Women win guarantee over female only public lavatories - the Times

[chilling19]

Share token

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/7355c886-1aea-11eb-8493-5b46eb56a071?shareToken=4752a364029a4a557a2ba26a99d985d4

OldCrone
"Sure. What about the stats for people of the male sex assaulting women and children in the women’s toilets? And voyeurism?"

This is what jj doesn't seem to understand (or pretends not to). If we allow men who identify as 'transwomen' into the women's toilets, how do we tell the difference between a man who genuinely identifies as a 'transwoman' and a man who is pretending to identify as a 'transwoman', and someone who is just a man, not pretending to be anything else? I asked jj how we could tell the difference, and jj said to 'Ask them'.

How can we ask them when asking is 'literal violence' and could result either in physical violence towards the person asking or a criminal record? An autistic man was prosecuted for asking a transgender police officer if they were male or female.

How simple and sensible this post is.

Thank you, OldCrone

I have a quick comment to make myself:
"the changes you want would not just devastate trans lives"
is inaccurate in one essential respect: I do not want changes.

I want a continuation of the legal requirement for single-SEX lavatory facilities to be available for the use of women, as has been the case since the 1940s and in some places earlier, and has been the case in workplaces since 1992.

If trans people want their own lavatories that's fine by me: I'll support that, while wondering why Stonewall shouldn't spend at least some of their money on helping to provide them. I don't see why trans activisits, and in particular their male fellow-travellers and males in general, should feel entitled to have the use of women's lavatories.

This is what jj doesn't seem to understand (or pretends not to). If we allow men who identify as 'transwomen' into the women's toilets, how do we tell the difference between a man who genuinely identifies as a 'transwoman' and a man who is pretending to identify as a 'transwoman', and someone who is just a man, not pretending to be anything else?

We already allow anyone who identifies as a trans woman into the women's toilets and have done for years. So does almost every other comparable countries including the US where the bathroom bill battles showed outright that toilet use is based on gender and that is what the public support. And yet the toilets are not full of abusive men pretending to be trans. So it appears that the public are actually quite adept at distinguishing "between a man who genuinely identifies as a 'transwoman' and a man who is pretending to identify as a 'transwoman'." Because it's what has happened, all over the world, for decades.

The law incidentally is equally adept, referring as it does to the perception that someone has undergone, is undergoing or is planning to undergo gender tranisition. This definition has stood up to be perfectly adequate in the courts in the few rare cases that have been brought.

Oh, right. What is gender?

We already allow anyone who identifies as a trans woman into the women's toilets and have done for years.

Which brings us back to - why do we need self id? Why does anything need to change?

I'm still interested to find out why you think, @jj1968 , that Jones being paid to be in a room with a woman would be inappropriate because wouldn't be ok under their probation conditions...

By implication that suggests their being in that situation in unpaid, in a managerial paid capacity (their previous jobs), or in a different setting (women's toilets, refuges, hostels) shouldn't be ok either?
Or am I misunderstanding or assuming too much?
I'm filling the consultation in later, btw.

^ I bang on about it all because I still have so many 'how did this happen/how was that allowed? Why didn't I get any support with the issues I encountered with them?' questions about my experiences of Jones. I could actually really do with somewhere safe to break my questions down and try and get them answered - and fully realise this isn't the thread for it.

If anybody has any suggestions about who I can talk to (and I don't mean therapy, I mean in terms of understanding safeguarding and probation, the sex offenders register, and wider community safety implications and impacts, and of course women's rights), please drop me a message. Apologies again for the merail.

If there's a weird bloke in the bogs JJ, women tend to walk straight out when they walk in, or if there are a few women, make eye contact and keep an eye out for each other. Make sure there are no girls in the cubicles by themselves etc.

We quietly look after each other same as we always have done.

DH said men hardly ever make eye contact with each other if there's someone being weird. Women and girls do it all the time. Silently. Have you noticed? I'm here. You're here. Right ok.

I've suggested to girls and women they change carriage if I'm getting out and they'll be on their own with an odd man. Eye contact, side glance, subtle head movement.

I think a lot of men are oblivious to all this stuff tbh.

