Trans Swimming sessions

[DaveDave]

Just saw the below event advertised at my local pool. How come this is ok but we can't have biologically female only swimming sessions? I'm annoyed, not because of the event, but because it seems impossible to have female only swimming without being accused of being transphobic.

"Been hoping for a swimming event that's only for trans, non-binary, and/or intersex people? Well, here it is!

To ensure privacy we have booked an entire public pool so it's just for us! Apart from the lifeguards, the rest of the building will be empty too, so there's no need to worry about which changing room to use or people staring. Whether you want to swim laps, float about, or just hang out, you're very welcome. We want these sessions to be accessible to as many people who need them, so if you need a carer who is cisgender to attend with you they are welcome to come along. Parents/guardians are welcome to come and wait in the changing rooms but will not be allowed in the pool or on the poolside.

VENUE: The venue will be given to you during booking to ensure privacy. Please do not advertise this information. You can arrive 15 minutes prior to our swimming session starting, but please note that if you arrive more than 15 minutes late you may be locked out. There is very little phone reception by the pool so you may not be able to get in touch with anyone to let you into the building.

CHANGING FACILITIES: The changing room is gender neutral, wheelchair accessible, and has individual changing and shower cubicles. Before swimming you'll have 15 mins to get ready, and 30 mins at the end.

AGE RANGE: This event is for all ages, but if you're under 18 you'll need to get a consent form signed. Just let us know when you're booking and we'll send you one to bring filled in on the day. Please bear in mind that we do not currently allow cisgender parents and guardians to be in the pool or on the poolside.

DRESS CODE: As always, genitals covered. If you have [insert word you're comfortable using for your chest/boobs/breast tissue] you'll need to have your chest covered too. A rash vest would be best, but if you don't have one or can't afford one a light weight t-shirt is also acceptable.

BOOKING: To book, or ask any questions, contact [email protected]. If you are disabled and need a cisgender carer to attend with you please let me know during booking.

COST: This event is free to attend but as a charity we welcome donations. You can donate on our website

www.rainbow-project.org/donate/ or there will be a donation bucket available at the event.

(redacted)

Absolutely nowhere is it not possible for the sacred caste thinking to take get in the way of normal safeguarding. Nowhere.

Some people need to remember that safeguard isn't labelling or discriminately against anyone.
It is protecting the vulnerable from the remotest possibility that they might get harmed or hurt.

If you don't support that then there is something wrong with you.

I also found this incredibly worrying!

@TeenDivided

Thats not the way I intended it to read.

Absolutely, single sex spaces should be available

But, if the definition of man or women is based purely on biological sex, then in the case of women’s only swimming,
if you exclude trans women because they are men
Then you would have to include transmen, because they are women.

And any women who feel uncomfortable about men being in female space will feel equally uncomfortable around trans men being in those spaces. Because they identify as men and shouldn’t be there.

There are unfortunately people who will lie to gain access to places they shouldn’t be, That’s not exclusive to trans people,

But
if a trans women, who had legally had all of their paperwork changed, and had surgery, and happened to ‘pass’ incredibly well quietly went to a women’s only session, was polite to everyone, swam a few lengths and went home, you wouldn’t feel threatened, because you’d have no idea they were trans,

And I’m sure trans women have been quietly entering women’s spaces, and being accepted for years
in exactly the same way that I’ve been accepted in to men’s spaces and excluded from women’s

So what I was saying is, how would determine someone’s sex?

How do you know if someone is male or female, or whether they were born so?

You don’t. No one does, they make assumptions based on looks, voice, mannerisms and the physical form

All of this ^^

Plus anyone trained in safeguarding, with a responsibility for it, and who has written the risk assessments, knows that well intentioned people who mean well and are naiive about risk and just haven't realised what can go wrong?

Sees all the potential for major problems that will end up with a lot of people very sorry about the harm that's happened to a child and the serious case review they will be answering to.

'did you think the unthinkable?'
'did you ask the difficult questions?'
'did you get hoovered up into meeting the emotional needs of adults in the situation first and above the responsibility you had to the child in the situation?'

are three classic questions that pretty much every such review asks.

'we all meant well and thought everyone would be nice and not make any mistakes' isn't going to wash.

