Article about WiSpa incident *title edited by MNHQ*

[CoconutGlaze]

www.losangelesblade.com/2021/07/07/alleged-trans-incident-at-upscale-la-spa-may-have-been-staged/?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter&cf_chl_jschl_tk=5829536c8d2fa7597130f41074d1ff4ddc091aee-1625785481-0-AcMexoncOasqbydtxZLnvW3kf86pvnmRUcmnFRJO3kDQTTPi3WE1pqsYEciE_bUv0_NrLqCEBB07kbXA9xARnFe7KkItHOoJesYdjEC6fhZlzSdZR5jNea3Hx86Run4GtO5awEU3NnavY0JvTjYrnAVNCm8tEidf1SMMw3N5siRBk8qD1VNkFgE5cpMkcjvQeRQOADtTSBAxPmJBCYcnt9-8vGTpjCqttCRHPJpNcOTVZ1yeJUoMKwXTMHx6TYPRXfLtl9iMGeP4hL9uTYPEGTlrpO9oNuwAKavdw2-gxpOKI_xUiq2v9Du5DREcmzRyp0Hbw663FPxWtUH30wzqS_uBK7ghaCwgVJq80Jqm_6IrKuwhmZZ8v63Pz43HNOLM_Z_LDzQaSLaudEQf8hcoUFVdcbQMtr1ZG0MPaesDmdB4iEDbdrdpR_yjmAZ0Pv1v151venXcbcYpUYyEtdcU8_kRH-iv2XYtf7vdtY_vfuu3DyzzvhXUk31-zNSYJlPMkVbHzQkZkuQMw4yQy7XsOSaoMPKRTgsJORo6DtRdu5NMqMu8190zks0sRxJeosg8KWSjnO33FKQXycbDay-9eGQagXI2tsfaurfG3jb2p3SV-f8fzRSwfCOf8C9-TmWrow#Echobox=1625710145

@theThreeofWeevils

man wise, the person most likely to attack you, sexually or otherwise, is your boyfriend, your husband, your Dad, your brother, your priest, your youth worker or your teacher. Normally within the confines of your own home or classroom Yes, because those people have access. Is letting intact biological males into previously female sex-segregated spaces going to reduce the number of 'sexual or otherwise' attacks?

I really can't see what the number of minors currently in the care system has specifically to do with this thread, except that they are peculiarly vulnerable to predators and that robust safeguarding is fundamental to their chances of thriving.

Of course they have access so, why aren't we campaigning to stop husbands living with wives, brothers with sisters et.al? Probably because we know that although DV is a huge issue we also know that it is proportionately not widespread percentage wise. That's not to say it's not an issue, I'd be mortified if some creep took a sentence out of context.

Trans people have been using single sex spaces for decades, probably for the whole of your life, without a significant level of offending. As many GC's are now starting to realise it is the EA as oppose the the GRA that is currently responsible for this.

The EA, a follow on in part to the SDA didn't result in a significant increase in offending in spaces over the last 11 years, nor did the SDA for many years before it.

If the government were to attempt to repeal the GRA ore remove GR from the EA they are going to have to show some significant data to support doing so. Article 8 of the EHRA will also require them to provide a reasonable alternative.

As for children in care, the UK is a shambles. No doubt targeting a small minority of trans kids would be like the 'dead cat on the table trick'.

We currently have a situation in the UK today where we can carry out an action such as turning off the life support of a cis child with less scrutiny than that required for a trans child to obtain reversible treatment on the NHS. I know the Bell case was reversed for kids who have parental support recently which rendered the original judgement almost null and viod but I'm really hopeful that will be extended to all trans kids in the near future. Imagine your medical treratment and life chances being dependent on whether your parents are tolerant or not. Madness!

Of course, if it has happened and they know who it is then I support the police in bringing them to justice. However, GC encouraged far right monsters are not something I can agree with.Especially when they start stabbing their own people. Wierd.

As has been said many times on this thread, there is nothing that can be 'brought to justice'. There is no crime. A male person was in the female section of the spa, naked, and he had a legal right to be there. As the manager explained, if a man says he is a woman, he is a woman, and is entitled under local laws to be treated as a woman.

The men who turned up at the demonstration are entirely responsible for their own actions. The women who organised the protest are not in any way responsible for the presence or actions of these men. You seem to find this difficult to understand, but women are not responsible for male violence. At all.

Getting into the metaphorical bed with that lot is not going to end well. If you think for a minute that once they've finished with trans people that they'll leave women alone, I'm afraid i think you are mistaken.

Just as well we're not getting into a metaphorical bed with them, then. Do you really think these are the sort of people who would be doing what they're doing because some women told them to? They are responsible for their own actions and it's nothing to do with us.

Well.

This thread is quite the eye opener.

A few points.

If women do object to seeing penises in women only spaces, would there be any way to for us to protest this that wouldn’t result in us being blamed for male violence?

What is the mechanism that causes a woman who objects to seeing penises in women only spaces to be right wing? Do left wing women not mind? (I myself am left wing, and I do mind, so that really is puzzling).

