How do we move forward? Toilets, passing and GRC’s

[Superhansrantowindsor]

I think there are some serious problems going forward and can’t see how they are going to be solved with things as they stand. I have some thoughts in my head that I just can’t organise.
Toilets - I agree 100% with single sex spaces. The reality surely is that if a TW passes they are going to just carry on regardless in using the ladies. This is obviously though a minuscule number.
If they don’t pass they could be challenged and whoever does the challenging - woman, security guard, concerned dad etc knows the law is on their side.
What about those that don’t pass but have a GRC? If a TW doesn’t pass and is challenged and then whips out a passport stating female then what happens next? I mean I know this is a pretty rare occurrence but if you have a GRC your sex marker on official documentation is changed. This should never have been allowed imo but someone with a GRC , no matter how masculine they look, have their actual sex recorded as female.
Am I right in thinking some new laws are going to have to be introduced? I just think everything is such a mess.

Whether they pass or have a GRC is irrelevant. The SC ruling has clarified that if a single-sex space is for women, then only biological women can use it. No case by case exceptions, a single-sex space must be single sex. TW are not legally women under the Equality Act. In practice, passing TW will probably continue to use the ladies, but now we all know they were never entitled to do so. They have been misled by the likes of Stonewall.

The solution? Third spaces will need to be created, and men will need to be more welcoming towards gender-diverse males in their spaces.

The judgement is so much more than toilets though. It’s saying that women exist as a biological sex class separate from males. This is so important for fairness and safety in women’s sport, and spaces where women are vulnerable such as prisons and rape crisis centres.

As I understand, it also means that if a committee needs to be 50% men and 50% women for diversity purposes, TW cannot make up the women’s numbers because legally they remain a subset of the male sex class.

You don't need a GRC to change the sex markers on any document except a birth certificate.

Let's imagine.
Swimming pool, changing room, a TW exposes himself, the customers report what's happening, the management deals with the situation, if it escalates ("But I'm a woman! Look at my passport!") the police might be called for indecent exposure. It's more difficult to challenge somebody if the behaviour is more discreet.
Toilets at work, a TW who is out to everybody uses the women's toilet, this gets reported to HR, HR intervenes.
Toilets at work, a TW who is not out uses the women's toilet, enquiries are made discreetly to HR. HR cannot be sure of the sex because the sex marker on the passport says F. In this case, it is difficult to enforce, and I agree with you, something needs to change.
I see your point. Hopefully it's a gradual change in society, certain behaviours are less tolerated, the vast majority of trans are rule-abiding, and the social norms will be rebuilt around sex.

The way I see it, everyone knows their own biological sex as defined in the EA, as this will be the sex recorded on their original birth certificate.

So even someone who presents their driving licence or replacement birth cert and says “oh, but I am a biological woman, look” knows that they are lying.

It doesn’t matter what they believe about the definition of “biological” or if they genuinely believe that TWAW, because the definition that matters for the purpose of the EA 2010 is the sex recorded on their original birth certificate. This is an objective test based on fact, and does not depend on one’s beliefs about gender identity.

If they insist on lying and refuse to leave to the point the police become involved and they are arrested for a public order offence, there’s a good chance their legal defence would involve trying to prove that they were (or reasonably believed themselves to be) a biological woman and that this was all a case of mistaken identity.

The court disclosure process would reveal that they have been granted a GRC and that their original birth certificate said male. Given that they actively applied for a GRC, it’s obviously unreasonable for them to genuinely believe that their original birth certificate said female.

Define "passing"

Who decides? How?

Is it wearing make up? Height of heel? Length of hair? How do you define it without resorting to sterotypes?

I think OP’s point is referring to whether someone passes for practical purposes, i.e. if anyone recognises them as a member of the opposite sex in a single-sex space.

On that basis, whether that person passes as the opposite sex would be determined by whether anyone involved in the situation notices that they are the opposite sex.

TBH how many actually pass? I mean in reality, not in their imagination. They think they do because women have been budging up and putting up with it, but I can clearly remember my DD asking me quietly "mummy, is that a man in a dress?" at about 8 years old.

We can tell the difference between men and women. We do it all the time. Someone's fashion choices really don't make as much of a difference as some people seem to think they do.

In practise, if someone is persistently using the wrong facilities, then at work, this will become a disciplinary matter, and in public spaces, the facilities owners will have to ban them.

