Kemi Badenoch appointed new Minister for Women and Equalities

[Manteiga]

And International Trade Secretary. I'd have preferred to see her as Secretary of State for Education in addition to Minister for Women and Equalities, but this is good news.

twitter.com/Conservatives/status/1584957913059454976

What is the difference between a 'transwoman' and a man who thinks woman is a costume?

What is the difference between a 'transwoman' and a man who is pretending to be a transwoman?

What is the difference between a 'transwoman' and any other man?

It's not transwomen it's trans women, and you already know the difference. No trans woman things being a women is a costume.

Women have the right to single sex spaces under law. There is an exemption clause to protect single sex spaces.

Why change the law?

Because its clear the law isn't being properly understood and is being misrepresented, because certain organisations don't understand the exemption clause properly and are doing everything they can, to get various organisations to believe that women's rights aren't important.

Strengthening the law and making it explicit that certain services MUST be single sex to protect vulnerable women or women in vulnerable situations would be extremely useful to avoid this deliberate blurring of lines in order to abuse the situation.

Doing things like making it a legal requirement to have single sex domestic abuse services available or single sex hospital accomodation or or single sex prison accomodation or single sex changing facilities for those who need them is making sure women are protected. This does not mean that services for trans people are removed. It means that provision of services for them (which will be covered by the EA as legally required) must take a different form.The entire point being that validation of identity does not take precidence over safeguarding.

This may extend to single sex toilet facilities in certain settings too. Arguably, this should definitely be the case in schools due to them being minors.

The exemption clause was always one about proportionality and was supposed to protect women. It is clear that it practice this clause is not having the desired and intended effect to provide that protection in law. Therefore 'tidying up' the law to reflect the original intention and the need to safeguard women, is not the 'gotcha' you seem determined to make out.

The entire point and problem is the degree to which males have riden roughshot over the exemption clause and made a point of demanding unlimited access without any consultation with women or ethnic/religious groups over the implications.

This clarification about the need to ensure women are adequately safeguarded in certain situations and there is a legal responsibility for organisations to do this, might make organisations take a different approach to planning and service provision. None of this takes away from trans people if done properly. It means that both should be protected by law and served properly, to ensure you aren't getting women self excluding and trans people without services.

I think this business about trans women 'just wanting to pee' and 'having a right to pee' needs to be held up for what its about - validation not concerns over safety. If its about just wanting to pee, then the sign on the door does not HAVE to be the ladies. It can be a mixed sex provision which is clearly marked. This means, both males and females can use it in line with their ideological beliefs, as self ID effectively makes all facilities mixed sex anyway.

Women do mind. That's why they're telling you to get out.

And that's why you're on here, trying to coerce them into saying something different!

Stay out.

We're not asking for changes in the law regarding access to toilets. The existing ones when applied properly are quite adequate.

Personally I'd be quite happy for individual venues to make their own policies about access - provided of course that they are upfront and honest about them. Perhaps in the same way that accessibility statements are on venues' websites. Then women or transwomen can look at the information available online or they can ask a member of staff (who should give a clear answer rather than the vague waffle we often hear), and then decide whether to patronise the venue or take their custom elsewhere.

Of course venues which institute policies which cause Muslim or Jewish women to be excluded may be committing religious discrimination. Ditto those which exclude women who suffer from PTSD (disability discrimination) or who provide insufficient women's facilities compared to men's (sex discrimination). Therefore rather than just rebadging the women's toilets as being for all comers, they should look to properly-built third spaces as the solution in order to avoid legal action.

After all, if transwomen "just need to pee", they surely would have no objection to using third spaces.

Thinking about it, properly-built, well-proportioned, self-contained third spaces could help other groups out too, such as parents who are out and about with a child of the opposite sex who can't go in on their own, or they could be big enough to accommodate a parent with a pushchair comfortably.

It's not transwomen it's trans women, and you already know the difference.

ok. I prefer to use transitioned male here because I have to. I am quite happy to not use the term transwomen.

And what right do you have to insist that women allow 'trans' to be used as an adjective to women?

That you cannot see this is a great indication that misogyny is very much at play here.

No. Women have repeatedly told you that we do not accept anyone redefining us. No males are females. Words have meanings otherwise you wouldn't be here lecturing and admonishing us to force us to use a 'space'. That space has meaning and you are being told that women don't accept being redefined to suit some male's.

Let's use the word 'male'. Done.

How do you know what all transwomen think?

But yes, I do know the difference. There is none. I thought you might have a different answer, but if you agree with mine, fine.

