Shameful, incoherent, poorly referenced, completely biased piece of 'journalism' from the Guardian

[JustcameoutGC]

So, we are all right wing anti-trans nuts.
The WiSpa incident didn't happen
Or if it did then that would be no problem
(make up your mind people)
The violence was all directed towards the TRAs.

If you needed an excuse to cancel your subscription, this would be it.

Would suggestions take their daughter to a female spa that allowed male penises to be exposed within a metre of their face at eye level?

Please be honest suggestions? Would you be very happy to put your 6 or 9 year old in that situation?

And if it was semi-erect, what would be your explanation?

Anyway I thought it didn't even happen.

Charities that were set up by women for women, that have 'women' in the title are now being made mixed sex by a small group with an agenda. Are the governing documents being updated?

Women's services such as women's prisons and women's hospital wards are being made mixed sex.

These are services designed to be single sex.
What have I misunderstood?

And if they had a "no penises" policy how the f**k would they police that?

Well I guess they'd make it clear that it was female only as per the EA exemption and ask anyone who got their penis out to leave, bar them etc? Or call the police and report them for indecent exposure? Not rocket science, pretty much what would have happened in times past.

And if they want to offer mixed sex naked spas, that's fine. I just think they'd get limited take up in the US and certainly here in the UK. Just be honest about it.

Exactly. They need to make it clear that it's a mixed sex space.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

And if they had a "no penises" policy how the f**k would they police that?

Well I guess they'd make it clear that it was female only as per the EA exemption and ask anyone who got their penis out to leave, bar them etc? Or call the police and report them for indecent exposure? Not rocket science, pretty much what would have happened in times past.

Surely you're not implying that male people will expose their penises however they want and cannot be stopped? Because that seems..... rather a negative generalisation, and makes you wonder how you can simultaneously be supporting the point of view that any issues for women and children would never happen? Which is it - male people will forcibly do whatever they like however inappropriate or whatever the impact on others and cannot be stopped, or women have nothing whatever justifiable to dislike about their spaces being forced to mixed sex?

The benefits are so clearly obviously all to male people and all to the detriment of female people.

And can we please stop calling permitting male people into female spaces 'inclusion'. It is not. Inclusion does not exclude. This is about extending special rights to male people against the interests and to the exclusion of female people.

It's your good old fashioned garden variety medieval sexism. Which is why females needed sex based spaces in the first place; they are always the subordinate sex.

So interesting that those who insist the loudest about gender being more important than sex actually think wholly in sex based ways, and have no trouble knowing which people should never hear no or suffer a moment's distress and who can shut up, put up and piss off, and better not whine about it.

Sex based thinking. Sexist thinking. Old as the bloody hills.

Which is it - male people will forcibly do whatever they like however inappropriate or whatever the impact on others and cannot be stopped, or women have nothing whatever justifiable to dislike about their spaces being forced to mixed sex?

It's a puzzler!

Hold on, if it's their place, and their rules, why would 'no penises' be unworkable?

Is the only workable rule 'penises take precedence'?

@StrangeLookingParasite

If it transpired that many were abusing the system in bad faith then it would be right to re-evaluate what is happening to establish what has gone wrong. But I don't think this you should anticipate this in advance. Or act in bad faith yourself to give the example of what you fear will happen.

Jesus wept.

How many examples already occurring do you need?

Do you live in a box, with your fingers permanently in your ears, singing 'la, la, la, I can't hear you'?

Has anyone seen any evidence that the countries already using self declaration have experienced a rise in attacks against women or children? Because as far as I can see there is no evidence of this is Ireland, or Iceland, Portugal, Malta, Norway, Denmark or Belgium?

Have you got access to some evidence on this that says otherwise?

If you want to gatekeep it further how do you do this? I've got a load of friends who are women but are regularly mistaken for men by strangers because of how they choose to present. I reckon they're going to face even further discrimination and bigotry if the policing that people appear to want in this thread occurs in real life. How do you plan on protecting these women from harm?

@Gottalife

Everyone is missing the point. The premises owners have the right to make the rules as long as they don't discriminate unlawfully. Their place their rules. If you don't like it that's tough. And if they had a "no penises" policy how the f**k would they police that?

Well in a spa where everyone is naked... pretty easily I would thought!

And yes, their place their rules - but if there is penis in there then it ain't a female space is it? So don't call it one.

If it's their space and their rules then they need to be clear and call it a "mixed sex nude spa". Then people can make an informed choice.

If a business like that says their space is "female only" or "women only" then they can't fuck about with the language otherwise how can any business be clear to their clientele?

And if any business is free to discriminate on the basis of sex then anyone saying "their business, their rules" cannot take offence at gay male saunas saying "no transmen".

This comes down to definitions again. If those who wish to continually cause chaos insist on mangling the definitions of "man" and "woman" then we're not going to get anywhere. If we can agree on what "man" and "woman" means, then yes businesses can advertise as single sex or mixed sex and there shouldn't be a problem.

Has anyone seen any evidence that the countries already using self declaration have experienced a rise in attacks against women or children?

'but 'attacks' aren't the problem are they @suggestionsplease1 ?

the problems are

• women and children self excluding from leisure facilities and things like residential school trips because of the risk of being subjected to indecent exposure from males

• women and children ACTUALLY being subjected to indecent exposure from males

I've asked you how we'd track the lost opportunities due to self exclusion, but you didn't answer

and in your utopia, indecent exposure will be perfectly legal and thus impossible to track

women and children will just have to

• stay at home
• or put up with seeing unwanted dicks
• and put up with increased worry about seeing unwanted dicks and not being able to do anything about it

I don't really want to live in your universe if it's all the same to you

Has anyone seen any evidence that the countries already using self declaration have experienced a rise in attacks against women or children? Because as far as I can see there is no evidence of this is Ireland, or Iceland, Portugal, Malta, Norway, Denmark or Belgium?

