What right to a single sex space do I have and how?

[Avocadowoman]

I saw a comment on another thread and it got me thinking. The comment was (broadly):

'A woman's right to a single sex space cannot co-exist with a transwoman's right to enter a woman's space based on gender identity'.

That is undoubtably true. If a transwoman enters a female space that space is no longer single sex.

However I am unsure what legal rights exist to give women the right to single sex spaces. The trouble seems to be that the law seems to assume that they are something someone will want to provide, and go from there.

Workplace regulations mean I have the right to a single sex toilet at work (but we all know how many workplaces ignore that in their transgender policies).

I haven't looked into prisons legislation.

But I think everything else is based on a providers right to provide a single sex service. If they choose to provide one great, if not I don't think I have the right to one.

If a provider chosses to open a female space to transgender women without a GRC, the people who are being discriminated against (legally) are, I think, not women, but men who would like to access that space but who are turned away and do not say they are transwomen. This makes it much harder to deal with through litigation, I think.

Clearly females are discriminated against in the same way by not being able to go into male spaces if those male spaces are open to transmen without a GRC, but that doesn't help me if what I want is a female space.

If my religion was one which forbade me to (for example) undress with men, then possibly the lack of provision of a single sex space may be discrimination due to my religion - but as it happens that is not my religion so that doesn't help me.

That means that where the single sex space is provided by the government (prison, hospital, school etc) it is the government we can petition to keep those spaces single sex. And that is useful because the government would not want to have a policy that is 'hypothetically discrimatory' if I can put it like that (eg discriminates against a woman who wants to enter a male single sex space, even though that is less likely to happen).

But sports, for example, therefore need to be taken up with each provider/governing body.

Am I missing something? Ot do women actually have very few 'rights to single sex spaces' compared to 'the right to provide a single sex space'?

She didn't say it was irrelevant. Stop reading stuff into women's words which isn't there, just because we think female only spaces should be female only.

She didn't say it was irrelevant. Stop reading stuff into women's words which isn't there, just because we think female only spaces should be female onlly

And you are entitled to that opinion.

Transsexualism doesn't make men women. You may feel you are not like other men. Fair enough. But you are not a woman. It is not our role to treat your dysphoria at the expense if our dignity, privacy or safety, our mental health, or at the expense of our sports.

Why should I be forced into male spaces because of it?

Because you are male.

@Tibtom

Why should I be forced into male spaces because of it?

Because you are male.

Is that really necessary?

@BlueLipstickRocks

the morally right thing is for men to never, ever claim to be or try to pass themselves off as women

Its called Transsexualism. Its called Gender Identity Disorder. Both psychological disorders. These are not choices. You think I wanted to pursue a dangerous medical process? You think I had major surgery for fun?

So the morally right thing for me to do is to not have a psychological disorder?

Thats ridiculous.

Sounds like the disabled loo would be appropriate after all.

And you are entitled to that opinion.

Then could you please refrain from misrepresenting what I and others say? I have sympathy for your position and support third spaces. I don't think your issues are irrelevant, they're just not my priority here.

How can we possibly discuss this topic if we have to tip toe around the facts? A transwoman is a man, not a woman, not a non-male, not a ‘not-a-man-anymore’ - whatever surgery and hormones you’ve had, whatever diagnosis, no matter how genuinely or seriously you believe yourself to be a woman you are still a man and always will be.

It is not just transexuals who are considered to be protected by gender reassignment. It is anyone who says their gender identity is different from their actual sex. There is no need to modify your body in any way and as many do not suffer from dysphoria no changes are made. So the point remains, how do we accommodate the tiny percentage of transsexuals whilst still not opening the doors to any male person who might decide to say they are a woman?

I'm sorry Blue that your 'psychological disorders', as you term them (I'd agree, but suspect that's deletable phrasing, so to be clear I'm directly quoting you) have caused you such distress throughout your life.

But being psychologically distressed doesn't give any male the moral right to access female single sex spaces.

You continuously evade discussion of third spaces, despite saying that you'd prefer unisex ones anyway - which many women here are very willing to support as additional provision.

You are not female. Your entire argument is basically 'I belong to a particular subset of male people who i feel are entitled to demand access to your female spaces. Not those male people - let's all get together & say no to them! But you can't say no to me.'

It's forced teaming. & it's a hard no from me.

@BlueLipstickRocks

She said quite clearly why she supports Miranda. I think it's perfectly reasonable for a woman to support a male transsexual who understands women's concerns and respects our feelings.

As I have pointed out Miramda is a detransitioned PRE OP transsexual without a GRC.

You know nothing of how I live my life.

