GRA Reform, Legal Self Declaration, has no effect on access to spaces

[ool0n]

I'm wondering given the recent convincing defeat of gender critical ideology in the high court vs EHRC - if the Mumsnet gender critical people finally accept the fact that having a GRC has no effect on access to spaces?

People on the other side of the debate like myself have been explaining to GC people on Twitter for years that having a GRC has no effect on access to spaces so their objection to GRA reform is/was unfounded. I/we based this on -

1. English government legal analysis that stated having a GRC has no effect on access to spaces
2. Scottish government legal analysis ... ditto ...
3. The EA 2010 and GA 2004 text
4. The practical impossibility that a BC (Not an ID document) could be of any use in deciding access

now we have

1. Gender critical crowdfunded challenge to EHRC guidance that says having a GRC has no effect on access to spaces. Comprehensively lost, not even passed the very low bar to even be considered for a Judicial Review.

Given this is the case will gender critical people be reevaluating their assertion "Self ID", as in GRA Reform, must be opposed as it effects access to spaces? Trans people have always been able to "Self ID", in the colloquial sense, into men's and women's spaces. So making it easier for trans people to change their birth certificates only helps them, has no effect on GC feminists, and/or cisgender women and spaces.

(I also wonder if there'll be any introspection as to why an obviously incorrect interpretation of the law was able to become so prevalent in gender critical circles. Maybe listen to groups outside of GC circles a bit more?)

Women do not prefer "single sex" spaces as you define them, as they don't exist. You mean spaces with no trans people in them. Those don't exist, they can't exist by law, so they don't prefer something that doesn't exist, and currently can't exist according to the law of the land. They do however prefer to use the women's spaces we have, which are according to GCs "mixed sex", why is that do you think?

I didn’t say prefer

I said need

Ive agreed eleventy billion times that i agree with you

Single spaces don’t exist and never have

The question is can you see why some women need single sex spaces

You are unable to answer

Your answer if no....you do not see why some women need single sex spaces

Maybe I can make this easier for you ...
...OP making it easier would entail answering the question, not pontificating about what the hypothesis was. It was pretty simple!
Re: Amnesty- google it!

Single sex spaces obvs 😀

@BernardBlackMissesLangCleg

The judge agreed with the EHRC that trans people, GRC or no, are allowed in

oh dear, this again.

do you have some sort of short term memory difficulty?

The judge agreed no such thing. Even the seriously dodgy EHRC guidance is that people who identify as members of the opposite sex can be excluded from services set aside for th sex they identify as on a case by case basis

The "case by case" example in the EHRC guidance - go read it. It says an individual trans person may be excluded. However there are no proportionate reasons for ever excluding a trans person who is "indistinguishable from the sex they've acquired". Which is there to handle the much vaunted GC case of a "fully intact male" wanting to be in a women's naked sauna for instance. Fine to exclude someone with bits that might be a bit alarming. Never all trans women. So by GC definitions that naked sauna is "mixed sex" because one of the women there could produce "small motile gametes" at some point in her life, or if she never could (puberty blockers) then she had the potential to.

To ool0n

Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate
Although though dost seem to to be mainly here to say
nothing very interesting or engaging to date

@R0wantrees

Just drop the "though" Bernard?

Its not going well

phew! thank you!

You're not going to answer are you... I had such faith in you! I could have watched a whole episode by now...

I think bernard that you’ll have to accept ‘no’ as the answer to your question

The OP is unable to say yes...the only answer therefore is no

Binary

Cooee oolon.

Why do you think the women in my workplace which has single-sex toilets which everyone, male and female, respects prefer single-sex toilets?

Why do you think women who believe they are using single-sex public toilets (even if you would love to put them straight) prefer them that way?

@RufustheBadgeringReindeer

Women do not prefer "single sex" spaces as you define them, as they don't exist. You mean spaces with no trans people in them. Those don't exist, they can't exist by law, so they don't prefer something that doesn't exist, and currently can't exist according to the law of the land. They do however prefer to use the women's spaces we have, which are according to GCs "mixed sex", why is that do you think?

I didn’t say prefer

I said need

Ive agreed eleventy billion times that i agree with you

Single spaces don’t exist and never have

The question is can you see why some women need single sex spaces

You are unable to answer

Your answer if no....you do not see why some women need single sex spaces

Great, we agree, what you call "single sex spaces" is ones with no trans people in them. The only women who "need" that would be people who can't stand being near trans people even when they have no idea if they are trans or not. Weird how the law doesn't seem to think thats much of a concern.

@HipTightOnions

Cooee oolon.

Why do you think the women in my workplace which has single-sex toilets which everyone, male and female, respects prefer single-sex toilets?

