Most people agree with us.

[ArabellaScott]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/supreme-court-trans-public-opinion-b2753173.html

'[A] YouGov poll of 2,106 adults in Great Britain found that 63 per cent believe the Supreme Court made the correct decision in its April ruling.
The survey also revealed that 52 per cent of respondents now feel the law regarding women’s rights and their application to transgender people is clearer following the decision.
While 13 per cent said the ruling would have a positive impact on them and 6 per cent said it would be negative, more than three quarters of people (77 per cent) said the ruling would make no real difference to them.
The poll also addressed the issue of transgender women's participation in sports. Nearly three-quarters (74 per cent) of those surveyed agreed with the decisions made by some sporting bodies to ban transgender women from women’s competitions following the ruling.'

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/national/25172574.survey-suggests-people-think-supreme-court-gender-ruling-right/

A lot will depend on whether the EHRC successfully roll out their statutory guidance, if there's a lot of successful push back then I can imagine the trans community having a sense of fresh initiative. I can't honestly imagine that happening, at this point.

This sounds like a threat @GwenEdinburgh

Had the access been based on Digital ID and a scanner system, I would have had no choice but to use the Men's. I think that kind of change would mean trans women very quickly having to get used to using Men's toilets until it became the new norm.

How very telling that you believe trans-identified males will need that level of coercion to remove themselves from Women's spaces.

This. The judgment also mentions how this is practically impossible for a number of reasons.

You cannot ask men to produce any kind of certification at the doorways of single sex spaces.
You cannot visibly tell from exterior appearance which men have and have not medically transitioned and which are merely claiming to.
'Medical transition' and 'passing' are very objective things meaning very different things to different people, there's no way to set a standard.
There is no way for women to safely challenge men who often demonstrate anger and instability if women try to have a boundary they dislike - hence the frequent belief of 'passing' because of a lack of awareness that the women around them were afraid and working on getting away as quickly and quietly as possible without provoking problems.
The issue of privacy, decency, dignity and inclusion for women is a space free of all males. As lesbians are attracted to women and not certificates, the problem for women is the fact of the man being a man, not whether he's a pretty man, or has had a lot of cosmetic surgery. The issues for women are not disappeared by the man's personal appearance.

This was the premise of the original GRA and it's been destruction tested that if it's any men then it becomes inevitably all and any men, and that this does not work for women. It cannot be any men. Women's protections in law cannot remain with any men being allowed into single sex spaces. If you want this then you want to remove women's (and lesbian and gay people's) protections in law.

And it maintains an absolute focus on under which circumstances can men fuck with women's boundaries to access them as a resource, rather than taking into account anything around women needing and being entitled to single sex spaces. That meaning 'entirely man free'.

Yes, exactly what I’ve always thought. Except that if I’d been a novelist 30 years ago, imagining a scary misogynistic future, I would have gone for something more plausible than what’s actually happening!

I mean, come off it. Men saying they are women and the whole world just agreeing? And societies around the world abolishing women’s rights to privacy and physical safety in single-sex spaces, and ushering children onto lifelong drugs and surgery? That’s beyond unlikely!

You’d have been called paranoid if you’d predicted that.

Yes I think you are right, it couldn't be made to stand up in law, so it wontvhappen and wouldnt get through parliament. I think you're right that the European Court has ruled in the past that rights can't be dependent on medical interventions, and that's why grc applicants need only show a diagnosis not any medical treatment.

As a general point, the thought of us all needing a government app on our smart phone to be able to use the toilet at the railway station or town centre is terrifying and i would argue against that strongly, regardless of sex/gender issues.

While at the moment polling shows the electorate is not keen on trans ppl in opp sex spaces, it might be that the population would be willing to shift on toilet access and maybe some other areas if it was a specific carve out for trans ppl who are/have medically transitioned or who 'pass'.

I agree with others. But surely though, lobby groups have already tried this. It was on this very basis that women thought that the only male people entering their spaces were those who had had, what was supposed to be, surgery etc.