Irish... Later today, when the light is going, maybe it is raining again and people are wearing heavy coats, hats, scarves, maybe are under umbrellas. Take a lookout of any window.

I bet you will know the sex of every single person walking by. And the gender of not a single one of them.

I could tell you why, being a physiologist, biomechanist. But first hand experience is always better....

Trans individuals 'pass' because people are, more often than not, polite, silenced by social mores or, sometimes just plain scared.

Transmen do 'pass' more successfully but still, once in motion, sex is pretty easy to correctly identify.

Oh and the fourth question, how could I forget that??

'did you avoid safeguarding the child properly and to the extent you knew you should have done because you were afraid of the challenging behavioural response of adults in the situation if you provoked them by doing so?'

And, as I am sure you have agreed elsewhere*, transmen are usually unwelcome in female spaces because they have successfully othered themselves enough to cause at least initial anxiety. That's a natural consequence of specific actions.

*Apologies if I have misremembered that

Again, why cannot people who are not female, and who have identified out of being a woman and changed their appearance to the point of causing this potential confusion and distress to women wanting a single sex facility...

just respect that those women have needs of their own and not try to disrupt and break into that facility for their own purposes?

Because... just that. Because!

The end of that argument is the one about to be heard in court re the Brighton Rape Crisis Centre:

who proudly have a men's support group
an LGBT+ specific support group
and a women's support group, which is mixed sex

A male person of TQ+ identity has three separate options there to take their best choice from to match their own needs.

A woman who cannot get help within a mixed sex space has nothing at all .

The sole justification for this then becomes a TQ+ political wish that TQ+ people feelings, needs and choices be valued and unquestioningly met by denying the equality of care and services to others .

And at that point the answer needs to be a firm No.

Can't even begin to find the angle required to disagree with that!

Can you name any events where women seeking to protect women's rights and child safeguarding have... well, tried banging on the windows, drowning out people trying to talk about their experience to a group that met to listen to them, screaming at babies, drawing obscene and threatening messages and pictures on the pavements, setting off smoke bombs or kettling anyone?

I haven't. Yet. But sometimes when i read things here and elsewhere i worry that it is only a matter of time. I really hope I'm wrong here because i think, uncomfortable, violent and distressing as it is, it serves a purpose. And it's not the one the protesters think it is.

But i have to say, that I'm not a TERF and I'm not particularly what i would call GC as in: I'm a 2nd wave feminist. I believe that Gender Stereotypes and expectations are bullshit and i would like them gone.

I'm perfectly sure transwomen have been, in the past, in women's spaces. And up until relatively recently i have had no actual issues with that at all. (I am well aware that other women with other requirements can't accept this. I can only speak for me)

What has been going on over the last few years is something else. It is the desire to destroy the safe spaces we have built up over the years and the only reason is misogyny. And maybe jealousy. And the desire for validation which is why the eminently sensible suggestion of 3rd spaces is always rejected.

There are comments here of "women couldn't do this" or "men couldn't do this" but people need to try. And use occasions like this as a precedent. It makes sense that trans people might want to swim away from prying eyes. Women want that too. Some women require that for religious or other reasons. And nobody should deny that. I see above that pp wanted a session for fat people. Seems obvious, really - but why not? Hire a pool and share it with, say, weight loss groups or physio groups so people can choose to go. (Not sure how you'd "police" who attended though)

I'm happy, generally, with mixed sessions (although i need the agressive men who often barge me from the swim lanes policed more effectively by the staff) or trans inclusive sessions. I'd like to see sessions offered to natal women who cannot attend trans inclusive sessions. And I'd forgo attending them if it meant a woman who can only go to those would miss out on a space.

If we are to be inclusive, we also need to recognise that on some occasions, exclusivity, is als required. consideration and respect for everyone.

And any women who feel uncomfortable about men being in female space will feel equally uncomfortable around trans men being in those spaces. Because they identify as men and shouldn’t be there.

Personally? if they feel they can't go to mixed or men's sessions, i am ok with them joining in with women. Having said that, the only transman i know of (one of my DCs friends) is fine going into either mixed or male sessions and hasn't, yet, encountered any issues. He has had at least top surgery.

If we are to be inclusive, we also need to recognise that on some occasions, exclusivity, is also required. consideration and respect for everyone.

