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)

I don't get the staying in the changing room part, either. Although, they might have a communal area in there, of course. Despite a poster saying they wouldn't have any such thing so anyone dodgy would be in a cubicle.

Do the parents have to stay in the cubicles? Is a dad going to be told to sit in a cubicle for an hour or more, twiddling his thumbs, while his child is 30 feet away swimming with adult strangers, and he's been told to stay put?

For this to be transphobia, it would have to be that if this was a NON TQ+ group there would be no concerns.

No, my concerns re safeguarding are absolutely inclusive: they remain the same for all children and vulnerable people, regardless of race, religion, creed, sex, ability and age.

Yes, what if it was people who are interested in astrology, for instance. No age limit, all children are welcome to come, keep your genitals covered, but parents aren't allowed.

Or Harry Potter fans. All children and all adults are welcome, as long as they say they're fans of Harry Potter, but parents have to wait in another room.

Exactly. And many posters on this thread have said that if this was an adult only session, it wouldn't be a problem.

So it would be good if someone could point out the alleged Transphobia.

This is what kicked off this thread, the mix of young teens and adults and deliberately excluding parents. Why can't people see that that and only that is the issue?

Nope. Have you read the OP? It started with how come trans people are allowed to have their own session.

That was answered (it’s a private hire, which any community group can do) so to avoid having to say “oh, fair enough, carry on then” it moved on to hunting out dozens of ways to somehow make it not ok for trans people to hold this session.

It’s still trundling on, with the usual rinse and repeat tactics to try and shut up anyone who isn’t on board with the “but trans!” narrative.

Datun has latched on to a catchphrase and is ignoring every response to it.

Name calling, anti-safeguarding, DARVO and grey rock have all had a turn at shutting up the few with patience enough to keep challenging the utter nonsense.

Still here.

Still pointing out that this charity’s private hire event with written parental consent and lifeguard supervision is not a de facto “massive safeguarding risk”

Still waiting to see if any of the many people speculating and denigrating the event will actually be pro-active enough to drop them an email and ask the event organisers to put their mind at rest on their very specific questions and concerns.

Then maybe we can get back to how to deal with the vastly bigger threat that men pose to women and children in public swimming sessions, week in week out, and have done for years, and that children still have unfettered access to, unsupervised, from age 8, with no control or tracking whatsoever on adults in the changing and swimming areas.

this is blatant transphobia dressed up as “safeguarding”

For it to be transphobia,it would mean the issue is that this is for trans people. As others are saying, if this was for all christians or all blue eyed people, would it still be objectionable to deliberately exclude parents from an all age allowed swimming session? Yes. Don't care why this session was organized and I actually think it is a lovely idea as I can really this to be beneficial for children who are struggling with body image, but not all ages and both sexes.

Datun has latched on to a catchphrase and is ignoring every response to it.

Crikey. I've latched onto something, and I'm ignoring it at the same time.

Go me.

Have you read the OP? It started with how come trans people are allowed to have their own session.

Yes. And how everyone said good for them. Until someone pointed out the all age part. Otherwise the thread would have died out long ago.

Because I question why you see it as ‘deliberately excluding parents’ rather than a vulnerable community asking to be private to their own community and have their privacy respected. The only reason to see it as excluding parents is if you see it as a threat. And what is the risk here that isn’t a risk at any swimming pool on any given day where children swim unsupervised? And yet you aren’t out campaigning for leisure centers to ban unsupervised children as a safeguarding issue. Why not? If it’s that risky? That concerning? If swimming without parental supervision is that much of a potential risk, why is it allowed?

I strongly support and believe that women have the right to single sex spaces. I strongly believe they have a right to ask for and receive medical procedures from a female or at least to know if it will be a male if there is no alternative and have a choice whether to proceed. Most men are not a threat and are respectful humans from whom women have nothing to fear however that doesn’t detract from my belief as stated above. If it was a girls only swimming session, it would not be ok for a male parent to be present.