I'm not comfortable with this and dont think anyone should have to confirm their pre or post op status for the benefit of anyone else.

I agree.

@Thelnebriati

I'm not comfortable with this and dont think anyone should have to confirm their pre or post op status for the benefit of anyone else.

We neither. And it's irrelevant.

It is quite amazing how the criteria changes depending on who you're talking to.

Surgery, GRC certificates, longevity, passing, vulnerability.

All of these have been used to ride roughshod over women's access to their own spaces.

It is quite amazing how the criteria changes depending on who you're talking to.

Surgery, GRC certificates, longevity, passing, vulnerability.

All of these have been used to ride roughshod over women's access to their own spaces.

Quite. It is obviously impossible to allow only a portion of men under the trans umbrella to access women's spaces. The only sensible option is the existing one, to exclude all males irrespective of their personal identity. If their dysphoria is so severe that they cannot use the toilets of their sex then toilets for the disabled would be an appropriate option. For the less dysphoric they can use the men's, or campaign for greater provision of single-person gender neutral toilets and spaces.

People who require others to pretend that they are the opposite sex for therapeutic purposes need far greater access to counselling and other services, which are fairly woeful for all at the moment.

Could we really not get into discussing people's intimate details?

As far as I'm concerned, it's none of my business, and has no bearing on access to single sex spaces.

The fact that using the male toilets makes someone unhappy, afraid or embarrassed doesn't mean they have the right to make women equally unhappy, afraid or embarrassed. Because that would mean that their feelings were being placed above those of women. And that would be illogical, let alone callous and sexist.

(I am not directing this at any one person. I am talking in generalisations.)

We know, because women tell us, that some women find the presence of a male upsetting, frightening or embarrassing in certain spaces. That should be enough, really.

We know, because women tell us, that some women find the presence of a male upsetting, frightening or embarrassing in certain spaces. That should be enough, really.
Absolutely.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the decision making process, a person with a GRC does have a legal right to access female spaces that don't specifically exclude them and it is quite hard to get a GRC and not going to be made easier. Lots of people are turned down.

The GRC was intended for transexuals, please let's not let them take the brunt of this and lump them in with the gender idealogues.

These are existing rights.

@Thelnebriati

I'm not comfortable with this and dont think anyone should have to confirm their pre or post op status for the benefit of anyone else.

Absolutely. It's no one's business but Miranda's.

@AdHominemNonSequitur

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the decision making process, a person with a GRC does have a legal right to access female spaces that don't specifically exclude them and it is quite hard to get a GRC and not going to be made easier. Lots of people are turned down.

The GRC was intended for transexuals, please let's not let them take the brunt of this and lump them in with the gender idealogues.

These are existing rights.

Could you please link to why you say ‘lots of them are turned down?’

Because I have seen a link here (will find it tomorrow) with a quote from a Judge on the Gender Recognition Panel saying exactly the opposite. From the start they wanted an enabling approach and very few are turned down.

Whatever the initial intention was (and I disagree that it should have been possible), there is no way you can limit this to the 6500 people with a GRC.

You're not allowed to ask to see it and anyway it exposes women to an unacceptable level of risk if they need to ask.

Also, a GRC and surgery is absolutely no guarantee of anything. There are plenty of transwomen with both, who are violent/sex offenders.

Furthermore, if it was somehow possible to limit access to GRC holders, you can bet your bloody life that suddenly anyone and everyone would be applying for one. And although self ID has been shelved, the Internet is full of tips and tricks on how to convince a doctor you've got gender dysphoria.

The loophole was created, and now anyone who wants to, can exploit it. There is no way of stopping it.

It should never have been created in the first place. It was a huge mistake and quite, quite wrong to imply that women are just collateral damage in a man's mental health treatment.

I seem to remember Ruth Hunt say to little Owen that it was really all 'just admin' anyway? If I'm remember it correctly, I think we can all agree with that.

Benjamin Cohen used the exact same phrase in his unfortunate radio 4 interview last week.

It is quite possible that any females who saw the attitudes of those wanting access as their ‘right’ to female only spaces, would quickly change their minds from previously positive to a firm ‘no’. Particularly if they actually listened to the females that were being excluded from the facilities that were set up for their needs.

I know I have after seeing the way this has played out in the past. I also changed my mind after having a child. Because, like others have said, I simply ignored more vulnerable women to follow the liberal line.

I also see a great deal of not understanding female socialisation on this thread. It is quite remarkable really.

And let’s not forget that a person who is not female also has little understanding that the women’s toilets are not only used the same way a male toilet is used. That is why females need dignity and privacy.