Some strange contradictory arguments from the TRA side

[transdimensional]

Claim 1: That it's unfair for TW to go in men's toilets because they're less safe there.

It's probably true that they're less safe there, but how does the conclusion follow? What about a gender-nonconforming male who identifies as a man (not as a woman)? He would still have to go into the gents' even if admission to toilets was on the basis of gender identity. Should he also go to the ladies' to be safe? What about various other vulnerable groups? Young boys, elderly men who may be frail without being disabled, or ethnic minority males in an area where a white racist movement is strong - maybe they would all be safer in the ladies'? But it doesn't mean that's the answer!

Claim 2: That there is no use banning self-identified TW from the ladies' on the basis they might represent a risk, because genuinely dangerous males won't care whether they're allowed in or not.
This implies that the ladies' toilet is no safer than the gents', and therefore it completely contradicts the first point!

Claim 3: That having rules about who can and can't enter the toilets will lead to a surge in TM and others being wrongly accused of being in the wrong toilets.

But even under the EHRC's and Scottish government's understanding of the law, there were theoretical limitations on who could enter which toilets (in theory you would have needed a GRC). So there have always been rules about who can enter. Does anyone recall a huge problem of false accusations before 2010 or before 2004? If not, why should it start now?

...quietly slides Royal Yachting Association Level 2 Powerboat Handling (Inshore Waters) certificate off the table...

I should say I have agonised endlessly over this issue because I know and love trans people. But in the end I can't get past the clash of rights - disability rights in particular. People with autism should not be reprimanded for saying a TW is NAW, for instance.

I do recognise some merit in some TRA arguments: I don't believe that "you can always tell", for instance, just like you can't tell if someone is wearing a good wig. I do think that people pass better than they did thirty years ago because of improvements in hormone technology and facial feminisation surgery etc. It sits at odds with me as a lifelong leftie to step outside the "be kind" camp. I have yet to see a TRA acknowledge any merit in TERF arguments though.

<Waves certificate in sub floor preparation>
Although as I was pg it was decided it was better I avoid the fumes so I could only watch through glass rather than actually participate BUT then HR said that was discriminatory so I had to get the certificate anyway.

All I am thinking is what on earth goes on in men’s toilets that makes them so unsafe? Is this a real issue? Accept children should not go in unsupervised but adults?

toilets are designed by sex (female/male) not gender, which is why there are no urinals in female ones.

Partner just says it’s dirty and you get some men looking at others parts at urinals which is why he uses stalls every time

I certainly don’t believe you can “always” tell.

I think the vast majority of the time you can tell. The people who transitioned young are probably the most likely to pass, along with males with slight frames and women who are tall and muscular.

The older trans women you can nearly always tell.

I have met and had dinner with Christiane Nüsslein Volhard although I was sitting right at the other end of the table (and I can do an Umlaut where required).

Woah!

Why is anyone pandering to extreme porn advocate 'Jane Fae' (formerly John Ozimek)?

Do you know how much of your porn is extreme? • The Register

You win the thread!

‘some people think [NB] are the most affected.

In which sense of the word?

Why?

They stop having to 'pick a side'.

The decision is pre made for them.

Non binary people are not recognised in UK law at all.

They had no specific rights last week and they have no specific rights this week.

They do all, however, belong to the protected category of "female" or "male". Like every other bugger.

I would in fact argue that neither the Equality Act nor the Gender Recognition Act recognise non binary identities in any way, non binary people are less affected by this judgment than any other group.

Well, you could argue that they do not claim either gender. They’re not saying that they are something that they are not like trans people.
they just don’t feel masculine or feminine
but people are grouping both of them together and some of them probably don’t agree with being transgender and changing your biology

But how are they affected by the Supreme Court judgment?

If anything they should be happy about it because it will most likely lead to more unisex toilets, meaning they no longer need to have a crisis of conscience every time they need to pee.

So TRA are going to use every argument under the sun to get around this court ruling and I think everyone should be wary of this.

One argument put forward in parliament was that a containment who was a trans woman had been using women's toilets for 30 years so where should they go now? Firstly one could argue the man in question shouldn't have been invading female spaces and now is a good time to consider women's rights and see how behaviour should be adjusted. I might have sped on a road for 30 years but if a speed camera is out in place I can't just say this is unfair.

As for passing etc. I think blokes seeing a man in a skirt will think'bit weird bloke in a skirt having a piss......wash hands and think about work/meal/next beer'i.e. men will not bad an eyelid and just think the behaviour is a mild strange. There will not be some carnal lust that overpowers the average guy to molest a man in a ill fitting wig.

On the other hand men in women s spaces does present an obvious place for potential assault with no CCTV and no witnesses. If nothing else the presence of man in a space where women are in cubicles in a state of partial undress is hugely intimidating to some maybe the majority of women.

The arguments like pp have said are not based on logic but on increasingly shrill voices to emotion through breath taking displays of self pity.

You know the expression 'to wear your learning lightly'?
That's what you've been reading for the past few pages😂
Not just lightly, but brightly and wittily; ditto those who lightly, brightly and wittily revealed their various certs with equal good humour.

I❤this kind of interaction on FWR!

Why are people still platforming this porn activist?

and we can all play that game ‘I know an old lady who would rather die than be on a ward with men’ that’s how it works isn’t it? Emotional blackmail top trumps ??

The point of the law is not to recognise gender - or any identity.

The default is that sex discrimination is illegal. It is only legal when particular criteria are met.

Non binary people have a sex - just like everyone else - so they are impacted by the EA, but not more so than they were in March.

They certainly have the right to argue that a particular instance of sex discrimination is illegal or unnecessary, just like anyone else, but the judgement has confirmed that sex relates to male/female, not masculinity/femininity. If anything that seems like an improvement for them.

Where should they go now?

Exactly where the Secretary of State for Women and Equalities told them to go.

What part of what she said was unclear?

If they don't like it they need to campaign for a change in the law and secure the rights they think they need through democratic means, not undemocratic ones.

As for passing etc. I think blokes seeing a man in a skirt will think'bit weird bloke in a skirt having a piss......wash hands and think about work/meal/next beer'i.e. men will not bad an eyelid and just think the behaviour is a mild strange. There will not be some carnal lust that overpowers the average guy to molest a man in a ill fitting wig.

This is where I disagree with the terf POV. I mean, gay-bashing is definitely a thing. Unfortunately, I think we have to recognise there will be collateral damage both ways.

But gay men aren’t entitled to use women’s toilets.

There has been research that shows that mixed sex changing rooms are less safe for women.

I’d be interested to know if there has been any research into whether they are more safe for men?

But gay men aren’t entitled to use women’s toilets.

Exactly! Women's toilets aren't a safe haven for any random bloke who feels threatened in the gents' for some reason. Women's toilets are for women!

And please @ColourlessGreenIdeasSleepFuriously don't use the term "collateral damage" if you mean people being assaulted/attacked. Call it what it is.

If they think they pass as women then they won't have a problem still getting into the ladies' toilets.

If they're now worried about being stopped it shows they know they don't pass.

It can't be both. Either you look exactly like a woman ("I'm a lay-dee") because you now "are one" or you don't look like a woman because you know you're a man.
Which is it?

Well if it's ' just like being gay' then there's no problem with the gents then is there?!