How do we find a middle ground?

[Namechange2468109]

How do we find a place where it’s ok to say we believe their are transsexual people (in my lifetime it’s always been around and as far as I am aware not particularly fought against/prevented people accessing services/given equal rights) generally these people (who I totally support and would advocate for) appeared to me to want to go under the radar and just live their lives. I’d have NO issues sharing a bathroom with these people.

What shifted? Why is it now a case that we are bullied into accepting a man (with a beard who in every way looks and acts like a man) as a woman?

I thought in the 90s we accepted that what you wear, your hobbies, who you slept with and career choice did not define you. I was never girlie, wore boys jeans but at no point did I think I was a boy or prevented progressing my life.

We now have men that define themselves as women by going backwards in stereotypes, basically the clothes define the man.

The levels of irony baffle me ‘sex doesn’t exist, but if I wear heels I’m a woman’ ‘don’t assume or judge, but if you don’t assume correctly I’ll punch you’ and my favourite ‘I’m a non-binary lesbian’

The ironic thing is (and sorry if this offends anyone) I never coined myself as a feminist. I genuinely thought the previous amazing women had won the war, I earned equally or out earned my male counterparts, I never felt being a women provided me different opportunities to my brother, if anything maybe a tiny advantage.

But now I feel that all that has been pointless and at 41 I’ve become a feminist because I NEED too. Is this not such a rewind in society. I was genuinely a little nervous today at taking a book to the counter (material girls) a bloody (amazing) book, but a book.

How do we rationalise this?

Sorry for the long post but I am genuinely lost at the next steps to take.

Given that it is estimated that only about 5% of trans women have genital surgery, I can give you at least three, straight off the top of my head, who I certainly would not want in women's toilets.

One who is an utter misogynist and makes no bones about it.

Two is a violent murderer who has spent 30 years in prison.

And three is a man who claimed he attempted to rape a woman because he wanted surgery.

That's just three without even thinking.

There are women who post on FWR who have been very clear about the sexual offences they have been subject to by 'transexuals' in female toilets. You obviously don't bother to read those posts.

I don't know.

How many would be too many, in your view?

If you’re going to argue like this - ie moving the goalposts before “revealing” the answer we both know you want to serve up - try harder.

It’s too obvious a trap you’re trying to set.

So none then

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/transgender-sex-offender-who-attacked-29765751

This one sexually assaulted a 10 year old girl in the women's toilets in Morrisons in Fife.

Right. So we have no evidence at all of any actual prosecutions

I have not 'moved' the goalposts.

You have attempted to though. It is not a trap.

Do you have any evidence that males at ANY stage in their transition are less likely to commit sexual offences than ALL males in the UK population?

If you cannot fucking answer this, what the fuck do you think you are trying to achieve on this thread? Readers can easily see you have nothing to contribute at the moment except whataboutery and fuckwittery.

You either have evidence or you don't. Do you?

And how many sexual offences get to trial in the UK? And you are basing your claims on successful prosecutions?

So, you should have evidence for this question.

Do you have any evidence that males at ANY stage in their transition are less likely to commit sexual offences than ALL males in the UK population?

https://www.thestar.co.uk/news/crime/woman-attacked-in-toilets-at-maggie-mays-bar-by-group-she-met-for-first-time-on-night-out-in-sheffield-3889197

if it’s one and done - let’s ban women from women’s bogs too!

While you are here can you answer the question I asked Echobelly before they disappeared, please?

Can you give us a number, not n+1 meaning when enough are harmed that society should act, for how many women and girls harmed are acceptable collateral in the prioritising male peoples demands over female people’s needs?

Haha!! Prosecutions is it now. So it's not enough to gloat about using women's facilities and there's fuck all they can do about it. It has to be a prosecutable offence for us not to want them in there!!

And yes, the murderer who attempted to rape a woman because he wanted surgery, was absolutely bloody prosecuted.

So was the murderer who spent 30 years in prison.

So was Dolatowski.

It's quite incredible that you appear to view women with such contempt, that you would not only force men on vulnerable women with PTSD, you'd still do it if they were proven to get off on it.

We don't segregate toilets on the basis of who has a criminal record and who hasn't.

We segregate them on the basis of sex.

It is a blunt instrument, but an effective one for the purposes of protecting women, given that the perpetrators of violent crimes are overwhelmingly likely to be male.

You want to remove this protection from women. Why?

lol - no policy should be made through anecdotes on Mumsnet

It isn't.

Single sex toilets predate Mumsnet by quite a long time.

can you?

And yet, can you provide us with the evidence that males at ANY stage in their transition are less likely to commit sexual offences than ALL males in the UK population?

yes. It was ZERO. it is now past that. What is yours?

Pre op?

I absolutely can, yes.

My number is one.

Society should have acted when the very first woman or child was harmed by a male person using a women's space on grounds of their gender identity.

What is your number?

Do you have any evidence that males at ANY stage in their transition are less likely to commit sexual offences than ALL males in the UK population?

Do you have any evidence or not? A yes or no answer is a start. Then if you have that evidence, please post it so we can all be convinced as you have been.

No, thank God. But the effect of misogynists bleating about wanting to inflict further pain on vulnerable women, certainly gets noted.

Why do you think no debate was instigated in the first place?

Why do you think 'operation let them speak' is having such success?

TRAs like you are directly responsible for the massive national pushback, resulting in the turning of the tide.

It's a posts like yours has made the prime minister say, today I think, that no, of course you can't change sex and a man is a man and a woman is a woman.

Cock or not.

I’d say if it’s less than 100 minor offences (like exposure) a year we’re ok. There has to be a cost to everything to ensure freedom. 100 offences by post-op transsexuals might be a reasonable threshold. It’s very unfortunate that any take place but we have to be realistic.

And in respect of prisons, my number is zero.

Because when you are talking about the prison population, i.e. people who have been convicted of a serious enough crime to warrant them being kept off the streets, I don't think we need to give them an opportunity to demonstrate that they pose no risk to others. We can just assume that they do.

If you believe that being forced to serve a custodial sentence in a men's prison because you are biologically male would be a terrible infringement of your human right to "live as a woman", the solution is incredibly simple.

Don't commit crimes.

You’ve lost me