However, now that we have all had our attention brought to this issue, it has to be understood that it was NEVER acceptable that any male people (above about 8 .. well 10 years old apparently) should have been considered acceptable. Because we know that just because a male person has their dicks removed, they don't miraculously become women. They have been socialised as male for their entire lives and even without a penis, they interpret their lives from that male perspective. And they don't lose any of their male physical power. And they still retain their male pattern of criminality.

So, I cannot see how or why there should be any way for any male person, regardless of surgical status, to access female single sex spaces.

As a general point, the thought of us all needing a government app on our smart phone to be able to use the toilet at the railway station or town centre is terrifying and i would argue against that strongly, regardless of sex/gender issues.

I can't see that happening either. For a start, like all IT, it will periodically stop functioning. Secondly, it discriminates against people who don't have a smartphone eg the elderly.

Not all elderly, I hasten to add 😂

"As a general point, the thought of us all needing a government app on our smart phone to be able to use the toilet at the railway station or town centre is terrifying and i would argue against that strongly, regardless of sex/gender issues."

Has anyone with credibility ever indicated that this would be something the government would implement? Or has it just been a happy coincidence that the Digital ID bill has been discussed at the time the SC judgement has come out.

Why would a government want to track you in the toilet? It would be a significant over reach surely?

I think we need to be very wary of male people who will attempt to find the right approach to get their demands met. There is a distinct element of wheedling. Of wheeling and dealing. Of if I just pose the solution as a, maybe the women will agree. Didn't work, ok... let's try b. No... ok... what about c.

It really has been this way from the start, since the very first male person used a female single sex space.

Some male people will absolutely agree with feminists on issues like sport, and prisons, etc. But will insist that they have a special right to use female toilets. Like Hayton.

Remember some of the previous male posters who would be very agreeable with the concept that some male people are excluded. Then it became apparently that those that put the very hard and very painful work into being 'a woman', should be the only male people to have access to female single sex spaces. That they were here on FWR agreeing that male people should be excluded, while denying that they were 'male people'.

And would resort to anger when posters pointed out that that included them. It is like a script.

Any person that has stated that they are somehow not the male sex or are less male than other male people, or 'not really male', or tries to deny their sex is displaying red flag behaviour, in my opinion.

I don't think the DVS is supposed to be compulsory anyway. I think it is going to be offered as an alternative to paper ID documents, which can be a pain to gather together, scan and then email to solicitors for conveyancing purposes, for example

I agree. It seems to be another attribute that shows them to be male - the assumption that women are easily manipulated by males and blind to their attempts to do so.

Yes.

Or that they should even have the right to try.

Talking of dystopian novels, I recommend In the Beginning, a brilliant spoof of the current issue by Simon Edge, with transgenderism replaced by young-Earth creationism and a Maya-like character trying to stand up for reality. He’s also written The End of the World is Flat, which I look forward to reading.

100%.

I can't stand this kind of manipulation, and that is exactly what it is.

I like to go back to first principles. Human beings cannot change sex. TW remain biologically male and therefore morally and legally should not be in single-sex spaces for females. When a male uses a space that he has no moral or legal right to do, these are exactly the males that need to be kept out. These are the boundary ignorers and boundary pushers who don't give two hoots about the females who need the space to be single-sex.

Gwen, use the spaces for your sex (male) or unisex spaces. You should not use female spaces. Once again, the answer is 'no'.

GwenEdinburgh · Today 00:12
I agree with what you say - there is talk among some trans people of the need to start over in communicating to the public what trans means, the loss of public support feels so comprehensive.

What you feel as loss of public support is women now being able to express their feelings and insist that men obey the law, without worrying for their jobs and safety?

Silence did not mean agreement, support or consent.

I agree, it's a bit rich that there is the assumption that the public (as a whole) doesn't understand what trans means, and that is why support has reduced. There is the possibility that correct understanding has increased, and that is what has led to the loss of public support. Plus, many more people have trans identified people in their lives and understand precisely what it means. I also agree with your point Magpie, that the end of 'no debate' has allowed people to actually say what they feel rather than hiding their thoughts in silence and fear.

It's not as simple as 'we need to educate the public and then support will increase'.

I think that more people are beginning to see that this isn't about having the same rights as everyone else; it is about having extra rights. Plus, there is a very real cost to pay for these extra rights.

