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 ?

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

So the wishes of a subset of males is more important to you than a woman’s lived experience of trauma.

Your beliefs are unbelievably misogynistic and deeply upsetting .

That you have the nerve to suggest that rape victims who will not ignore their trauma to accommodate the demands of these males are bigoted is disgusting.

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 of male people's demands over female people’s needs?

I’ll be fair and start from now because there is already many examples I can quote from the UK of women and girls being harmed. There are ALREADY girls and women who have been harmed either physically or through any number of other harms. This includes women self excluding from using toilets and change rooms they are not confident are single sex spaces.

So, please quantify your thoughts here. We are used to seeing the dismissive n+1 type answer.

Will 1 more woman or girl being attacked, intimidated, being exposed to naked males, feeling traumatised, being abused or needing to exclude due to religious or past trauma mean you will finally consider those female people’s needs? 2? 5? 10? 100?

Do the women need to publicise their needs? Give traumatic accounts for you to consider their needs?

Also, it's about privacy, dignity and peace of mind for women and girls, almost as much as it's about safety.

You are blurring wants and needs.

How is changing in front of strangers who happen to be cis women privacy?

So is it a want or a need for a male who identifies as a woman to be affirmed in this belief in every way? Is it a want or a need for that male to invade every female space?

Invade?

How is changing in front of strangers who happen to be cis women privacy?

The pivot again when you haven't got an answer.

I don't mind changing in front of other female people. Other women may do, that's fine. Use a cubicle "for your modesty". PP82, as you saw fit to tell other women.

Readers please note that this poster has now acknowledged that there HAS been attacks on female people and children but has dismissed these as being inconsequential. Like Sophie Chappel declaring that a slight spike in murders of female people due to lower safeguarding is acceptable to Chappel. A transitioned male academic.

In fact, there has already been a number of these rapes IN THE UK as well.

Conveniently ignored by PP83.

Hence my repeated questions. Because if someone cannot answer with any semblance of evidence or even logical consistency, you have to understand there is nothing but emotional manipulation behind their arguments.

Good law and policy is not created on emotional manipulation. We have already seen this throughout history.

Invade?

That's what I said. It's how most women will experience it.

Excuse me for my ignorance but how is there any other way of being male but biologically?

Is it like being "socially" female? Btw you didn't answer my question on what constitutes being socially female?

And you have just dismissed the needs of women and girls.

How many additional female people are acceptable collateral in your push to lower safeguarding principles ?

Who appointed you the spokesperson for most women?

Also, it's about privacy, dignity and peace of mind for women and girls, almost as much as it's about safety.

This is the point which was avoided with irrelevant whataboutery about changing in front of women.

Do readers see it yet?

Once you see it, you cannot unsee it.

The complete dismissal of the needs for safety, privacy and dignity of female people.

You’re the lone voice advocating the validation of males at the expense of women on this thread.

No- you are blurring it. A biological man wants to be in female single sex spaces. He does not need to be. Ever.

Many biological women NEED to be in single sex spaces. They NEED it- for whatever fucking reason. So many of which have been not only outlined on this tread but are also obvious to anyone. I'm not going to repeat them here because it's frankly boring to do so.

@PP82 you have no logical or consistent arguments to offer- because there simply are none.

I don't think anyone really thinks that safety, privacy, dignity and peace of mind have anything to do with who wees in an adjacent toilet cubicle.

Their trauma doesn't mean they get carte blanche to exclude and other.

All men are excluded. And it is most certainly due to the trauma their sex has inflicted on women and girls for tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years. Violence against women by men crosses centuries and cultures. To equate women's rational fear of male violence with othering, which is typically used to show the humanity and worth of people with disabilities or people from historically oppressed cultures and races, is deeply insulting. Men are not "othered" and they most certainly are not oppressed by women.

It's not a debate. Over half of the men claiming to be women who are in prison in England and Wales are there for sex offences - which are almost all committed against women and girls. In comparison, 17% of the general male prison population. So men claiming to be women must be a threat to women, whether or not you can bring yourself to accept that they are men/male.

All the evidence, globally, historically etc points to the fact that the group that is by far the most likely to commit sexual violence against female people is the group 'biological males'. So far neither @PP82 nor anyone else has provided any evidence that (or indeed reason why) the group of biological males called 'transwomen' should be excluded from the safeguarding measures put in place to attempt to mitigate that risk to female people from males

We are talking about trans women. Not men.

Excellent point springlobelia

What readers can see is the notion that this poster only prioritises male people who they feel deserve more consideration than female people. Because they are driven by the belief that those male people have magically changed.

Here is a thing. It is also known that lobbing of cocks doesn't prevent sexual abuse or sexual assault. Despite posters who think that it does and who take cutting of cocks as some kind of commitment.

@PP82 you have no logical or consistent arguments to offer- because there simply are none.

Quite.

Again, this is about privacy, dignity and peace of mind for women and girls, almost as much as it's about safety.