EHRC single sex guidance out

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

Here: www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/separate-and-single-sex-service-providers-guide-equality-act-sex-and-gender

I'm off to read it...

Mermaids statement: ‘trans-exclusionary practices are never legitimate.’

So according to Mermaids it’s FINE to tell (for example) a Muslim woman seeking a breast examination that her male doctor is a woman and has the right to see her undressed if she wants treatment.

I think fucking not.

@Fieldofgreycorn

Good question.

Because some people have a medical condition which means they need to change aspects of their physical sex and live and be accepted within the socially organised aspects of that sex to be able to function and be well. (With some limits).

T'aint a medical condition.

• by which I mean, gender dysphoria has been removed from the DSM and is no longer considered a medical condition.

Although apparently still merits free NHS care.

@titchy

“ I agree with that but I would argue that no one’s privacy and dignity is being violated by private closed cubicles.

And where those are available - great!

Changing rooms and toilets are usually not individual lockable cubicles though, and excluding TW from the female facilities is perfectly legitimate.“

Many Ladies’ lavatories have private cubicles on one side of a main room with basins and mirrors, sanitary products vending machines and dryers.

So are people saying that it is fine for all trans women to use those alongside women and not be questioned?

So are people saying that it is fine for all trans women to use those alongside women and not be questioned?

Not me.

@PrelateChuckles

Private cubicles are a great idea in many situations, but not all.

People who need carers to go in with them need enough space for this in any enclosed space.

We need to ensure privacy and dignity where they are not possible or where the negatives to this (e.g. the lower number of facilities available in the space) outweigh the positives.

I'm not sure what Field means by 'transitioned' - physical surgery? I'm uneasy about excluding people according to how much surgery they've had.

And also a locked cubicle needs to be accessible via another way, in case the person inside has a seizure for example. Better to keep changing rooms single sex.

This sure is forcing some people to have to come out and say that they don't think women should have the right to single sex anything, isn't it?

@tabbycatstripy

Mermaids statement: ‘trans-exclusionary practices are never legitimate.’

So according to Mermaids it’s FINE to tell (for example) a Muslim woman seeking a breast examination that her male doctor is a woman and has the right to see her undressed if she wants treatment.

I think fucking not.

The Scottish Government's 'six words' amendments saw elected officials voting against allowing traumatised rape survivors to request a female examiner. The Head of ERCC changed political parties in a show of displeasure that the amendment had passed.

As with Mermaids, the argument seems to be that the right for a transwoman to see women naked or carry out intimate exams on rape survivors is more important than the women's choice/view/feelings. That the validation of transwomen is simply more important than women. We saw it again in the MOJ judicial review.

As you say, I think fucking not.

The argument is that a transwoman's desires override women's consent.

Changing rooms and toilets are usually not individual lockable cubicles though

Exactly. The last two health clubs I visited had open plan floor space with benches. The showers were cubicles with three quarter (not very) opaque glass doors that opened onto the main floor space.

The only place you could have changed privately was the two toilet cubicles. Not practical on a busy day. Changing between day clothes, swimming costume and gym clothes means stripping naked several times a visit.

I assume the male change rooms have the same set up. Neither of those places were set up for for anything other than a strict separation of male and female. They'd either have to rip everything out and start again or find another space to make a fully cubicled mixed sex space.

I don't think they'd recoup the cost in more business of doing either of those things so maybe the government, instead of spending money on conferences the attendees don't want, they should consider offering business grants for additional spaces.

The businesses won't do it otherwise and the solution is not to give males a pass into the female spaces (or vice versa because the men probably aren't keen either).

@Hasselhoffsheadband

This sure is forcing some people to have to come out and say that they don't think women should have the right to single sex anything, isn't it?

As zombie says: they're actually coming out and saying they do not think that there should be any circumstances in which females should be permitted to refuse consent to be undressed or vulnerable or receiving intimate care without male people present.

Because male people want to be present and don't want those females' distress and resistance to be a barrier to their wants. And want the coercion aspect of obey or lose access.

The attitude towards female people is horrific. The lack of equality of thinking is stark: it's awful to suggest a TW should have to use a facility they feel uncomfortable in or self exclude but absolutely fine to do that to a female. What kind of a person wishes to have this sex based power over females?

The thing is we know. The glee, the enjoyment, the exploitation has happened , it's not theoretical. It's been tried. It is not working for females. Some balance is needed.

This is a case of the EHRC saying everyone matters, all needs should be met, not just TQ+ people. And this is causing rage.

That's pretty much everything anyone needs to see to know what's going on here.

[quote ScrollingLeaves]@titchy

“ I agree with that but I would argue that no one’s privacy and dignity is being violated by private closed cubicles.

And where those are available - great!

Changing rooms and toilets are usually not individual lockable cubicles though, and excluding TW from the female facilities is perfectly legitimate.“

Many Ladies’ lavatories have private cubicles on one side of a main room with basins and mirrors, sanitary products vending machines and dryers.

So are people saying that it is fine for all trans women to use those alongside women and not be questioned?[/quote]
No - lockable cubicles need to include a wash basin.

A small cafe for example may only have space for one toilet, so as long as that loo has floor to ceiling lockable door, hand washing facilities and is accessible to those with disabilities then it can happily be mixed sex.

This is a case of the EHRC saying everyone matters, all needs should be met, not just TQ+ people. And this is causing rage.

That's pretty much everything anyone needs to see to know what's going on here.

Exactly, again, it's very telling.

T'aint a medical condition.

It’s in the ICD11. International Classification of Diseases.

The argument is that a transwoman's desires override women's consent

Quite.

So by extension if our consent no longer matters (or can be compromised at will) then where does that leave us when it comes to sexual assault and rape?