As ID documents can be falsified so easily, they will clearly not be suitable for use to prove your sex (not that the vast majority of us will need to) - perhaps the courts will require cheek swabs.

Yes we really need to think about the design and practicalities. Third spaces aren’t great because they are mixed sex and private. We can’t change the mixed sex but we could change the private. I am not sure if anyone is ready for that. So it’s children, women and the medically vulnerable that suffer.

Make male toilets gender neutral and keep women's toilets as women only spaces. Let men deal with it for once.

Very few pass, even those who supposedly do like Blaire White don't pass irl. In candid snaps Blaire White looks like a linebacker.

OP. The only reason it seems to be a mess is because men who claim to be women have NEVER been told no. So they've been able to repeatedly breach women's boundaries, eradicate aspects of child safeguarding, cheat in women's sport and upturn the social contract (amongst other things).
The SC confirmed that the existing laws are as women claimed - that men are not women, even if they've got a special ticket. So, just like the stereotypical teenagers, they've not stopped whining about how unfair it is that they can't be alongside unwilling women & girls while we undress, use the loo etc. And their whining has been amplified by the media

It will be fine. The sporting bodies are all reverse ferreting (and are no doubt pushing the boat out to ensure that men's sport is now as inclusive as was demanded of women). Businesses will do the same as will the NHS.

Yes some men will continue to breach boundaries and threaten women and girls - they've been doing it openly in the name of transactivism for years and it will take a while for organisations to work out how to say no to them.

But the law has been clarified. The vast majority of citizens are relieved and pleased that this comprehensive lie imposed on us has finally been given the boot.

What about those that don’t pass but have a GRC?

The SC clarification said it makes no difference. If he has a GRC, he is still male under the Equality Act.

In terms of passing, look at those who really think they pass (I'm more of a woman than you are types). They don't. Clearly.

The reason lots of these men think they pass is

i) because of their body dysphoria they see themselves differently to how others see them, similar to people with anorexia etc.

and

ii) they say they never get challenged in female spaces, utterly unaware that women see that they are male and are too frightened to challenge them so quietly get out of there as quickly as they can to preserve their own safety.

Transwomen who think they pass are living in blissful ignorance.

Wait until idiots ignore it in the workplace and they start to get disciplinaries cos employers DO NOT want to be taken to court by other members of staff.

Yes this is exactly what I mean. I have seen a fair few TW who were obviously men. I am open to the possibility that there may be occasions when I don’t notice. I do think though that the vast vast vast majority do not pass and people are too polite or scared to say anything.

I think that if I’m in a restaurant/cafe/shopping centre loo and a TW uses it but the owners haven’t encouraged it in anyway then I can complain but there’s unlikely to be much they can do after the fact, however the situation in workplaces and hospitals where the people are known to each other and their sex is known will be a different story, if a TW uses a workplace women’s loo and the employer doesn’t stop them then the women cohls
probably claim sex discrimination.

TW can both be a vanishing rare phenomenon or everywhere, depending on the particular TRA argument.

I can see what you are getting at, but i think TRA would be bonkers to use their id to get themselves into womens spaces, because the next step would to reexamine the use of gender markers on official id.

If you want to spend your life lying about what sex you are, your life is going to be problematic. It's up to you to solve that problem, not the rest of us. You have to show ID to buy alcohol and pick up your Vinted parcel so I honestly don't see the big deal about showing ID when challenged about using toilets.

I'm applying for jobs at the moment and literally the first thing I'm asked on the form is what sex I am, my sexual orientation and what job my mum had when I was 14. When I get a job I will have to show up on the first day with my passport. The idea that GASP employers might have to ask their employees to provide proof of their sex is somehow unacceptably intrusive is bollocks.

I think TW who are discreet will often be able to continue using women’s toilets. I’m thinking of older post op transsexual people who genuinely just want to pee.

but the clarification of the law means that the in-your-face performance of TRAs wanting to show off their dubious woman-ness won’t work.

and I hope that many more large venues will have unisex loos in addition to make and female so that everyone has a space they can use.

Years ago in Australia I came across signs for the loo called (in typical Ozzie bluntness) "Dicks" and "No Dicks"!

I'm thinking that perhaps we should rename loos in the UK "Ever had a Dick" and "Never had a Dick". Irrespective of whether someone thinks they pass or not, this would show them which facility to use.