Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

SC-Fuelled Bathroom Aggression

853 replies

BisiBodi · 15/05/2025 06:38

Firstly, this thread is for open discussion on a specific topic, stated at the end. It is not a thread that sits in judgement, or calls for people to sit in judgement, of the Supreme Court finding.

Now, read that first sentence again before proceeding.

So, I am posting this with the full permission of the individual concerned, whose photograph - again posted with their permission - is on the thread. The reason for that photograph will become evident soon.

Caz is a cis woman and a very, very successful music producer and DJ in London. She has recently been very vocal online about a recent incident that was almost certainly created as a result of the SC ruling and the subsequent interpretation by certain members of society. Here is her original post:

"This photo of me was taken a few days ago. This is what I look like, not that it matters, but to set the scene…
I was at the Festival Hall. Toilets on either side of two lifts - men’s on one side, women’s on the other. I was in the queue for the women’s. Men were queueing across from me.
I was facing into the bathroom, so from behind, you couldn’t see my face. I was just standing there, minding my business, when I heard someone shout,
“The men’s toilets are over here!”
I ignored it at first thinking someone was letting their mate know. But he kept shouting it "The men's toilet are this side!". Then I felt a tap on my shoulder, (meaning he came into the corridor of the women's toilets), he poked me and said
“Do you realise this is the women’s toilet?!”
Up to that point, he hadn’t seen my face. So what was he judging me on? My haircut? My hoodie?
Also, I was surrounded by women. It was pretty obvious I knew which toilet it was.
His energy was aggressive. I was shocked. I looked him straight in the face and asked: “What sex do you think I am?” Affronted he said: “I don’t know!”
Here’s where I wish I’d said, “If you don’t know, then shut the f**k up!”
But instead, I said: “Would you like to see my tits?”
I started unzipping my hoodie. He panicked: “No no no, don’t do that!”
His wife came out of the loo and saw what was going down and said with urgency, “Let’s go now!.”
She rushed him away before all the ladies around me could properly react. They were horrified by what they saw. One lovely lady said to me, "I can’t believe what I just saw!" Another one said, “I am so, so sorry you had to experience that. I held back from speaking up till it was too late because when he came and touched you, I thought he must have known you.” Another woman said, "You are welcome here!" and yet another said, "You must report him and get him kicked out!" I stood there, shocked, and unfortunately didn’t react quickly enough.
What’s interesting is that he wasn’t a staff member. He was just a random member of the public.
Also, my attire was more on the masculine side. So if he thought I was a trans woman, why would I be dressing like a man? If he thought I was a trans man, then under the new rules, I was in the right toilet!
His policing was based on my hair? My clothes? Maybe I had cancer? Or maybe I just like my hair that way. What makes him think any of that gives him the right to behave like that?!
It is fair to say also that I could have been a butch trans women but that is the whole point, you can't judge from a hair cut several meters away and its not anyone's place to.
For the record, I’m not offended by being thought to be a man. I have a strong male energy, (female too sometimes!). However I often feel if I could press a button and turn into a man I might, I don’t feel like I’ve earned the right to call myself trans, given the immense things people go through to be right in their body… but in spirit perhaps I am. Asides this I am a 100% biological born unchanged female.
What was offensive was his assumption that this kind of behaviour is OK.
This is what these new laws and rules are doing — they’re not making it safer for everyone. They’re fuelling public entitlement and policing of gender expression.
Afterwards, I tried to find them. I thought maybe it would help to have a conversation. To understand. Did he think he was protecting his wife? What made him do that?
I’ve been meaning to speak out on this issue for a while. But I’ve had a lot going on, it’s been a difficult time and I haven’t felt I had the head space.
In a strange way, I’m grateful for this moment. It gave me the push I needed to finally say something.
I genuinely believe there’s misunderstanding from a few of the much older cis community about what it means to be trans. I mean this compassionately, It is just something they do not understand and it frightens them. I wish I’d got to talk to that guy… open conversations are needed to understand what fears are fuelling their prejudice."

Again, the purpose of this thread is not to pass judgement on whether the SC ruling was right or wrong, everybody has their own opinions on that, but rather to open a dialogue on - and raise awareness of - the effect that that ruling is having on the small but disproportionately loud and aggressive members of society, and the fear being generated as a result.

Speaking personally, I am hearing many reports of bathroom aggression - perpetrated by both men and women - against anyone who doesn't 'look right', regardless of the facts or a sense of common respect for others.
Now that the ruling has passed, I think that as women the best we can do here - the absolute bare minimum if we want to consider ourselves reasonable, respectful members of society - is to be aware that this kind of horror does happen and is happening, and to call out that bullshit if we encounter it.

I'd be interested in your thoughts...

SC-Fuelled Bathroom Aggression
OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
Barbadosgirl · 15/05/2025 08:29

CatietteX · 15/05/2025 06:48

I agree that it’s very upsetting indeed that gender ideology has reduced being female to external appearance and forced females using single-sex spaces to be alert to potential interlopers in a way they weren’t before. It’s a bloody tragedy that an ideology that claims to expand boundaries and break binaries has led directly to previously unheard of anxiety, and associated cynical claims of confusion.

