Educate me! Trans women who have undergone surgery accessing changing rooms, women's toilets...

[sandinmybellybutton]

So, I'm clear on where I stand with trans women who have not undergone any surgery accessing toilets, changing rooms, etc and women's "safe spaces.

But what about those who have had their male genitals removed and made a conscious effort to look like a woman? I know this does not change their biology but how does this impact on the argument about trans women posing a threat of violence to women in their spaces. I'm a wee bit torn on this one to be honest but am sure someone out there must have a good case to make either way to help me make up my mind.

Come educate me Ladies !

I'm happy with a post op transwoman in everything but sport

Single sex spaces are discriminatory. That's the point. And not sure what protected characteristic you are comparing to race here either. No thumbs were harmed during this post.

Dare I say she may not get a particularly well balanced lesson here

Never going to get a well balanced lesson if those who feel they can provide the balance leave

Although to be fair maybe you dont feel you can provide the balance which is fair enough

To win the widest public support and win the argument

That is the weirdest way ive heard of to win an argument

So let me get this straight

I’m supposed to come up with the Brilliant idea AND implement it

I have no problem with the person I know in a ladies toilet area
because a casual observer would not guess
and they are happily settled in their quiet life and relationship

but they are the exception that proves the rule

and show that the "changes" the TRAs want will harm lots of people and not actually benefit any.

You are right there really is no middle ground, single sex provision is as it is stated ; provision designated for a member of one of the 2 human sex classes. If you are not a member of that particular sex class then this is not the place for you.

that ( not this) is not the place

@catpoooffender

A lot of assumptions on this thread which I will attempt to address.

1. I haven't argued for mixed sex toilets and changing rooms, nor have I argued for TW to be able to use female facilities.
2. what I take issue with is the use of the argument that men are more likely to commit crimes against women to justify not allowing this, on the basis that I consider it discriminatory. I know this will incite a range of furious responses, so let me save your thumbs from an unnecessary hammering: I know you think this is ridiculous and I don't care that you disagree.
3. I draw no parallels between this scenario and the racial profiling I referred to in my curfew analogy other than that it's a hypothetical blanket rule against a subsection of society based on one (protected) characteristic.
4. I don't need to be lectured on the injustices faced by people of colour over the years - for reasons I won't go into, you can rest assured that I'm not 'deeply ignorant' (as suggested by one PP) on this matter.

I long ago made the decision not to engage in these debates on MN because I am well aware of how it turns out for those of us who dare to suggest that there might be some middle ground to be explored between the opposing views that 'transwomen are women' and 'transwomen are men and if you were born with a penis you will never be anything but a man'. I must have been suffering when mild heatstroke when I wandered in. I'll leave you all to it, and wish the OP success in educating herself. Dare I say she may not get a particularly well balanced lesson here.

So true 😂😂

RufustheSniggeringReindeer

You think proffering a solution that might find the widest amount of support while still protecting women-only spaces is the weirdest way you've ever heard of to win an argument?

And no one's asking you personally to come up with (let alone implement) a solution. Relax! But maybe someone else could. Maybe a third space is the solution.

And to re-interate the original point - should transmen use the ladies? Where trans women go may not be women's problem to fix as they are biological men, but where transmen go is - they are biological women.

I don't understand what you're saying here, Catpoo.

It sounds as though you are saying sex-segregated places are discriminatory. However, you are not advocating for mixed-sex spaces. How come?

And you are not arguing for transwomen to have access to women's spaces either. Again, I don't understand your logic, if you consider that sex-segregation is discriminatory.

It would be helpful if you could expand on this. It is difficult to consider other arguments and perspectives when people leave the board rather than explain and defend their position.

And no one's asking you personally to come up with (let alone implement) a solution. Relax

Well obviously, i also thought the use of ‘I’ in my reply wouldn’t be taken quite so literally but there you go

People have come up with potential solutions many many times...

Fed up of all this energy wasted on loos. It’s the argument the TRAs give and many cafes and restaurants have unisex loos, not to be woke, but due to space issues.

If it were just toilets workable solutions could be reached but it’s not; the real issues are changing rooms, DV refuges, rape crisis centres, hostels and prisons.

Single sex spaces need to remain single sex.

Well obviously, i also thought the use of ‘I’ in my reply wouldn’t be taken quite so literally but there you go

If you meant "Women are supposed to come up with the Brilliant idea AND implement it" you should have written that then.

And you seem to be skating around the issue of transmen. Which was all my original point was. GC feminists on this board seem to like to avoid this question. But when I'm discussing this with work colleagues, or on non-GC online spaces this is one of the "gotcha" questions that gets brought up. I hoped that there might be women here who could help with answers.

Apparently not.

@BewaretheIckabog

Fed up of all this energy wasted on loos. It’s the argument the TRAs give and many cafes and restaurants have unisex loos, not to be woke, but due to space issues.

If it were just toilets workable solutions could be reached but it’s not; the real issues are changing rooms, DV refuges, rape crisis centres, hostels and prisons.

Single sex spaces need to remain single sex.

Yes, I agree. A post-op transwoman may well pass when clothed and simply washing their hands in the ladies' loo.

They would probably stand out far more in your average Fitness First or Virgin Active changing room where there are no individual cubicles and you have to strip right down - no matter how briefly - so you can use the showers.