It’s honestly disgusting to read this misogynistic tripe on a feminist board. Male violence is not women’s fault. If you think you’re advancing human rights by telling women that we can’t speak out for fear of what violent men will do in response, then you are not the campaigner for social justice that you think you are.

Men don’t commit violence because feminists want single sex spaces.

Women should not speak up when they are flashed at, in case they 'incite' men to violence? Is that the gist, statsgeek?

Women have all the rights they need ... the right to stay silent.

I think last night's posts have been very eye-opening.

I'm a little taken aback that there are people who are opposed to the right to protest.

And that, further to that, I'd think we all agree there are people who always seek to merail or derail a discussion or protest to suit their own agenda whether that is on Twitter, a SM forum, or an in-person protest. This form of takeover or objection seems to be common and attack particular aggression when the discussants or protestors are women.

I have a couple of questions for those who are wont to compare feminists to Nazis at the drop of a hat. Let’s lay aside the topic for a moment.

Do you think that it helps bring people round to your way of thinking? If someone were to read your posts who didn’t have a strong opinion one way or the other, and saw you saying that people who hold the view opposing yours are effectively Nazis, what do you think they would imagine you mean by that and do you think that would predispose them to agree with you?

How do you feel about the disrespect that you’re showing to people like my in-laws who actually did live through Nazi brutality, by comparing the political murders of their loved ones in a campaign of genocide, to your finding women’s opinions on the Internet disagreeable?

@Steph751

There's quite a bit to answer here so I'll try it bit by bit.

Of course it is not okay for anyone to waive their genitalia around infront of children. I'm surprised that people think pre-op trans women as a whole would want to expose the body they hate to others. I'm not saying there aren't had trans people but i 'd be astonished if we're a common trait.

The law is the law whether you agree or not. Sticking your genitals in someone's face in most jurisdictions is a serious offence. The plod are required to take it seriously and have a duty to find evidence. If someone is withholding said evidence I'm wondering why?

Old Crone - Even in California it is an offence to waive your genitals in front of children. Waiving genitals has been described, it's an offence. Again this should result in those morons that didn't listen at school who term themselves police getting their act together and looking into it. Yes/no?

Who has come forward? Surely they will be able to consistently describe someone who is seen in the entrance camera? That someone may tie in with a known trans client. We know this isn't a place that randoms can just wander into willy nilly, appointments are required. Yes/no?

So, who is to say she just hasn't published the footage yet? Really, worth saying twice, really? I'm normally willing to engage in many points but I find myself laughing this particular suggestion off given the circumstances.

There's no suggestion about outing anyone. A serious offence has been alledged, all footage, personal and business related needs to be seized at the earliest opportunity. CCTV is passive evidence, disputing it is very hard.

And, eventually, good Lord Datun, do you really expect me to believe someone connected to the religious right would enter a known trans friendly spa, see an obvious sexual offence take place and film everything but the offender? I've got to be really honest and say, I really do believe you think I was born yesterday.

As for Antifa being there at the subsequent protest, if you are seeking to minimize the actions of a right wing ideologue using GC ideology as a cover for his actions and a side to politics that you appear to have chosen to engage with to own trans people, I'm sad to say, you make me sick. You really do. Hate has no place here.
I
I'm still no wiser as to what really happened but my theory that the cops ain't the brightest hasn't lessened. My opinion that Datun would excuse right wing violence as long as it owned the trans is new but eh, we learn something every day.

Steph, I know you've not the best communicator in the world, but I honestly cant make head nor tail of most of that. Especially as you repeatedly ignore the main premise, that no crime has been committed.

But now I see the mask has slipped and you're blaming women for male violence.

It's so predictable, it's number one on the list. Original you ain't.

1. Women are responsible for what men do.

And you know why? It's because of number ten!

10. The worst thing about male violence is that it makes men look bad.

It's so tedious. This relentless online victim blaming. The woman is at fault for complaining, the child for noticing, the feminists for protesting.

Not the man exposing himself and the relentless, decades long campaigning of TRAs to make it legal.

Another piece related to this incident, from a different perspective: spectatorworld.com/life/rude-stare-woman-penis-locker-room-spa/

Excerpt:

She was enraged and shouting obscenities, accusing ME of assaulting HER and her daughter! I felt so insulted by this I almost burst into tears, when thankfully a brave hipster wokebro stepped forward and covered my ladysack with his man-bag. ‘Stop right there,’ he said to the hysterical mother. ‘This stunning and brave trans woman was using the locker room to air her female schlong and you and your child decided to attack her in a sexual way with your conservative faces. You should be ashamed and subsequently ousted from society for your violent invasion of this fragile female penis owner’s privacy.’ The woman stopped shouting and just stood there, being intolerant. Her child glared at the floor, uneducatedly.

Her child glared at the floor, uneducatedly.

😂😂😂😂

Firstly, I find it interesting that many apparently upset at women protesting seem to more readily accept that the person in question is trans than that he exists.