@Facefullofcake

I'm still interested to find out why you think, *@jj1968* , that Jones being paid to be in a room with a woman would be inappropriate because wouldn't be ok under their probation conditions...

By implication that suggests their being in that situation in unpaid, in a managerial paid capacity (their previous jobs), or in a different setting (women's toilets, refuges, hostels) shouldn't be ok either?
Or am I misunderstanding or assuming too much?
I'm filling the consultation in later, btw.

There is obviously a difference between working with potentially vulnerable people in a position of responsibility and an ex-prisoner just going about their life. Like it or not, we let people out of prisons who have done terrible things all the time and they are free to interact with everyone else on normal terms, which may include sometimes being in a room with someone of the opposite sex. That doesn't necessarily mean we should let serious violent or sex offenders work in schools or to have responsibility for, and therefore power over, vulnerable people.

Which they're supposed to be because they can get angry if they realise that is happening.

Oops JJ posted in the middle but you get what I mean

@HecatesCats

We already allow anyone who identifies as a trans woman into the women's toilets and have done for years.

Which brings us back to - why do we need self id? Why does anything need to change?

Nothing is changing, that's been made quite clear.

The GRC process is a mess but it was hardly a priority for most trans people because all it does is change your birth certificate. Obviously the government put it on the table and it was largely supported primarily because it was pretty much all that was on the table. I suspect it was seen as a cheap and easy way for the Tories to look progressive on trans rights. Unfortunately it backfired and I suspect most trans people would rather they hadn't bothered. Certainly the reaction from most trans people to the new Women and Equalities Committee inquiry was one of dismay.

Fine: Deliberately cultivating friendships with vulnerable women, volunteering to act as an advocate for them, telling them they are a natal lesbian who killed an abusive man in self defence (regardless of whether it's fully approved by probation services) - if done on their own time in the name of rehabilitation.

Not fine: being paid to sit in a room with a vulnerable woman.

Righty oh. That clears that up - thank you for answering. I'll drop it now.

Nothing is changing, that's been made quite clear

Yet the % of people who are trans who will seek access IS growing so for how long are these laws suited for purpose.

You keep denying that there already ARE issues with males accessing women’s toilets though. Considering how few assaults get taken to the police, I suspect there are many more than get reported. Plus there is the growing number of fetishists complete with their phones to allow 4K recordings. This is a growing issue. To be clear, I am talking about ALL males.

You keep denying these issues are happening and you keep denying they are relevant. You keep showing this denial with the same ‘it has been happening for 50+ years’.

you obviously haven’t noticed the changes in the past years.

Or more than likely, you don’t care because it doesn’t progress your aim of accessing women’s toilets.

Still want to know how you dealt with the pram/stroller issue. Thanks.

So right about the quietly looking out for other girls and women nicegerbil. It really is a sort of animal instinct of protecting each other.

@Winesalot

Rather than needing ‘gender cops’ what is actually needed is respect that males should not be in the women’s toilets.

We have given you so many reasons why, but like always, you cannot acknowledge that women’s needs are very different to ‘just wanting to pee’ that we are told transwomen’s needs are.

We are all for these mixed sex toilets in addition to women’s Single sex provision. No one has argued that there should not be mixed sex as well as women’s at all.

Hmm, but mixed sex as well as women's would not validate would it. Which is the goal really isn't it.

@Winesalot

Let’s not also forget that the statistics show that transwomen continue to commit violent acts at a rate very similar to all males.

So, is your answer that women should just shut up and let them into our toilets because they have the similar risk of attack that we women have with males entering our toilets. That’s your answer? To ignore the risks to females over the risk to transwomen?

Why not join the campaign for better configuration of services for transwomen while leaving female single sex provision for women.

And campaign that all males then respect that boundary regardless of how they identify.

You keep coming back to ‘women, just shut up, no one is going to stop using the women’s toilets if they feel like they are women’.

Let's not also forget that the majority of transwomen have penises.

you obviously haven’t noticed the changes in the past years.

It seems to me the main change is some young queer activists have really pissed you off on social media so you've decided to take it out on all trans people by demanding they no longer have the right to live the way they have lived for decades in some cases.

No, TheWordWomanIsTaken, it certainly would not be the validating experience.