Equally, trans people have a right to create a space with no non trans people in it. They have a right to ask for it ti be private and not viewed by non trans people. That’s all they are asking for. After that, the ‘risk’ to a child swimming in this session is no more or less than any child swimming unsupervised at any pool ….unless of course you believe the risk is higher? Then why? Unless you believe the trans people are more of a risk? Because I don’t see a campaign to safeguard our children by banning unsupervised swimming

I assume you must have missed my question earlier (and Datun's mention of it) Strawberry as you couldn't possibly be ignoring it, so I'll ask again.

In what way does being GC relate to The Emperor's New Clothes?

That should be under Sankuca post! Arg!

I didn't know you had a catch phrase. I'm jealous now. Can I have one? Pretty please?

I might be missing something here but I was under the impression that privacy and their own spaces was definitely not what transpeople want.

That was answered (it’s a private hire, which any community group can do) so to avoid having to say “oh, fair enough, carry on then” it moved on to hunting out dozens of ways to somehow make it not ok for trans people to hold this session.

Just to take a teensy little issue with this. Women have conducted private hires across the land. And have had transactivists show up screaming at them, banging on the windows, shouting burn it down, threatening them, threatening the venues, chalking pornography on the pavement outside and accosting them on the way in and out.

Crikey, I've been in private hires in professional clubs, and even the House of Commons, and still faced that.

The safeguarding issue in this event took over, because it was so bloody blatant.

Everyone knows that women can't hire anything for themselves, without transactivism trying to stop it. It's not news. Inviting kids to an event where their parents are expressly excluded, is.

Why do you think that means WE are the problem?

Safeguarding exists and adding Trans to anything doesn't remove the requirements of that.

Your idea of safeguarding being 'more stringent' is based on a misinterpretation of what is being said here; a determined effort not to see any issue. Why do that?

Bottom line? Where minors are coming concerned adults asking for secrecy, banning adults, ignoring safeguarding is absolutely and utterly wrong. Nothing about 'being trans' changes the normal, every day requirements of safeguarding kids. Pointing that out is not transphobic, it's common sense and, for some of us, part of our jobs.

Then maybe we can get back to how to deal with the vastly bigger threat that men pose to women and children in public swimming sessions, week in week out, and have done for years, and that children still have unfettered access to, unsupervised, from age 8, with no control or tracking whatsoever on adults in the changing and swimming areas.

And what would be your suggestion to address this threat?

As Strawberry isn't answering, I will suggest: This is where the DARVO tactic falls flat on its face.

It doesn't make any sense whatsoever in relation to women raising safeguarding concerns.

Because I question why you see it as ‘deliberately excluding parents’ rather than a vulnerable community asking to be private to their own community and have their privacy respected.

Fourth attempt to create a sacred cast.

Because there is no risk here greater or different from allowing children to swim unsupervised in a Leisure Centre pool.
If you believe that children swimming unsupervised by their parents in a pool that has adults in it is such an egregious safeguarding risk then why aren’t you campaigning for it to be stopped?

It's safer for children to be in an open public place than it is to be locked into a private space with strangers and their caregivers specifically, explicitly excluded. See?

So… irrelevant question, making up stuff no one said, DARVO, women raising safeguarding, banning adults, ignoring safeguarding, so and so’s not answering…

Are we going around all over again just for fun or because you have nothing new to say?

Dont forget to call me a TRA - that bits really important.

So you'd be perfectly happy if the leisure centre said that their swimming pool was open to all ages, obviously, but no parents are allowed. Just a handful of privately cherry picked adults who say they have something in common with those children, and that's all.

If your kid goes to a public swim session though, as a parent you are allowed to watch.

Or get in the pool with your child

They're no more 'locked up' than my son is when he is at swim lessons and I can't access poolside.

No one is locked in and compelled to stay there. Nothing suggests the pool area is locked. The building is secured, with the parents inside. Amd actually, where required caregivers are not excluded as outlined in the original post.