Edited

This

RobinEllacotStrike · 15/05/2025 08:31

An awful act of harassment by a man against a woman.

sadly we have had years of :
-men forcing their way into women’s spaces,
-men now publicly saying they will continue to use women’s spaces,
-gender ideology pushing harmful sex stereotypes onto society in a crazy efficient manner (short hair boy, long hair girl bullshit)

Unsurprisingly some people are now confused. You could argue this confusion is the whole point of the gender bollocks.

the man was clearly an arsehole. No one seemed to think she was a man. She handled it well.

none of this is a reason for women not having single sex spaces.

Apollo441 · 15/05/2025 08:33

So is the OP coming back? Or having been handed her arse feels she has everything and there is no need to return?

SternJoyousBee · 15/05/2025 08:34

AthenaWhite · 15/05/2025 07:09

A woman with short hair. How we all survived the eighties when we all had short hair I will never know.

My hair is as short as Caz’s right now. I will tremble in my feminine shoes in case I am confronted….or I won’t give it a second thought and carry on happy that the SC ruling will protect service providers who want to offer female only rape crisis centres and DV refuges and allow lesbians to meet without being forced to admit men into their groups.

Barearse · 15/05/2025 08:36

Stonewall and other trans activists unlawfully encouraged men to enter women’s toilets for years. As a result people are hyper vigilant. The SC ruling will help calm everything down again as long as men (no matter how they ‘feel’) just respect the law and go back to using the men’s toilets.

RedToothBrush · 15/05/2025 08:38

Why are you here to lecture women?

Cis is offensive.

Why are women to blame for a situation created by men not observing women's boundaries. If women are speaking up now it's because they felt unable to before and were ignored.

Also she doesn't look like a man.

SinKlaire · 15/05/2025 08:38

I see the threadstarter has slinked off to never return after having her arse handed to her on a plate.

WithSilverBells · 15/05/2025 08:41

Before gender ideology came along, this type of event would have been just one of 1000s of microaggressions against women on that day. It would have gained absolutely zero traction. Then men re-brand it to try to help their attempts to cross women's boundaries and now it's suddenly worthy of discussion. Stinks of desperation to me. What's the next story going to be? I'm guessing a small boy being attacked by women for being in the Ladies with mum.

TisILeClair · 15/05/2025 08:43

Probably an old man with old-fashioned ideas on image and sexuality - likely with dementia had too much to say for himself. Nothing new here and nothing to do with SC ruling.

BisiBodi · 15/05/2025 08:43

Apollo441 · 15/05/2025 08:33

So is the OP coming back? Or having been handed her arse feels she has everything and there is no need to return?

You have a somewhat shaky, if unsurprising, grip on reality.

Whilst it's true that the thread has, as I predicted it probably would, descended to the standard that this sub-fora of MN is infamous for, I'm not especially concerned. I'm perfectly comfortable that the thread has done what it was intended to do.

OP posts:
LivelyFinch · 15/05/2025 08:43

I have a trans man friend, they use they/them pronouns but are always delighted if someone uses he and mistakes her for a man. However she tends to use the disabled toilets as a 3rd space or the womens if necessary. She is extremely worried about the SC judgement because women may challenge her in the ladies and she refuses to use the mens toilets as it's too dangerous!!

This apparently means men should be allowed in womens facilities because then she can't be challenged even though she acknowledges men can be a risk.

The OP sounds like it exactly this kind of mental gymnastics going on.

Ironically my friend hates men but wants to be one and can't see the dick pandering she's exhibiting.

Duckyfondant · 15/05/2025 08:43

I just can't imagine in this situation offering to show the aggressor my tits. Telling him to fuck off, yes, but strip off, no. Nor can I imagine the alleged comments of the other women. I can believe that masculine women are occasionally challenged but no, I don't believe every detail this particular woman gives.

Greyskybluesky · 15/05/2025 08:44

BisiBodi · 15/05/2025 08:43

You have a somewhat shaky, if unsurprising, grip on reality.

Whilst it's true that the thread has, as I predicted it probably would, descended to the standard that this sub-fora of MN is infamous for, I'm not especially concerned. I'm perfectly comfortable that the thread has done what it was intended to do.

I'm perfectly comfortable that the thread has done what it was intended to do.

I think we know what you intended this thread to do. Screenshots galore!

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 15/05/2025 08:46

BisiBodi · 15/05/2025 08:43

You have a somewhat shaky, if unsurprising, grip on reality.

Whilst it's true that the thread has, as I predicted it probably would, descended to the standard that this sub-fora of MN is infamous for, I'm not especially concerned. I'm perfectly comfortable that the thread has done what it was intended to do.

And what was that? Get screen shots for Reddit showing that the uppity women of Mumsnet are still refusing to fall into line?

BisiBodi · 15/05/2025 08:46

Duckyfondant · 15/05/2025 08:43

I just can't imagine in this situation offering to show the aggressor my tits. Telling him to fuck off, yes, but strip off, no. Nor can I imagine the alleged comments of the other women. I can believe that masculine women are occasionally challenged but no, I don't believe every detail this particular woman gives.