And in the case of the video on YouTube that I watched the other day, that validation was exactly the reason that male was in the toilet changing into their 'women's clothing' while being challenged by the teenage girls who they (the male) filmed while running down the street yelling at them.... According to some posters, this also NEVER happens or is an issue.

It seems to me the main change is some young queer activists have really pissed you off on social media so you've decided to take it out on all trans people by demanding they no longer have the right to live the way they have lived for decades in some cases

Really? So, we should not believe what they say and who they say they are?

And way to go in minimising the abuse women receive on social media. Can you be any more clear in your hate for women?

demanding they no longer have the right to live the way they have lived for decades

It is very sad for those who were quietly minding their own business and not demanding that females had no female only spaces, should have to share all changing rooms and toilets and hospital wards and dormitories with any male who wanted to be there, weren't allowed anything at all including the word woman, no same sex hcp, lesbians had to sleep with males and homosexuality for women is right out.... Debbie Hayton and Miranda Yardley and many other transsexual well known speakers/writers were talking about this years ago. They get this. They respect women and they understand the issues.

Sadly, as they realise, the good will that was once possible is long gone. But it was not women who pushed until it broke, it was not women who created the situation where women's rights had to be stood up for, it was not women who proved that if any male was given this access then it would be forced to the widest extent of any male at any time with any agenda, and it's not women's job to pick up the pieces of this.

New and additional provisions will have to be made to adapt to the situation that has come from the trans community, caused by certain factions of it, and they - and the male sex, because it isn't transmen who have caused this mess - will need to sort out how they are going to fix it.

But it will not involve women giving up their rights and spaces and budging over to fix it.

Sadly, as they realise, the good will that was once possible is long gone. But it was not women who pushed until it broke, it was not women who created the situation where women's rights had to be stood up for, it was not women who proved that if any male was given this access then it would be forced to the widest extent of any male at any time with any agenda, and it's not women's job to pick up the pieces of this

This! everytime women asked raised issues and asked for discussion/clarification, Stonewall et al screamed NO DEBATE, called us bigots and hatefuland refused to engage. Many women like me started off very much on the 'be kind/what harm can it do?' side only for TRA to demonstrate over and over again from their choke on my lady dick abuse on twitter to workshops on breaking the cotton ceiling to women being actually fucking raped in prison exactly what harm it did to let men identify into our spaces

this is all on the TRA and their enablers, all of it

By the way, slightly at the implication that female people having boundaries and defending their rights, stating their needs and where these have been infringed, is just petty 'taking it out on' apparently 'all' trans people.

You may want to consider the posting guidelines which are clear that negative generalisations are unacceptable.

Hmm, but mixed sex as well as women's would not validate would it. Which is the goal really isn't it.

Indeed, but there is also the aspect of women acting as human shields and being collateral damage, that's a must.

Where is this hard, factual, provable evidence that Men's toilets are so dangerous, awash with the bloodied and broken bodies of TW? There isn't any, there isn't even any to suggest men feel uncomfortable with TW in their toilets and going by what male family members and acquaintances of mine say, who have all at one time or another been in public toilets and seen TW in there, no-one gives a damn, they just get on with what they are in there to do and leave.

According to our friend all the women and special non gender conforming women, (not to be confused with the non special non gender conforming women on here), that they know none of them mind being in mixed sex spaces so they would be in there with our friend and fulfill all the validation, human shield and collateral damage needs, but somehow that's still not good enough. Now what does that say about someone when they want to force consent on others or make them unwilling participants in their choices.

Now what does that say about someone when they want to force consent on others or make them unwilling participants in their choices.

I have yet to see that this has ever registered with posters who believe that women's objections are irrelevant in this issue (such as the constant minimising of risk, gaslighting and lack of any facts or statistics to prove their assertions of low risk) and that it is males who are vulnerable that must at all costs be considered.

The rights of the female sex class to live their lives as they want to, their rights to safety, privacy, dignity, the rights of religious and disabled females to have access to public spaces.

New and additional provisions will have to be made to adapt to the situation that has come from the trans community, caused by certain factions of it, and they - and the male sex, because it isn't transmen who have caused this mess - will need to sort out how they are going to fix it

But it will not involve women giving up their rights and spaces and budging over to fix it.

This in bucket loads.