They would rather question the report of a woman, than question a hypothetical trans person's identity. The women, of course, don't care whether he's trans or not.

Anyway, following that principle, are the people blaming the women really saying that women should be reporting transwomen to the police? Seems a little transphobic. I know a lot of people would find the idea of trans people being reported to police troublesome. Katy, for example:

Steph

By "pre-op trans women" in plain English you mean males? Men?

Or to put it another way that everyone, in every culture, in every country, in every understands it you mean man/male by writing "pre-op trans women".

Yes?

Some of the comments on this thread have given an interesting insight in the TRA mentality.

Just remember, ladies - if your feeble XX brains can take it in - that everything is your fault

Even if a man does it in plain sight.

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

Another piece related to this incident, from a different perspective: spectatorworld.com/life/rude-stare-woman-penis-locker-room-spa/

Excerpt:

She was enraged and shouting obscenities, accusing ME of assaulting HER and her daughter! I felt so insulted by this I almost burst into tears, when thankfully a brave hipster wokebro stepped forward and covered my ladysack with his man-bag. ‘Stop right there,’ he said to the hysterical mother. ‘This stunning and brave trans woman was using the locker room to air her female schlong and you and your child decided to attack her in a sexual way with your conservative faces. You should be ashamed and subsequently ousted from society for your violent invasion of this fragile female penis owner’s privacy.’ The woman stopped shouting and just stood there, being intolerant. Her child glared at the floor, uneducatedly.

Trans ideology is where satire goes to die. Or at least take to its bed a cold compress. The child actially was blamed 'for looking'.

In my culture, we have a word for males who flash their genitals in children's faces.

We call them nonces.

As only a tiny percentage of transgender people have any form of treatment(surgery/hormones) I think that it should always be assumed , in the first instance, that all transwomen are pre op.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine

That article is genius. Laughed out loud.

Another thought occurs. How will CCTV footage help identify anyone when as I understand it, we can never tell that transwomen are trans?

It doesn’t help even if you think it was a man,and not a transwoman because then you’ll be scouring the footage to see if either a man or a woman enters the spa nefariously. Doesn’t really narrow the field of suspects.

@yourhairiswinterfire

It also remains a possibility that there was a person, unknown to the Wi Spa staff, who pretended to be transgender to create an inciting incident." Wait a minute...

Also forgetting their own rules there...

As we were reminded tonight on a now deleted thread, apparently no predator is going to go through all that hassle of pretending they're a woman just to access women and girls...

So this person either was a TW (but they can't be, because that never happens), or they're someone pretending to be a woman to get their dick out in front of kids (which also can't be because that will also never happen).

🤯 They tie themselves in knots with this bullshit, no wonder they've gone for the misogynistic "women are devious little liars making their false allegations again" option. Much easier than trying to explain their own logic.

This!

Once again they have massively contradicted themselves. They have been campaigning for this exact thing for years, even Stonewall have been campaigning for an end to single sex exemptions in the Equality Act.

But then when it does actually happen it's so outrageous that it must be made up? Or someone must have been 'pretending to be trans' (which rather makes a mockery of the whole but as if anyone is going to pretend to be trans to get into womens spaces thing doesn't it?)

Absolute load of fucking SHITE!

Wow, last night's comments are really eye opening aren't they?

As PP pointed out, people are now saying the incident didn't happen but that if it did happen the male person was definitely trans.

From what I saw, the woman making the complaint never mentioned trans at any point, she saw a male body and that was her complaint.

As males can legally use female spaces in California, the person wasn't breaking any law so why would there be a police report? Why would ther be an investigation?

It's shocking but not surprising to me that again women speaking about their experience seems so much more problematic than what they actually experienced. This is a man's world, thats for sure.

Having read this thread a few times (I couldn’t make any sense of some of the posts), I now think I know what’s going on.

1. Stategeek and Steph are almost exclusively interested in the complete and unrestrained access into all female spaces. This access includes non passing transwomen with penises.

2. The women on this board worry that this inevitably will grant access to a large number of perverts.

3. Stategeek and Steph think that total access for non passing transwomen with penises is more important than keeping perverts with semi erect penises away from little girls. This is because of the validation of transwomen is more important than the safety of little girls.

4. Stategeek and Steph worry that if GC women point out the perverts, non passing transwomen with penises will find it harder to access female spaces.

5. Stategeek and Steph finally believes that women talking about safe guarding will make men trying to protect little girls from all penises including trans penises and cause violence. This violence is, they believe, the fault of the GC women trying to protect little girls. They do not think it is the fault of the penis people in women’s spaces, nor the fault of the penis people hurting each other.

Did I get this right?

Ye gods what did I just read?

Happily, yet again, the sensible posters here haven't reported any of it, so all that twisting and turning remains for everyone to see.

From what I saw, the woman making the complaint never mentioned trans at any point, she saw a male body and that was her complaint.

From memory, when challenged, she says several times that the person wasn't 'a transgender' . And that it was about dick. Hence the other guy's razor sharp repartee with no you're a dick.