find this movement reveals a lot of highly ugly and currently fashionable ageism.

Which basically goes (paraphrased): You're past it, old people don't matter as they'll be dead soon, it's old fashioned hangovers of the old that they're stupid about privacy, they have to learn that the new generation is here now

A certain 19 year old male who was made a Labour women's officer was quite clear on social media while in post: females of race and faith that meant they could not share spaces with males needed to immediately abandon their race and faith as unenlightened. The naivety and selfishness is shocking.

Ask about females with Alzheimers. Dementia. Look for some of the posts by MNetters with Autism who say they can't deal with the conflict between eyes, instincts, social expectation to lie about it.

Ask about females who have been sexually assaulted.

I ask people over and over: what happens to these females who cannot grit their teeth and get their kit off with a male person present. Because however the male person identifies, there is no change in the subjective experience of the female to any other male: females don't predicate their reality on what a male tells them is in his head: it's beyond arrogant and profound misogyny to expect females to do this. What happens to these females? Who are tax payers. Who have services right now. Who will be excluded from hcps if they can't choose a female, who will have to discharge themselves from hospital if a male wants to sleep on their ward, who will just stop using public facilities and loos.

No one yet has ever had the guts to say to me, they don't care. That's what they imply: that it is fine for some females, most of whom will be from groups already marginalised, to lose ALL services and provisions so that some males can have access to all the choices and all the spaces and all the freedoms. They will never own it, nor admit that it's based on a fundamentally sexist belief that males have primary right to all spaces, and that someone born with a penis is of greater importance and value than someone born without.

Yes, that's what's upsetting me. They won't discuss these women's disputations - there will be millions of women impacted by the (as I see it) selfish choices of a very few people.

It is agesit and sexist. But, that does not seem to matter. It's bizarre that they are so blatant.

Worth looking at the fuss on the Russell Whatzit threads and Twitter which is demonstrating it.

Over and over: JK has no right to link her fear of males in personal spaces through assault and male violence - with a fear of any male who wants in any female personal space.

It's not allowed.

Females feelings about males in their personal spaces are not allowed. Females who feel them to the point of not being able to use the space.... they won't admit it but they think those females deserve to lose their spaces.

The male people who identify as women however? Their fears and feelings and wants and losses matter hugely and must always be taken seriously. It would be an unpersoning crime to suggest there is anything they should just 'get over'.

The sexism is massive. The inability to get their heads around a male who identifies as a man and a male who identifies as a woman is subjectively exactly the same for a female person in the same space. The rage around 'weaponising' the 'few' incidents where someone identifying as a TW attacked and harmed a female in a female space is also thrown at females, because 'it was just a few'. And 'the group shouldn't suffer for the actions of the few'. But that's how safeguarding works. Unless as we keep coming back to, this agenda means up front accepting - some women will suffer and that's a justifiable price of TW inclusion

The problem is that they see the statement ‘Transwomen are women’ as literal, whereas I think the majority of people would understand it as ‘transwomen are women for politeness and things that don’t affect anyone else, but obviously we know they’re really men and shouldn’t be in women’s safe spaces or sports’ and I don’t think you can have a reasonable debate unless one side can get past this first hurdle.

It’s like an atheist arguing with a religious person, neither side can really understand what the other genuinely believes.

Women aren’t frightened of what a man might or might not be feeling about his inner gender identity, we’re scared of his larger physical size, strength and ability to harm, rape and impregnate us.

TRAs have a very simple single sex solution

Mens

and Theirs!

One sex, squillions of genders.

Sorted!

Anyone who looks at Alex Drummond and resorts to the PCOS argument is too far gone. I wouldn't bother.

"but, we should all be kind to the trans people"
But unkind to the elderly frail lady in your scenario?

I'd just keep plugging away with that. And maybe ask them to examine what they mean by 'kind'. Because their 'kindness' sounds a lot like dishonesty to me.

And it's often very self-centred.
The question is, do you think single-sex spaces should be taken away from women who need and want them.
It's not about you and your friends as individuals.

Exhausting, though.

Paris Lees has said that trans women have been in the toilets since forever.

Yes. We know. We let them in, knowing that they were trans women and having done speedy a risk assessment of their behaviour - as we do with all males.

Paris Lees has convictions of violence and has expressed violent thoughts about women online. I don't think Paris Lees should be in the same toilet as my teenage daughter because of those things.

