Is there a name for this?

[Confusedpleaseeducateme]

Pardon my ignorance. But can anyone help? Genuine question. Just a NC

I say that I'm GC as I don't believe you can change sex. However I strongly believe you should go where your genitals match. E. G. If you've COMPLETELY transitioned then use that toilet.
By all means say you're a different gender (and I'll just roll my eyes internally) but personally I don't have a problem if a true TW uses the ladies facilities. I just don't want to share female spaces with a penis!

I don't believe TWAW. I believe they are TW.

Does that make sense? Please be gentle... First time posting on this board but been reading a long time but don't recall seeing anyone saying anything about this? But I could just be being dull... Menopausal brain!

SPIDERS HAVE ARMS?? 😱
😂

I would describe your stance as not fully thought through.

There is no practical way to distinguish between different male people on the basis of what they have had done to their genitals. No one is guarding the door doing genital inspections.

Either you let no male people in or you are letting any male person in.

Yes, apologies for my tone.
The answer is really very simple - single sex means female.
I would probably also add - and women are allowed to say no without having to explain why they are saying no. And why this exception or that exception cannot be made.
But that has not been allowed. Several hundred thousand pounds had to be spent for the SC case and the judges there painstakingly spelled out the law. And still people do not accept it.
So that is where my weariness comes from.
It was not intended to be a personal slight.

I am reminded of a TW who posted a sad face selfie on Twitter from the disabled toilets of (I think) an airport, complaining that the floor was too small/wet/dirty to lie down on for the purposes of dilating his neovagina.

"I strongly believe you should go where your genitals match. E. G. If you've COMPLETELY transitioned then use that toilet."

I know it seems like a compassionate position towards the few who fully transition*, but it's also a terribly unethical position towards those who don't fully transition, because you're telling them that they have to submit to extensive surgeries with sometimes terrible results if they want to be considered fully trans and thus be allowed to use the other sex's toilets.

( * Using "fully transitioning" to mean getting hormone treatment and genital modification, even though that's not any kind of actual transition from one sex to the other.)

They can keep their weird creepy fauxgina away from me. It isn’t real!

To answer the question you asked, I don't believe there is a specific name for your view.

To answer the question you didn't ask, here are a few reasons why that doesn't work as a line for who does/doesn't use a single sex space.

Depending what figures you use, somewhere between 80% and 95% of men who identify as trans don't have genital surgery. They may have other feminising surgery, such as to alter their face or voice, without having gential surgery - which makes it impossible to tell who is entitled to go where under a 'genitals system' without ridiculously intrusive checks.

Genital surgery only charges genitals. Someone who has it may still look like their own sex in every other way. Even the most extensive surgical and medical treatments don't - can't - remove all traces of birth sex. A man will retain male clues in height, hip angles that affect gait etc. Women with male-caused trauma are especially sensitive to these clues. So a 'very fully transitioned' man in a rape crisis centre or a quiet changing room can still trigger trauma.

Men also retain a lifetime of male socialisation. And male offending patterns - men who have had genital surgery have the same pattern of criminal offending, including violent offending, as non-trans men.

Ok I will try and be gentle!

I don’t buy the idea of a “true” TW. What does that even mean? You say genital surgery. They are still men. And women have to right to not want men (any type) in their spaces.

I think this is good advice: keep it simple, OP.

'Oh but it's so complicated' and 'The SC ruling has just caused more confusion' and 'but my lovely lovely friend who is a transwoman is really really upset'
are being used to try to subvert the ruling that 'woman' means 'biological woman' and therefore the women's toilet is for biological women.

You can get side-tracked by all sorts of 'but what aboutery', the simple fact is that there is an established arrangement of women's, men's and disabled toilets that worked fine because people used to respect that they do not have the right to any toilet they want.

And that's the law, which has been ignored until the Supreme Court reminded everybody that men of any description never had a right to use the women's toilet, or women's changing rooms or anything designated for women.

It's giving too much power to a tiny number of transpeople to tie ourselves in knots in order to placate their unreasonable demands.

This isn't about toilets.
Making it about toilet is far too simplistic.

The law requires consistent definitions which can be applied across the board and are workable.

The Equality Act applies to ALL situations. Not just toilets. This means situations like healthcare - a transperson NEEDS to be treated as the sex they are, for their own wellbeing. Otherwise they have poor care which isn't as good as everyone else's. Transpeople NEED the observation of sex for certain scenarios and without the observation of sex they lose ALL protections - because they become invisible in law as the have no definition to protect them. They just become 'people' with no definable difference.

The Equality Act also needs to protect other groups. The most notable group is lesbians who are same sex attracted not same gender. Even if a man has surgery he remains a man. This is not what lesbians are attracted to.

Thus the SC had NO OPTION but to rule that sex is biological sex. They could not pick and choose scenarios. That's not written into the law as it stands. To do this MPs need to rewrite law in parliament. The SC could only make a ruling one what the current law is and how it was intended to work in a blanket way. Because the EA didn't make distinctions.

Indeed the EA DOES make distinctions and clarifications for single sex. So the judges HAVE to acknowledge that and refer to that.

They had NO CHOICE ultimately.