It’s implausible as well. We have many tourists and visitors each year who would not be covered. A completely pie in the sky scenario. 🙄

Secondly, it discriminates against people who don't have a smartphone eg the elderly.

Life in general already does that, massively.

Re passing being subjective a TW of my acquaintance has been all over social media since the SC judgement saying how they will be standing up for their trans sisters who are now scared but it doesn't affect them because they will carry on using female spaces without fear of being stopped because they pass.

Reader they are 6'2" with size 11 feet, hands like a shovels, brow ridges, male pattern baldness and 5 o'clock shadow. I clocked them as trans within seconds of seeing them for the first time.

Exactly. I think we have to take most of these claims with a pinch of salt.

When passing becomes a check list of body modifications only, you can certainly understand why so many male people believe they pass. I took this from a thread from last week.

Imagine this is a checklist (these have been suggested as some of the elements that mean a male person has acquired the secondary sex characteristics people use to judge 'passing' on because apparently, "People don't have the capacity to see chromosomes or whether a person has a uterus"):

Passing report:

Breast tissue acquired✔
Fake vulva acquired ✔
Skin softened ✔
Male body hair pattern removed ✔

Result: 100% 'pass' - you should now expect everyone in society to act as if you are female.

When the reality is:

Identifying a male person as male report:

Walks with male hip alignment ✔
Male skeletal proportions ✔
Male voice in tonality, timbre ✔
Male skeletal leverage points ✔
Male skull shape ✔
Male facial features, including brow ridge, eye tilt, lip line, spacing between nose and top lip etc etc etc ✔
Male q-angles ✔
Male musculator ✔

This list is very very long...

Result: You are male. And your sex is still likely to be correctly identified by someone at some time. If not most people, most of the time.

The disconnect in the minds of some people is very apparent when you start to consider what they mean. And that they have reduced people's perceptions to them having a checklist of achievements without understand that people are not looking at those things really, they are looking at the second list.

It simply doesn’t mean a fucking thing if some male people have

Breast tissue acquired✔
Fake vulva acquired ✔
Skin softened ✔
Male body hair pattern removed ✔

Because they will never be able to remove the body cues that people really use to correctly identify a person’s sex. The male breasts are on a male chest. Unless a surgeon works hard to proportion those breasts, male breast placement will result in a dissonance that may make some people look at further body cues. Look at those male people who decided to do a topless protest over the weekend.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5336846-men-get-their-moobs-out-in-protest-at-the-supreme-court-ruling-at-the-scottish-parliament?page=4&reply=144358236

And those ‘vulvas’ may have added cavities made from inverted penises, repositioned intestines or other body parts. Any inserted cavities are also not in the same location as you would expect to find in a female pelvis, from what I have read. Because of the differences in pelvic bones that will not change.

But maybe to some people, just having a surgical modification is all that matters for the purpose of being considered a ‘woman’ when you are a male person. Not actually understanding just what female body parts do. And how fucking offensive it is to call a surgical modification, such as a 'Neo-vagina' by the same name as a working body part of a female person.

I mean when you think about it, to some male people, all the vagina is is a fuckhole. A cavity to accommodate a penis. To me that is what those people have reduced a vagina to when they describe the cavity created in a ‘vaginoplasty’ as a ‘vagina’.

But hey, breasts, soft skin, vulvas and hair removal are all signs of how society views womanhood apparently.

Some people really don’t see the misogyny behind gender identity theory I think.

In my experience, I don't need to think about what a person's sex is, because I know instinctively. A TW might "pass" in a photo if they've had facial surgery, but their physical presence in real life is different. I can identify a man by the sound of his footsteps behind me. I think most women can; it's called female intuition for a reason. We've evolved that way to survive.

I think men are less perceptive, and I wonder whether that's why they think they pass. Maybe they're oblivious to how women see them, because they assume we're as easily fooled as they are. Or maybe they just lie to themselves.

Great post Hellofabore. It is so fucking offensive that women are viewed as something that can be achieved by removing bits and adding bits as if we were nothing more than a piece of lego.

The sheer unadulterated misogyny never fails.

Yes. Just hearing a man walk or run behind me is all I need. When I am out running, I can work it out reliably. It is an inconvenient bit of reality though.