No trans woman things being a women is a costume.

Don't they? how do you know this exactly?

Are you a spokesperson for all transitioned males? If so, we have some other questions.

This.

Particularly those from minority or vulnerable groups.

When they try to voice the fact its problematic - and this isn't just about dignity - this includes safety, they are actively abused, called names and threatened with actions to lose their jobs.

Women are trying to assert their rights that exist within law, but are being actively prevented from doing so by abusive and unlawful methods such as harassment.

It would be nice if this alone could be acknowledged - barriers to women being able to advocate for themselves and be able to be taken seriously about their concerns and feelings, without fear or being talked over about and told what they think and feel by men...

Personally, I would use the word man, or cross dressing man, or transvestite, or man with AGP/a paraphilia. I'd use all and any of those words to describe these specific individuals, but of course, we're not allowed to actually apply those terms to named individuals.

so I don't.

Fair enough datun, unlike those who like to think we are an echo chamber, I know that each of us has our lines.

I would like to use man and then go into the descriptors you use, but as you say, they are not allowed. Anyone not understanding why they are not allowed probably needs to think about the far reaching impacts of that diktat. Some people will never be able to because they are so personally heavily invested in this somehow. Particularly if they fall under one of those descriptions themselves.

It must be interesting for readers to note the questions that are not answered and to think about why they are not answered.

yes indeed Helleofabore.

I like to also sometimes draw imaginary Venn diagrams of those who don't answer questions and those who like to compel speech.

Yes 'Flibberty'.

However, the reality is we don't need the answers. We see all we need to see.

A male coercing females to allow males to access female single sex spaces. And to coerce females to use the language that some males want used.

That is all we really need to know and all we have ever needed to know about posters who persistently do this.

Describing trans women as "men who think women is a costume" is transphobic as hell.

That line might have carried a little bit of weight back in about 2016, before characters like part time Pips Bunce, 'girl mode/boy mode' Izzard and sundry others became familiar players in this drama. Now it's just the toothless bleat of those truly bereft of argument.

Yawn.

Yes. The truth is transphobic. We know.

I am not lying to protect male egos.

Quite. Tell that to the penis playing pianist transwoman, who writes jokes about 'say that again, and I'll hit you with a hate crime'.

No trans woman things being a women is a costume.

Well, and in all honesty I can't be more polite than this, but who gives a flying fuck how men identifying as women describe it to themselves?

It's nothing to do with women.

No trans woman things being a women is a costume.

The other thing this points out is:

No male who wishes to calls themselves a ‘woman’ actually knows what being a ‘woman’ is like and therefore the only truthful name is ‘male person who wishes to be called a woman but is only their interpretation of what a woman is’.

Quite the mouthful I know, but is at least marginally more honest.

When someone shows you who they are, believe them.

When a male demands women use the words they want to describe a state of being they want to label using a word that means adult human female, take note of that male’s demands and say ‘no!’

I daresay someone who wants is identifying as their interpretation of adult human female will be rather infuriated.

Funny how @DadJoke has twice refused to answer my questions of what they believe is the definition of transwoman, sex, male, female. The legal definition.

I think we need to keep asking that rather than answer their questions, because really we can't. Not until we all agree on the actual definitions. They could be thinking a transwoman is a unicorn which makes all discussions nonsensical.

I don’t think that Bunce and Izzard (and that Tory MP) work well with the desired narrative. Which is very interesting because if saying the word ‘costume’ is being dismissed as a hate crime then how are these males being accepted.

It's not transwomen it's trans women, and you already know the difference. No trans woman things being a women is a costume.

Oh gosh, how very refreshing a male demanding that women use certain language, what they must, think, say, do, accept and put up with.

How many rules of misogyny has our revered male poster complied with so far? Anyone still labouring under the misconception that Gender Ideology is not a Male Rights Agenda red in tooth and claw?

DadJoke sterling work on showing clearly that Gender Ideology is driven by and for males with the express aim of detriment to females.

By the by DadJoke I'll use the language I choose to describe transwomen, who died and made you Dictator?

So if im saying transwomen do i have to say

trans…….long pause…..woman?

how long should the pause be i wonder 🤔

im not going to do a pause…but im curious now

No trans woman things being a women is a costume.

I've not been following thread much but christ, haven't you seen the skirt swirling videos on twitter/ tick-tock ffs?!

I have come across transwomen who don't think woman is a costume. I've spoken to two.

They're the ones who consequently understand and respect women and so stay the fuck out of our spaces.