Fair points, and obviously this was not my experience and I only have the details Caz has made public to go on.

As to the offer to bear all, my assumption - and it is just an assumption - is she might have been so shocked by the encounter that a streak of angry defiance kicked in and she made a suggestion that - in the cold light of calm - would never have been made.

OP posts:
LittleBitofBread · 15/05/2025 08:47

mummytoonetryingfortwo · 15/05/2025 07:36

It’s interesting that every woman spoke to “Caz” in the same way that she writes.

Exactly what I thought! The writing generally is not exactly great, is it. And certainly not convincing.

OP, this didn't happen. And saying 'cis woman' was an entry-level mistake and giveaway.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 15/05/2025 08:47

LivelyFinch · 15/05/2025 08:43

I have a trans man friend, they use they/them pronouns but are always delighted if someone uses he and mistakes her for a man. However she tends to use the disabled toilets as a 3rd space or the womens if necessary. She is extremely worried about the SC judgement because women may challenge her in the ladies and she refuses to use the mens toilets as it's too dangerous!!

This apparently means men should be allowed in womens facilities because then she can't be challenged even though she acknowledges men can be a risk.

The OP sounds like it exactly this kind of mental gymnastics going on.

Ironically my friend hates men but wants to be one and can't see the dick pandering she's exhibiting.

So she's afraid to use the same toilets as men but thinks other women are unreasonable not to want to use the same toilets as men?

Greyskybluesky · 15/05/2025 08:48

BisiBodi · 15/05/2025 08:43

You have a somewhat shaky, if unsurprising, grip on reality.

Whilst it's true that the thread has, as I predicted it probably would, descended to the standard that this sub-fora of MN is infamous for, I'm not especially concerned. I'm perfectly comfortable that the thread has done what it was intended to do.

Do you see that this post 👆contradicts your first post, OP?

Especially this bit: "I'd be interested in your thoughts..."

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 15/05/2025 08:48

BisiBodi · 15/05/2025 08:46

Fair points, and obviously this was not my experience and I only have the details Caz has made public to go on.

As to the offer to bear all, my assumption - and it is just an assumption - is she might have been so shocked by the encounter that a streak of angry defiance kicked in and she made a suggestion that - in the cold light of calm - would never have been made.

Or...and hear me out for a minute...it might just all be made up.

LivelyFinch · 15/05/2025 08:48

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 15/05/2025 08:47

So she's afraid to use the same toilets as men but thinks other women are unreasonable not to want to use the same toilets as men?

Yes! Ridiculous isn't it?

CantStopMoving · 15/05/2025 08:49

The fact is there are always going to be weirdos in the world and this lady came upon one.

the photo you provided is clearly a women. That person could have no hair at at all and be wearing a box covering their body from head downwards and they would be unmistakably a women. (A very femininely soft featured pretty women I’d add as well not that it matters but she isn’t even on the slight margins of unsureness)

just because the man in question hadn’t gone to Specsavers doesn’t mean the law as it has been confirmed isn’t the right one!

illinivich · 15/05/2025 08:49

She photographs very female looking.

The he said/she said back and forth is unbelievable, but that could be the OPs bad writing.

There is an idea that older people with no contact with the young 'lgbt+' community are very gender conforming. Thats a blindspot with the young that allows them to come up with scenarios that arent realistic. They are forgetting about music and film stars of the 60s/70s and 80s. And often what is clearly nonbinary to the young just looks like a smiths fan to someone in their 50s.

Im not sure that the SC ruling is that understood or known by the public in general? It was talked about at the time, but now seems to be confined back to trans and womens spaces?

Having said that some men are agressive twats. But they tend to be aggressive twats regardless of acts of parliament and sc judgements.

WithSilverBells · 15/05/2025 08:49

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 15/05/2025 08:46

And what was that? Get screen shots for Reddit showing that the uppity women of Mumsnet are still refusing to fall into line?

Screenshots might help to peak a few people on reddit. Maybe OP is doing us a favour🤔

soupycustard · 15/05/2025 08:51
  1. Males, at population level, are more aggressive than females
  2. People can be mean and can make mistakes and other people can be the victims of meanness and mistakes. That doesn't have any relevance to the law that protects women's sex-based rights (which I am presuming is the point of your post)
  3. The picture clearly shows a female.
  4. There is no such thing as 'cis'. There are 2 sexes, male and female. Within those 2 sex classes there are millions of individuals with different characters, personalities, hobbies, interests, views.
  5. In rather the same way, it is difficult to define 'trans community'. The differences between, say, Elliott Page and Robin Moira White, or middle aged AGPs are as big as between any individuals in what you term the 'cis' community.
So your post is based on a lack of logic and understanding.
mummytoonetryingfortwo · 15/05/2025 08:51

LittleBitofBread · 15/05/2025 08:47

Exactly what I thought! The writing generally is not exactly great, is it. And certainly not convincing.

OP, this didn't happen. And saying 'cis woman' was an entry-level mistake and giveaway.

OP seems to be looking for a certain type of answer to their post 🤔