Why do you think women who believe they are using single-sex public toilets (even if you would love to put them straight) prefer them that way?

Um, RufustheBadgeringReindeer said, and I quote ..

"Single spaces don’t exist and never have"

Take it up with them. We are in agreement, they don't exist and they never have.

The only women who "need" that would be people who can't stand being near trans people even when they have no idea if they are trans or not.

ah, now we're getting somewhere

so women want single sex spaces because they're bigots?

So NO

Halle-fucking- lujah

There was a young man on mumsnet
Who claimed to be wise and cis-het
But his sneaking on Twitter
Made him seem rather bitter
And he didn't answer the question as set

TW talk of accessing single sex spaces but actually what they mean is accessing women. It is not the space that matters, it is women. Using women, with no feeling or regard for our safety, our privacy or our dignity. Purposefully setting out to destroy our boundaries and access us where we are vulnerable. Then celebrating doing so.

It is assault.

@BernardBlackMissesLangCleg

The only women who "need" that would be people who can't stand being near trans people even when they have no idea if they are trans or not.

ah, now we're getting somewhere

so women want single sex spaces because they're bigots?

Mate..

Its taken him all fucking thread to answer a yes/no question

I wouldn’t get too excited about getting any other answers

@lonel

There was a young man on mumsnet Who claimed to be wise and cis-het But his sneaking on Twitter Made him seem rather bitter And he didn't answer the question as set

Ooooh nice!

I always wonder which stats and why are collected. Are negative stats collected, like are women using communal changing rooms less? Are women shunning single gender swimming sessions? Do women leave when a transwoman comes in? Has any of these countries, who all with the exception maybe of Iceland, ever collected any stats about how women feel with all facilities being mixed sex?

So all we have to show the disaster growing is the actual cases where women were harmed, forced out or ignored. Which OP deems not enough. I can only guess because OP sees women as being of lesser value than transwomen.

@BernardBlackMissesLangCleg

The only women who "need" that would be people who can't stand being near trans people even when they have no idea if they are trans or not.

ah, now we're getting somewhere

so women want single sex spaces because they're bigots?

I didn't say bigots, I said they need spaces with no trans people in them. Even if those trans people are not identifiable as trans people. That's true right? You wouldn't accept in trans women who pass as cis women into your "single sex" loos, they wouldn't be "single sex" by your definition then. Even if you never knew they were trans

ool0n
"Single sex toilets don't exist, right? Why can't any of you answer this simple question. I believe I am characterising your view correctly - that any space that lets in trans people is "mixed sex" - but you won't clarify. If that is the case, and I believe it is, then they don't exist in the UK. They've never existed and women use single gender spaces, not single sex."

Wait, single gender toilets, changing rooms etc certainly don't exist. I have used many toilets in the UK and they are always male, female or the unisex / accessible toilet which is certainly not labelled as being restricted to only one gender. Are you saying that non-binary, graygender, maverique, novigender, effreu, nyctogender, xumgender, or moewgenger people never, ever use public toilets or changing rooms? ONLY femme or masc people (who could be represented by the toilet symbols used in the UK, or by "Ladies" or Gents") ever use public toilets, public swimming pools, gym changing rooms, etc? That seems unlikely.

Can you name any of the single-gender prison facilities available in the UK, other than men's and women's prisons?

It was said they prefer them, how can they when they don't exist? I agree with you many GC feminists want these mythical "single sex" spaces. How are they going to police it so no "male bodied" people get in and instantly turn it into a "mixed sex" space? How does the space change when a stealth trans woman gets in and they don't know it?

So your 'argument' seems to be that as we can't always know, we have to just suck it up when it's obvious as fuck. Is that it in a nutshell?

What are you on about re: how can we prefer it when they don't exist?!! That's about the oddest thing I've ever heard. I would prefer a world where people (usually women) aren't killed every day by their partner (usually male). But that world doesn't exist so I can't prefer it?!! What the hell?!

- your assertion is that there is "no way" of recording someone sex characteristics if you are trans inclusive? That's obvious nonsense, trans people are well aware of what biology is typically male or female, have no issues with Drs recording theirs, definitely no issue with them recording cis peoples! (where necessary obviously)

Don't call me cis please. It is mis-gendering me. To be cis I have to have a gender identity and I have clearly stated I am agender. People do have a problem with recording this. That's why people are objecting. Crimes committed by male-bodied people are being recorded as committed by women.

This is interesting. A study about why women in India don't use pulic toilets

wedc-knowledge.lboro.ac.uk/resources/conference/40/Reddy-2794.pdf

one of the reasons was the presence of a male caretaker. I expect those women are hateful bigots?