^^ absolutely that.

Equality of care, consideration, dignity, privacy and respect. Equality of opportunity and accessibility regardless of any characteristic.

Like so many others, I can’t fathom why nobody at the charity has considered the huge potential mess they could get in with unsupervised under 18 year olds in a pool without any parent/carers in a line of sight. My understanding is that once over eight most pools in England will let kids in without specifying an adult/child ratio. No idea if this means no adult needs to be on site, you’d assume so but one doesn’t assume when considering safeguarding. They have at least stated adults need to be on sight but not with children . From a practical view, would they increase lifeguards? Would the charity increase the number of dbs personnel to be present for increased numbers of under 18s? A school or even a Cubs trip would specify a number of adults to keep tabs on the children for basic safeguarding, this seems odd, unless the consent slip would trigger an increase in adults to supervise (DBS checked you’d expect with a charity).

Also, how is this session remotely attractive to adults? A load of children screaming and splashing with no parents/ carers to keep in check sounds awful. Yes, am deliberately ignoring the more unsavoury side of why certain adults want access to children.But surely for the majority of adults of whatever persuasion, presentation, faith or sex a private swim session when feeling uncomfortable in yourself filled with children must be so unappealing.

Plus, they are locking the doors…how can you get out, asides from the fire doors, without drawing attention to yourself? Could be very overwhelming.

The group and organisers may have no ill intentions towards the children, but a sex offender will look at that and see that no parents are allowed near to the pool and see this as his opportunity.

It staggers me that we know that sex offenders will spend a long time grooming children and lying about who they are. But apparently they would never pretend to be trans. Everyone who says they are trans is always truthful!

Indeed.

Putting to one side the (very important) issue of safeguarding children, if this was a session for over 18’s then I don’t think anyone here would have any problem with it.
The problem with this comes if women only groups are not permitted, either because of policy, or because TRA’s won’t allow it.
I do wonder whether we are dealing with two very different groups of trans people here - the ones who want to swim away from prying eyes, v the ones who actively want to be in women’s spaces, and having natal women there with them is the whole point. There may not be many of these men at the trans swimming event

I don't think their motivation matters, and apart from the very obvious safeguarding concerns, which can be fairly easily addressed i think, there should be no real objection to this kind of session.

Because it shows that there is need for exclusionary practices sometimes. And that is fine. it should apply to everyone (within reason and the law). So like the more rabid TRAs really waking some people out of the stupor they seem to be in where the trans lobby can do no wrong and anyone raising any questions or concerns is a transphobe committing literal violence, having trans only sessions reinforces the fact that exclusion for reasons of privacy and dignity can be acceptable.

Has anyone suggested that 'trans only' sessions are a problem? I can't see that they would be.

Has anyone on this thread said it is not a good idea though, apart from the safeguarding issues? If it was for over 18’s with a separate session for those people with appropriate safeguards and parents given access.

And that if there were female only sessions available without being protested or attempted to be shut down.

I think, reading the posts that most people are supportive.

Do you really think feminists would protest the session? I would hope that does not happen.

I think OP initially said she did, but on reading replies changed her mind, because that wasn't quite what she meant.

Had separate sessions, facilities, services been asked for initially many of us here would have stood up to help.

But that is not what is / has been asked for by many.

Do you really think feminists would protest the session? I would hope that does not happen.

I don't know, did you read my other post where i said that from what i read here and elsewhere it seems there is a critical mass approaching and i do worry that some zealots may indeed pull a stunt like that. But that i hope they won't.

We don't know if a similarly set up private session for natal women would "be banned" until someone tries it. And after this event it may be a good idea for someone to do just that. Maybe a Jewish women's group or someone - not restricting it to Jewish women, but to women who can't attend inclusive sessions because their religion/belief/personal circumstance forbids it. Because there is now a good argument, as I have said before, for exclusive events. Having a trans session that goes off without a hitch is a good thing. A good thing for trans people who want to swim and feel unable to join other sessions. A good thing for other groups because it sets a precedent.

No, I’ve read the whole thread (😊) and I don’t remember a single person saying it was a bad idea (safeguarding aside)
But maybe what many trans people want, and what TRA’s/MRA’s demand are not always the same thing?