You can not strip out one form of consent because it suits a vocal few, and then expect the consent as whole to stay in tact for serious crimes.

The repercussions are enormous and very serious.

Fieldofgreycorn
I've never understood why it's women's responsibility to undress / shower / sleep alongside / in front of unknown men who self identify as women in order for them to feel validated. Can you clarify in any way why this s so important ?

@Swayingpalmtrees

The argument is that a transwoman's desires override women's consent

Quite.

So by extension if our consent no longer matters (or can be compromised at will) then where does that leave us when it comes to sexual assault and rape?

You can not strip out one form of consent because it suits a vocal few, and then expect the consent as whole to stay in tact for serious crimes.

The repercussions are enormous and very serious.

This.

Once it is set in law that there is a right for male people to female people as a resource to meet their needs whether or not the female consents? And it involves the female's body, her consent, her state of undress and vulnerability and intimacy?

Incel law is here. Absolutely bloody not.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

This is a case of the EHRC saying everyone matters, all needs should be met, not just TQ+ people. And this is causing rage.

That's pretty much everything anyone needs to see to know what's going on here.

Exactly, again, it's very telling.

Jane Clare Jones has some helpful writing.

Discussion of women as mothers and casting all women in that role.

janeclarejones.com/2021/08/15/spectacular-rage/

One thing this debate has made screamingly, terrifyingly, evident to me is the rightness of the French feminist assertion that – within the binary conceptual structure of Western thought – women do not actually exist. If we did, our being would never have been so easily handed over by nearly everyone concerned, and the appropriation we are resisting would never have been so easily caricatured as an act of illegitimate hatred.

janeclarejones.com/2018/10/01/a-note-on-smashing-the-binary/

To be a woman, under patriarchy, is to be a mirror. We are raised to reflect, to efface ourselves and accommodate. We are the surface and material upon which men make themselves, winnowing out our subjectivity in the service of others. And feminism is the practice of refusing to empty ourselves in order to receive the impressions of others.

It is not ethically impermissible to refuse to be a mirror. For some women, sometimes, it is survival itself. But it is ethically impermissible to demand that someone else erase themselves in order to reflect back to you exactly what you need them to reflect.

Affirmation cannot be taken, only given freely, or not at all. And when someone does not meet your needs, they are not killing you.

We are not sovereign beings: what we are exists between us and others. What we are, and how others experience us, is outside ourselves, in the warp and weft of the world, beyond our control.

www.troubleandstrife.org/new-articles/you-are-killing-me/

It took me a long time to see it. Because it's horrific. You don't want to believe that that is actually what is happening - surely the dismissal of women's voices and concerns is just accidental? Surely people just hadn't thought through the potential clash of rights? Surely women are human, and are afforded the same rights and protections as males? Surely if a woman says they are afraid to be in a space with a male, that will be respected - just as the rationale is that transwomen must have access to female spaces because they find males frightening/threatening/risky.

Eventually I realised that it wasn't accidental at all. Transwomen are listened to when they say that they need to be protected from males. Women are not.

This is a male supremacy movement, and that is the point.

Hasn't transgender been taken off most medical illness lists?

I think even gender dysmorphia has also been removed , but that isn't a precondition for trans identifying

Time for trans people to start campaigning for third spaces then. We've only been telling them that for about a decade.

If you are for example as a nurse completing a smear on a female patient, where does a medical examination stop and serious sexual assault start if it is being carried out by a male without your consent? How on earth do we protect ourselves in surgeries and hospitals?

The case of the patient being raped in hospital but no males were present according to the hospital for an entire year it was denied is a case in point, who is going to stop this from happening on a wider scale, a much wider scale - and will we get the same shrugging of shoulders and 'no men here' response over and over again, even thought it was a clear lie?

Are the hospital trust being taken to court? Are the people placed in charge of self guarding continuing in their roles undisturbed?

How can we trust the very people that are supposed to be caring for us if such lies are able to persist, and who is really checking this stuff at recruitment level now even?

It is a huge violation - and yet who can stop it if we are silenced into submission?

Hasn't transgender been taken off most medical illness lists?

It's still in the ICD (I believe this is used in preference to DSM in the UK). It's been moved from mental health conditions to sexual health conditions and renamed 'gender incongruence' (hands up, who's 'gender congruent'? )

Thread: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4512853-why-was-gender-dysphoria-changed-from-being-a-mental-illness

No MrsOverton I haven’t mentioned self identification.

This sure is forcing some people to have to come out and say that they don't think women should have the right to single sex anything, isn't it?

There are times when everyone, female or male has the right to single sex things.

I am just now thinking that if you realise you are being examined intimately by a man, instead of the female nurse you thought it was. How would it even be charged with sexual assault, even if it plainly was an assault and the woman herself felt compromised and violated?

He was simply doing this job, as a woman and there was no need to alert anyone to the fact he is a man because that is against the 'rules'.

Anyone who works in the courts, can tell you how hard it has become to produce convictions for sexual assault and violence in the last few years in particular, and we could see a whole new layer of society experiencing sexual assault potentially en masse without even having the means to defend themselves or see justice served.

One might argue that some men work in a medical field with women intimately, but that is different because the woman is consenting to a male accessing her body, and not having it inflicted on her.

I would not know where to start with a case as above - it would be a very grey area, and the implications and the publicity.
We are rightly as a society waking up to the danger, some of us have been for years, it is not just to our dignity and privacy and our ability to play sports fairly at stake, but the stuff that further down the track that is truly terrifying.

Anyone from stonewall or the trans community care to tell me how this would ever be okay to inflict on another human being for your benefit? I genuinely have no idea how any decent person can continue to support this hate campaign against women, which is what it is.