No.

Paris may look more feminine than I do - by a LONG way - but, Paris is male.

That's the nub of this, isn't it? TWAW means TW-want-us-to-pretend-they-are-female-too.

Which ins't true.

And women die, are scared by and threatened by male people all the time.

Sigh.

I think they would say the elderly frail lady was transphobic for not treating the trans woman as exactly the same as a woman whether they look like one or not.
(Also hi I don't think I've posted in femisim boards before. I'm new to thinking about this topic so critically after not disagreeing with JK Rowling and then 'educating myself' on the advice of TRAs - unfortunately for them my educating has led me to conclude even more strongly that TWANW)

I alway find pictures help. If TWAW then these people have to be allowed the same rights.

@Eo91

Iv'e been having alongargument on FB with friends who keep saying "but, my trans woman friend is lovely and wouldn't hurt anyone" this here is the trouble.

People who know nice trans people support the TRAs out of compassion for their friend - they hear the rhetoric and alarming stats and want to do what they can to protect the dignity of their friend. The difficulty comes from TRAs not actually representing the nice trans people your friend knows, but people who have their own interests and are happy to ignore the needs of vulnerable women to fulfil them.

More needs to be done to help seperate the extremist ideology from trans people but it's incredibly difficult when it's the extremists that listened to by the media and sensible people who point out the problem get cancelled.

Absolutely.

It's been interesting, how many trans women are on JK Rowling's thread supporting her, and mostly they are being howled down by men. Not trans people - men.

I suspect a lot of sensible trans people are very frightened of speaking out, too. They'd get so much shit for it. Which speaks volumes.

Third spaces are the solution. For many groups, as well as trans people, and NB people, it would help. But that doesn't represent women capitulating, and I'm afraid with many TRAs that seems to be the goal. Not the best interests of trans people.

Maybe we need a new org for all sensible GC people, women, trans, and male allies alike! To call out male violence and oppression to both groups, plus advocate for third spaces and the protection of single-sex, too. Surely there are more of us, anyway? Right now, TRAs are insisting they speak for trans people. And from what I've seen in the last day, many speak over trans people, instead.

Apollo
"No they don't need a solution or your consent. They want access and if they get their way anyone who opposes them will be prosecuted. Simple."
In Scotland, I'm afraid that this is a real possibility. The new draft Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill may potentially criminalise the expression of gender critical views - it creates a new offence of stirring up hatred by behaving or communicating threatening or abusive material if as a result it is likely that hatred will be stirred up against a protected group. Protected groups include transgender identity (but not sex!) The Bill contains a freedom of speech carve-out from the offences that exist to protect religion and sexual orientation so that behaviour etc isn't to be treated as criminal solely because it involves criticism of religion or of sexual conduct etc. (its implied therefore that such criticism in the absence of this carve-out might otherwise be caught and be a criminal offence; otherwise why would the carve-out be needed?)) However there is no such carve-out for the protected characteristic of transgender identity. The implication must be that behaviour or material which is regarded as threatening or abusive in relation to transgender identity would potentially be criminal e.g. a woman saying to someone in a public toilet: "Why are you in here? You're a man..."

They want us to be hurt. They don't give a shit. Their validation matters more than our safety. They won't even budge on convicted rapists with penises in women's prisons. Their position is incompatible with human dignity and the fundamental rights of others, to borrow a phrase.

A third space won't suffice. TW of my acquaintance say they are women, it doesn't matter what bits down below they have or have not, they have "woman brains". They'll not be using third spaces as they are women.
No one will stop them using the womens toilets/changing rooms/ women services because "woman brain" means you are a woman.

there is no reasoning with them.

No, Sapat there is no reasoning to be had.

None of them seem to care that women who are older, frail and a bit confused are to be made criminals for saying what they see - someone who is male rather than the female people that she'd be comfortable being around while naked.

Same for women with autism - are they REALLY to be penalised for not filtering the social niceties of pretending that they don't know the trans woman is actually male?

I am quite sure that I've never missed a transperson in the flesh. Maybe in photos, but, not when they move. I am evolved to spot sex at 100 paces because male people could be a threat to me. Doesn't matter what that person wears or does with their hair - I can see that transmen and women are trans and not the sex they wish they could be.

I really don't think I'm alone in this.