Google 'Barbie Kardashian' for starters. I believe there is another sex offender in a female prison in Ireland as well, although I don't know any details, I just remember being shocked that there was another case in addition to Barbie Kardashian.

If you want to gatekeep it further how do you do this? I've got a load of friends who are women but are regularly mistaken for men by strangers because of how they choose to present. I reckon they're going to face even further discrimination and bigotry if the policing that people appear to want in this thread occurs in real life. How do you plan on protecting these women from harm?

Funny isn't it - no one had a problem with single sex spaces until men decided that they wanted in on women's spaces.

Same as no one ever had a problem recognising who the men are and who the women are when it came to knowing who to oppress until women, in the West at least, started to get a semblance of equality with men. Now suddenly its oh so complicated and no one can tell who is a man and who is a woman at all! Bull. Shit.

So again, it comes purely down to ‘attacks’. With statistics being collected as female statistics, it relies on groups to go in and pull the statistics out. And face the harassment for doing so.

Well done again on your empathy for women.

How about we look at the statistics that we have pulled out in the UK? On males who identify as women, committing sex crimes and are in prison.

Or don’t they count? Because why? Because women separated them out and reported them? So you will not take any notice of them, it was hateful to pull the statistics out in the first place.

Transwomen which are in fact men by sex, offend at the same rate as men.

Let me say it again.

Men offend at a consistent rate, much higher than women by sex.

Hence why there ore 80k men in prison and 3.4k women. Can you see a difference? Are you willing to admit a difference? No, you aren't, because this is all about male privilege and bullying women.

Transwomen offend at the same rate as men by sex, because they are men by sex.

I will attach one study, but again, this is not a library. Do your own research rather than positing nonsense on here to provoke.

I see you. We all see you. It is sad.

<a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/18973/pdf/&ved=2ahUKEwihk8D8gYvyAhWlnFwKHQ9HD2sQFnoECAsQAg&usg=AOvVaw1nfGy7VvUMk_Nrwv81ai3h" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/18973/pdf/&ved=2ahUKEwihk8D8gYvyAhWlnFwKHQ9HD2sQFnoECAsQAg&usg=AOvVaw1nfGy7VvUMk_Nrwv81ai3h

It's a game of pigeon chess really, but in terms of PR it is helpful to hear from someone who just doesn't give a single shit about women and children.

very eye opening.

Focusing on numbers of attacks/assaults, is also a red herring.

Men and women should have the right to know whether or not they are entering a single sex or mixed sex space before they do so.

We don't need to wait and see who gets assaulted or not to know that that's just the right thing to do.

If I see a sauna or spa is mixed sex I can make the choice for myself whether or not to go in. If they advertise as a space only for women and then I find men sharing that space with intact genitalia... it boggles my mind that this is even up for debate. That is wrong.

The language we use matters.

I don't need to wait to see if I'm assaulted by a male stranger to know that I don't want to sit next to his naked body in a spa. It doesn't matter what he does. I don't want that and have a right to know what kind of space I'm entering into.

This is basic stuff for Christ sake!

How about we look at the statistics that we have pulled out in the UK? On males who identify as women, committing sex crimes and are in prison.

Nah, you can't ever refer to those cases because that is just 'tarring everyone with the same brush' which is pure bigotry innit. So you have to pretend those cases don't exist.

Still on the cycle of ‘it will never happen’.

If it did, it was just the once!

If it happened again, it was just the two times.

And they were not really trans….

And anyway, we will ignore the fact that the proportion of males who identify as women who are in prison for sex crimes… because… a hateful group of women worked out the figures, they are not trans anyway, but look over here at this country…

It is very tired and we have seen it many times already.

That was for the persistent

@suggestionsplease1

And focusing only on attacks completely ignores the plight of those women being excluded from female spaces.

And to collect that data requires women to admit to what, micro aggressions that are considered hateful, being bigots, not being progressive, not being liberal or left wing.

Let’s fucking face it. Women cannot win. And if you have valid issues why you cannot share spaces with males, however they present, you are even more fucked over.

How about we look at the statistics that we have pulled out in the UK? On males who identify as women, committing sex crimes and are in prison

I was looking at the Keep Prisons Single Sex website earlier while preparing my email for the UN call for evidence on the status of women.

I refreshed my memory about Jessica Winfield, who is serving a life sentence for the rape of two girls, one of whom was the disabled daughter of a family friend.

He was sent to a women's prison after identifying as a woman. Using the risk assessment framework you proposed above @suggestionsplease1, namely

complete risk avoidance is not possible and not compatible with other values that are important

he made sexual advances to the poor women forced to live with him, of course.

but they are just collateral damage in your world aren't they?

This is what you believe. It isn't kind, and it isn't humane.

OWN IT

Yet even here the same poster post the same shit every single sodding day.

Over and over.

Refusing to acknowledge any of the evidence or facts, or even reality.

They post and post passive aggressive and openly offensive nonsense on a feminist forum, for women.

Oh such entitlement.

You aren't trying to educate or convince anyone of your positions. You are just bullying women. It's sick.

This is what you believe. It isn't kind, and it isn't humane.

Well… it can be considered humane if you are prioritising males over females for the purposes of believing them to be the more marginalized group. If you are part of the community that needs to be seen to support those males.

If you will be ostracized for not prioritising those males.

Then I am sure you will pretzel your thinking to stifle any discomfort.

You will ignore inconvenient questions and who knows what you might tell yourself.

Are their photos of the "Precious Child, transactivist" supposed to be reassuring?

Because they're . . . not.