Instead of discussing how we can customise a male to make him acceptable in the ladies, let’s just keep him out.

I read a story about someone who had their penis bitten off a couple of years ago. IIRC he was being abusive to the woman who bit it off. Should we put the abusive penis-less man in with the women too?

So your categories for toilets and changing rooms would be:

Ladies:
Some women
Men who have chosen to have their penis inverted
Men who have accidentally lost their penis

Gents:
Some men
Women who have had part of their forearm stitched onto their groin

Excellent!

Doesn't your question really boil down to 'What is a woman?', with a side-order of 'I think it's sort-of OK to dilute women's spaces, a little bit?'

I think the name for your stance, OP, is trans ally, and I suspect you are posting in bad faith, like all the other posters who have started almost exactly the same conversation in recent weeks.

Decent men stay out so that bad men stand out.

@Confusedpleaseeducateme

Do you think men who have lost their penises through injury should use women’s facilities?

What about men who have severe erectile dysfunction (eg due to prostate can we treatment) - is it ok for them to use women’s facilities?

Trans ideology is supposed to centre around the trans gender identity, which is an internal essence and has nothing to do with how someone looks or presents. There is a feminist phrase "women don't owe you pretty" and the equivalent trans phrase is "trans people don't owe you passing". Many trans people are not interested in passing - mimicking women through clothing, hair, make up, surgery, hormones. They say they are a woman and that's supposed to be that. See Alex Drummond, "lesbian" with full beard for example.

So we can't start trying to work out who is getting in. We have to say no to all of them, or we are just selecting those who meet a set of stereotypes

The thing about women's single sex spaces is that they are there to meet the needs of women. While you'd like to be kind to the men you think have transitioned far enough, what about being kind to those women who don't feel safe or able to use that space with any man in it regardless of what's in his trousers?

Why is it a problem for him to use the gender neutral ones that the judgment says need to be provided and let that single sex space do what the law says - meet the needs of women?

There's also the basic practical problems. How are you going to identify the men who have had the degree of surgery and cosmetic change to meet your boundary? How are you going to stop men on the doorway of a single sex space and check with them whether or not they're breaking this boundary? Isn't this exceptionally personal information to ask anyone and expect them to answer? What about someone like Karen White who is entering the women's space not only in knowledge of this distressing and excluding some women, but with the intent to sexually offend - would he tell you the truth? How would you know?

The GRA was in fact exactly this attempt: to limit (without asking women or considering the effect or their right to any feelings or say in this) the invasion of their spaces to a very small number of men who had or were in the process of a full surgical removal of their penis. That isn't explicitly said but implied. It didn't go well because in reality it was practically impossible to set boundaries on and had to be that if one man could enter then any man could. And the total lack of respect for women, male entitlement and many other poor behaviours made it clear it was never going to work with any kind of equality.

Those men who don't want to use men's spaces will be fine in gender neutral ones. It is ok to consider women's needs and feelings equally to those of men without this being a misdemeanour.

if a true TW

This rhetoric truly annoys me, what is a true transwoman? A transwoman is still a biological male whatever modifications they have made to their body.

What is this idea there are different levels of being a transwoman? Do medals get handed out after each stage has been completed like in a competition?

You seem to be advocating for the insistence of brutal surgery to achieve the top prize of womanhood. How will you police this? How will people prove it?

Womanhood is a not a fucking prize to be granted to some men.

What’s a ‘trueTW’?

The relatively small number of people with neo-vaginas and neo-penises may well have given themselves a "where do I pee" problem, alongside other vastly more important ones, but there are of their own making, or perhaps those who encouraged them into the situation in the first place. Surely another issue that it's not women's problem to solve?

I'll add too if you're concerned about the possibility of gender neutral spaces not being currently available in all places since that concern often arises for men:

Women who cannot use mixed sex spaces were openly and freely expected to either risk it as best they could, find another space or go without, and this was considered perfectly all right and an appropriate way to treat them. And they did not have the law or large amounts of public establishment support behind them very worried about their feelings and needs and pushing for those needs to be met with additional facilities provided where needed.

This is what men who are not comfortable in men's facilities will need to do for a while, and they do have that support and that promise of facilities coming. Anyone unhappy to inflict this burden on some men for a while but was all right with inflicting it on some women indefinitely needs to give some thought to why this difference in their binary sexed based view of why one sex is of greater importance than the other.

@Confusedpleaseeducateme I used to think something similar, that there were a very small minority of "true trans" who were so dedicated to this they were willing to get radical surgery to destroy their own reproductive systems and it was because there was something neurobiological about this. "Female brain in a male body" etc.

Then I heard about detransitioners. Some of whom were so completely convinced about it they'd gone all the way with the surgeries and drugs and so on. But then changed their minds.

This fundamentally changed my view on what "trans" means.

Neatly put! 👏

A man doesn't need a penis to rape a woman.

Due to transwomen having the same levels of criminal behaviours as males, I would feel very uncomfortable sharing a single sex space with a transwomen. That’s not to say all transwomen are a danger (far from it), just as all men aren’t a danger. I fully respect that others will have different feelings about the issue of single sex loos.