Does anyone actually fully support trans people in women's changing rooms and loos?

[bottomsup12]

Just curious really? I see a lot of aggressive stances (Owen Jones eg) pro this on twitter etc. I don't get it.
The only reason I can think of is that it's never actually happened to them and they imagine it will be fine but when it actually happens a few times they might start seeing sense?

For the men who are aggressively pro it I wonder how they would feel is women just started flooding into their changing rooms and bathrooms ?

It doesn't bother me one or another m toilets and changing rooms have separate cubicles and I don't care who is in the other cubicles

And if said woman also wanted gender segregation on public transport, as is the law in some Muslim countries, would you also agree with that?

When Orthodox Jewish men try to make women change their seats on aeroplanes because they refuse to sit next to them, is that OK?

Here is that question again for any poster who supports male inclusion into female single sex spaces.

Why is this question so hard to answer?

Well no. The 'basic stuff' is what is the impact of male socialisation on male attitudes, how much of male behaviour is rooted in biology & how much in how male people are raised.
I've never seen any evidence to suggest transwomen are somehow immune to the impact of having been born male. Any more than I've seen any evidence that it is being born female, rather than feeling female, that is the root of the disadvantages faced globally by women.

Well I can't say I'm surprised, but I've come back on and found that PPwotnot has STILL not answered the questions repeatedly asked of her. I don't know how the stalwarts of this board deal with the ridiculous trolling. It's actually raising my blood pressure more than work was. I might go back for a rest!

And again. Here is that tricky concept of legitimate discrimination.

Do you know that in some countries, due to attacks on female passengers, those countries have female only carriages? And that they are entirely legitimate.

There is significant difference even between an Orthodox Jewish man telling a woman to change seats on an aircraft and a religious woman who cannot enter a toilet space that she expects to be single sex (as per that EA10).

The man asking the woman to change is not legitimate as it is a seat on an aircraft. The woman expecting a single sex space IS legitimate as per the EA10.

This is another of your hyperbolic false equivalences.

First of all, get the terminology right. The Muslim woman or Orthodox Jewish man in your hypothetical examples might want sex segregation, ie men and women in different parts of the bus, or the aeroplane. Gender is meaningless.
These requests would not be accommodated because aeroplanes are not single sex spaces. Rape crisis centres, toilets, hospital wards, prisons etc are.

A Muslim woman is entitled to expect all of the above to be male-free.

I'm not going to get into a debate about whether trans women are a threat to women's safety. It's not a legitimate subject for debate. It's just bigotry.

I am supportive of a post-op transwoman using female changing rooms loos. As far as I'm concerned - that's a commitment I am willing to respect.

I do not want to see a penis in a changing room.

I think some sports need to wake the fuck up and do some better research.

I worry about how some religions handle the trans issue and how that might isolate other - larger - population minorities and their ability to utilise single sex spaces.

I am not GC, but I am GC sympathetic. This issue feels so poorly thought through sometimes and I cannot bear an argument being shutdown by the 'you're transphobic' but equally wish GC people wouldn't patronisingly talk about their children being indoctrinated.

I wish GC activists didn't often just sound like TRAs. I'm somewhere in the middle. Common sense must prevail.

Been asked time and time again.

Nothing.

I suspect it is because this poster recognises there is a disconnect in the logic that they believe and are trying shame others into accepting. Because if they cannot answer these questions, and continuously has tried distraction for pages and pages, it starts to show to readers that they also don't really believe it. It is ideological only and I think they know it.

Yes. Persuading people that they are right isn't actually their primary objective here.

@PP82 I think you've missed my point. The principles underlying hijab are (almost universally agreed to be) based on biological sex not acceptance or otherwise of someone's self-declared identity. Therefore, it's not a particularly constructive way to think about it, by reducing that to "she won't accept their female identity".

I've never seen any evidence to suggest transwomen are somehow immune to the impact of having been born male. Any more than I've seen any evidence that it is being born female, rather than feeling female, that is the root of the disadvantages faced globally by women.

Did you mean the bit in bold the other way around?

Now that we've had 'Nazi' and some sort of attempt to suggest that sex-based rights in the UK are equivalent to societal expectations in fundamentalist Islamic societies, I await with baited breath being told that 'fungus isn't binary'. Or something. Definitely the one thing we're missing is something about fungus. Or avocados.

soupy, because for all the occasional 'you are all mean and why can't you see why people won't engage', there are many readers on this thread. New people are hitting the thanks buttons and letting us all know that they are watching. I am sure that some are thanking PP83 as well.

We get to the point where we are only partially engaged in directly responding to PP. But many of us are simply here pointing out the logical flaws, the inconsistencies, the hypocrisy and the tactics being used so that the readers can see for themselves.

Those readers can go away and read up and then they can think somemore about it and make up their own mind. But pointing out the deficits in a posters' thinking, and they are very obvious, certainly is no longer for that poster's benefit. It is for those reading along.

So who gets to decide which should be the magical pure, 'no y chromosomes allowed' spaces, and how is this decided?

A very religious person might be just as perturbed at having to sit in close proximity to a member of the opposite sex on public transport as they would be peeing in an adjacent toilet cubicle. Don't you care about their feelings?

'fungus isn't binary'
Well, there is only one Fungus the Bogeyman!

Can I please remind everyone here that @PP82 is a victim of rape speaking of her experiences and being horrifically dismissed because of her position on trans people.

You do not have to agree with this poster, but the language being used by women supposedly alleging they want to protect female safe spaces is not consistent with that position.

At this point, you don't seem capable of making any rational argument to defend your point of view in any case.

Your absolute refusal of it shows that you have absolutely nothing. Nothing but the constant flow of emotional manipulative tactics.

Yea, I was simultaneously chasing a puppy (not a euphemism)

But she is minimising it for other women by saying it isn't the worst trauma or words to that effect. Or we shouldn't use this to argue for women's single sex spaces.

I've been raped I find her views really offensive.

Her points are being dismissed because they make no sense and her claims are unevidenced.

How do you know that some of "us lot" aren't victims of sexual violence @WhereTheHellisTheRestOfThisCroppedShirt ?

I don't think that is the debate. The debate is 'are male people a threat to women's safety?'. If the answer is yes, then it really is beholden on those who want to allow some of those male people access to spaces that are designed to mitigate risk to explain their reasoning.

Of course, your answer could be 'NAM'

Can I please remind everyone here that @PP82 is a victim of rape speaking of her experiences and being horrifically dismissed because of her position on trans people.^^

There are other women on the thread who have been the victim of male violence. She has zero empathy for them. She's not being "horrifically dismissed" she's being called out for her internalised misogyny and prejudice towards women here.

Also many of us who have been dismissed, belittled and mocked by @PP82 have continued to express sympathy and empathy for her traumas, before and after she has dismissed, belittled and mocked us. She has not reciprocated at all. Not an ounce of empath displayed for other posters on the thread.