Showers are in cubicles, but often the doors are opaque so you can tell if someone is in there. They don't lock.

Toilets are not my main concern.

CantThink, the OP asked about post-op transwomen.

You are derailing the thread by talking about transmen. People have given you brief replies anyway, but it is not the subject at hand.

The issue of trans men has been discussed before, but you might want to start a new thread if you want to focus on this topic. You will get more detailed replies.

@CantThinkOfACleverOne

OK, that does seem like a workable arrangement - though expensive.

Something like this should be front and centre of GC feminists' position on this issue, shouldn't it? Maybe with a name for the policy ("equitable toilets" - whatever). So that we don't appear to be just saying "no men in women's toilets", but instead we have a put forward an arrangement that would best cater for everyone's needs (other that transwomen demanding access to women's toilets as some kind of validation), while preserving women-only facilities.

At the moment the GC position (or at least the way it gets presented, even on here) seems too easily misrepresented to the wider public by TRAs as being bigoted.

I'm not sure whether you are new to this debate, but what you suggest as the best, most widely acceptable solution has been proposed by every single grassroots women's rights group and by every individual women's rights campaigner active on this issue. Myself included.

This solution is generally known as "third spaces" and we have not only proposed this solution, we have offered to campaign for third spaces alongside the trans community. Privately. Publicly. On social media. On our websites. On Tv, radio and the press.

This has been explicitly rejected by trans rights activists as transphobic, exclusionary, regressive and discriminatory.

Even though trans rights organisations are much better funded than disability rights ones - so well funded in fact, they could simply pay directly for the necessary building work - they have chosen not to spend a single penny on alternative, mixed-sex provision. Not on campaigning for it. Not on funding it.

The only reason some places now have a third space in addition to female-only and male-only spaces is because the people in charge understood that single-sex provision continues to be necessary even though trans rights organisations demanded that those should be abolished.

The reason why we many of us are now simply say no to males in female spaces, is because the end goal is not in fact accommodation alongside single-sex provisions, but the complete abolition of single-sex provision altogether.

(This long explanation does not take away from those who point out that if males who identify as trans are unsafe in male spaces that is a problem for males to sort out amongst themselves. Women and girls are not human shields for vulnerable males.)

what I take issue with is the use of the argument that men are more likely to commit crimes against women to justify not allowing this, on the basis that I consider it discriminatory.

Of course it's discriminatory. We discriminate all the time. Has that word suddenly lost all meaning, because of its over use?

A homosexual man is discriminatory in his choice of sexual partner. I discriminate against all women when it comes to having sex.

Loads of fairground rides will discriminate based on height.

It's a nonsense argument to consider it negative purely on that basis.

Discriminating against men by not forcing women and girls to get undressed in front of them, is completely correct.

If you think that's wrong, your opinion of women is clear.

And you seem to be skating around the issue of

Im not skating round anything

If you wanted my opinion on transmen in the womans toilet you should have said so

As ive said many times...personally i have no issue with transpeople using the toilet of their choice

But again as ive said

Fwr is not a hive mind

There is no one view

EdgeOfACoin

Fine. I don't think I'll bother starting a thread on the issue, though. I started searching for threads older than when I started reading FWR. Oh dear!

This solution is generally known as "third spaces" and we have not only proposed this solution, we have offered to campaign for third spaces alongside the trans community. Privately. Publicly. On social media. On our websites. On Tv, radio and the press

Yep

Male, female, mixed sex seems a good idea to me

Discriminating against men by not forcing women and girls to get undressed in front of them, is completely correct

Of course men are allowed to discriminate against women in their single sex spaces too and there really isn't the same desperation from women to gain access into men's toilets. Its pretty much all one way. In fact in sports women are screwed over twice. Once by males allowed to compete in wonens sports and secondly by having to compete against women doped up on testosterone.

Who does it benefit to allow women no space at from males?

Do you think they stand around in the freemasons feeling awful cos women arent allowed in?

Answer...no.

So why would we be worried about how men feel not being able to undress infront of us? No men means no men. Regardless of identity , law abiding status or sexuality.

They are allowed every where else. Just not where we are naked or vulnerable. Why is that unreasonable

Which was all my original point was. GC feminists on this board seem to like to avoid this question

And my point was that they dont

Different posters have different opinions

The best one seems to be ‘3rd spaces’

By best i mean where most people seem to agree

Some women have made this feeling clear. You don't speak for all of us.

Consent is not transferable, catpoooffender. The fact that some of us said no to males in female-only spaces is enough.

As for some, there have been a number of surveys on the issue and there is not only a sizeable minority of women who reject post-op males in female spaces, but a majority reject the presence of those who do not fully transition.

As we cannot and will not police genitals, and most post-op males remain obviously male (this is due to the larger percentage of post-op transsexuals who are late transitioners), the fairest solution, as pointed out on this thread, is the provision of an alternative third space while retaining single-sex provision.

And you seem to be skating around the issue of transmen. Which was all my original point was. GC feminists on this board seem to like to avoid this question. But when I'm discussing this with work colleagues, or on non-GC online spaces this is one of the "gotcha" questions that gets brought up. I hoped that there might be women here who could help with answers
@CantThinkOfACleverOne
This may have been your original point but its not the original point of this thread.
Start your own thread instead of derailing this one with your straw man arguments. You may get help with the gotcha questions.