Single sex spaces

[piloswi]

I’m confused with single sex spaces and trans people and what people want.

My understanding is everyone must use the single sex space of their biological sex (I might be wrong). This is only spoken about in terms of trans women now having to use men’s toilets, etc. But this means trans men must use women’s toilets. So someone who looks like a man but biologically isn’t but mostly (imo) you can’t really tell with trans men whereas you often can with trans women.

Is this what the majority want? Surely if people are worried about ‘predatory men’ pretending to be a trans woman to use single sex spaces then they could equally claim to be a trans man as you can’t really ask them to prove it can you?

I guess I’m just wondering if I’m missing the point the point? Are the majority happy with this? I’ve seen posts of people being very happy with the ruling but only have spoken about trans women.

I don’t want this to be a trans bashing thread. Just would like to know what people would like to see as their ideal for single sex spaces while still respecting people

In MRKH: The vast majority do have mucosa and therefore natural lubrication once the canal is lengthened.

Lubrication absence in MRKH or similar blind vaginas is uncommon — estimated at well under 10% of cases in medical literature.

That means we’re talking about fewer than 1 in 50,000 biological women overall having a congenital blind vagina and no natural lubrication.

A neovagina made from skin will never produce natural lubrication — this is the default, not the exception.
A blind vagina in a biological woman will almost always lubricate naturally unless the tissue lining is atypical.

The argument seems to be that we can't understand humans as bi-pedal because some people don't have legs.

This is the level of the argument.

You are the only person calling women's vaginas 'fuckholes'.

You appear to be the only poster here who seems to be trying to insinuate that a woman's vagina is being called a fuckhole by posters on here.

I've just skimmed back through the posts and there is mention of when a man has had his penis inverted (or part of his colon refashioned) that what, essentially, he ends up with is something that really doesn't have any actual use than to be a hole that another person inserts a penis , or other item, into.

Can you

a) point us to the post/ posts, other than your own, where a poster says a woman's vagina is essentially a fuckhole

b) tell us exactly what other use a man's inverted penis / re fashioned colon has other than being an open wound that has to have an object inserted in it at a regular interval to stop it closing up.

Personally I couldn’t give a shit if a transwoman used the women’s bathroom. I think the men who are a threat to women are more often the red-blooded cis men who don’t need to sneak into a women’s bathroom in order to harass women.

A lot of trans men are very, very male looking, very hairy, ripped up, and I’d definitely feel weirder about seeing one of them in the women’s bathroom than a somewhat androgynous looking trans woman. I think most people would, if it actually came down to it.

...and yet that is not what opinion polls say. Overwhelmingly, the British public want people to use the facilities allocated to their sex.

So I don't have to read the whole thread are they doing "what about transmen?" or "what about biological women who don't have uteri (or other bits)?". I'm a big fan of the last one as it reveals they do, in fact, know exactly what a woman is.

You aren't even pretending anymore.

You aren't a feminist if you don't accept that men who decide to get a cavity are the same as women albeit women with disorders because you are being mean to these biological women.

No.

The attempt at smearing doesn't stick.

We see you.

We did from the word go.

Both!

Transmen who are 'very, very male looking' will be in the men's. HTH

I'm going to need a bigger bingo card

I know, but I reckon if a woman walked into the bathroom and actually saw a massive, burly trans man in there she’d feel a bit taken aback. On the other hand, she might not even register if a trans woman was in there.

I feel like the reality of the situation isn’t what people are imagining.

A flayed and inverted penis could be described as ‘fuckhole’ if you insist but it’s deffo not a vagina.

You can’t turn a penis into a vagina in the same way you can’t make a liver into a lung.

Well, then, I suppose trans women who are very female looking will be in the women’s. But they shouldn’t be, according to a lot of people.

lol.

’massive burly’ is not an accurate descriptor for any of the transmen I have ever met or read about or seen on tv.

Or, as I said to a friend earlier today, if I stick a mane on my cat it doesn't make it a lion.

And yet, the SC judgement thought of that very thing and discussed options to address "a woman walked into the bathroom and actually saw a massive, burly trans man".

Strangely, the trans men that come and post on MN tell us that they understand that they might cause other women and girls distress if they have taken testosterone, so the ones who post generally tell us they seek alternative solutions.

"I feel like the reality of the situation isn’t what people are imagining."

Maybe you should hang around and read for yourself when female people who have taken testosterone post as many of us have read. I think that we actually do have an understanding of reality of the situation.

Well, in photos they might. But the perceptions change quite often in real life.

And those hips do not lie. (meaning that female movement doesn't lie)

I don't tend to use public baths, but if you mean toilets, if anyone can use any toilet, that includes 'red-blooded cis men'. If you think toilets should be mixed then you are free to make that argument, but you seem to be erroneously assuming that 'red-blooded cis men' could be kept out of a toilet that they wanted to use as though there is a clear way to distinguish between trans women and 'cis' men.

Wait! What? Transwomen will go into single sex spaces even though they know it can make lots of women uncomfortable*? They sound terrible.

*in reality most people know that truly passing transwomen may continue to use the ladies, and no one would know. There are however only about 5 of them.

Why would a person that 'looks' like a female but is male be entitled to use the female single sex provisions?

Just because they have extreme body modifications?

There are other types of extreme body modifications. For instance, if someone undergoes extensive body modifications to resemble their favourite animal, should that person be considered as that animal?

If someone 'looks' like a young teenager but is in their twenties and not enrolled in school, should they be treated like the age they feel and may even 'look'?

Why does this group of male people get these additional privileges, access to female single sex spaces, when other male people don't?

Well, we have spent quite a bit of time looking at trans-identified males and females irl and online and the vast majority of them do look like their actual sex, especially when you see them move and hear them talk. I think you are imagining that lots of them 'pass' because you are looking at filtered photos online, carefully posed so that you cannot judge the scale of their hands, the shape of their hips and so on.

I see people with DSDs have been co-opted into the debate again...

And if I stick a mane on a lioness it doesn't make it a lion.