Sex Matters survey on public attitudes to men in women's spaces

[Forwarder]

Sex Matters survey on public attitudes towards women's rights. The splits on voting habits show why Starmer is swithering. :-(

https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/less-than-a-third-of-brits-agree-with-stonewall/

Yes, I'm working my way through the pdf.

Q1: An elderly woman needs intimate personal health care and has asked for female carers. Should the care agency be allowed to exclude transwomen from applying for this job? If this is a subject that you would rather not answer questions on, please select "Prefer not to say".

All 18-24
Should be allowed: 32% 22%
Should not be allowed: 22% 24%
Prefer not to say: 26% 33%
Don't know: 20% 22%

It seems that 33% of 18-24 year olds are too uncomfortable to answer the question, even though, given their ages, it doesn't directly affect them.

D'oh - I should have previewed the formatting! The first percentage in each row is "All" and the second one "18-24".

“Intimate personal care” is a bit of a complicated and slightly coy way of asking that question. It might have been better to add “such as washing, bathing and going to the toilet”l

Actually, it says “intimate personal health care” so does that mean medical things as well and if so what sort of things?

Agreed, the questions are quite wordy and the 18-24s might be unfamiliar with intimate personal (health) care, but there was a "Don't know" option (which 22% of them went with) and yet a further 33% still chose "Prefer not to say".

The question should have been 'Are you OK with a trans-identifying man washing your Granny's vulva without her express consent?'

The results are (mostly) much more troubling for the Lib Dems than for Labour - but both parties should take a good hard look. Time to hand round the (fully reversible!) policy blockers to give them time to think?

You'd need to read the questions quite carefully before answering. "Should not be allowed" means the agency should not be allowed to exclude, not that the transwoman should not be allowed to do it.

It looks like respondents were given the chance to opt out of all the questions at this point as the unweighted base goes from 2432 for the question on care to 1802 for all the other questions. Maybe the 18-24s do find the whole subject more difficult or maybe some of them are fed up with it!

I think this should have been preceeded by an explanation of what a trans woman is. I'm sure most people still think they'll have had surgery and therefore are less of a risk to women and girls /at risk themselves if they use male facilities / an object of pity.

Somewhere in the commentary accompanying the graphs it does say that an explanation was given which clarified that a transwoman may or may not have had surgery but as a pp said, it wasn’t pointed out that they may or may not be taking hormones. “May or may not” have had surgery does make it sound like a 50/50 chance whereas we know that the odds are different.

They may or may not decide to have cosmetic surgery such as breast or genital surgery
It could be interpreted that while cosmetic surgery is not a given that some sort of surgery/ treatment is required. I think there is the potential for people to read that as they might have had a boob job or not but they will have had medical interventions.

It seems that a lot of people still don't get it. Or maybe there's a lot of people out there who have family members caught up in this and rather than thinking more generally are thinking about sweet misunderstood Timmy who is now Tammy.

We've seen how family members have affected the positions of politicians so it seems logical it would do the same to the general population.

Plus as we see on here there are a lot of people who don't care about anyone but themselves.And if they don't have a problem they are unable to see why someone else might.