Women's 'Private Spaces'

[Howseitgoin]

Clearly private spaces for women are considered a necessity by many due to a propensity for male sexual violence. Given this threat is much greater by orders of magnitude in the work place as opposed to public bathrooms, isn't it inconsistent not to demand private spaces there as well?
Thoughts?

R.e. this is irrelevant to your point. Supreme Court didn't rule on TRAW, that's not its role.

It ruled that as used in the Equality Act 'sex' means biological sex, so a woman is a biological woman /assigned woman at birth and equivalent for men.

That makes biological women a distinct legal group with distinct needs. Including transmen who are protected for pregnancy discrimination regardless of gender identity.

"Nope, it’s a fact, scientifically and legally. Sorry."

It's also 'scientifically legal' that males & females share 'biologically' influenced 'sexed' personality traits. IE they overlap in terms of 'sexed' behaviour. There are on average differences like a propensity for violence, neuroticisms, agreeability, femininity & masculinity but on an individual basis? An individual can have more in common behaviourally with one group more than the other hence sex categorisation can be based not only on reproductive traits but average behavioural traits.

Its why he dictionary definition of distinguishing characteristics in 'sex' includes behaviour. see 1B

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sex

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3149680/

Of course it has nothing to do with the single sex spaces women need for privacy, dignity and safety. It's just a feeble attempt at a gotcha with a heavy side dose of misogyny. The OP let the mask slip up thread with a snide remark about men doing the heavy work. Draw your own conclusions.

"The OP let the mask slip up thread with a snide remark about men doing the heavy work. Draw your own conclusions."

So you dispute usually 'men do heavy work'?

Uh oh, looks like the 'sex is real' people have a 'reality' problem…

No, I'm not disputing that men tend to do work requiring greater physical strength. They tend to have greater physical strength. But given that it's not very relevant to the matter in hand, the fact that you dragged it in just further illuminates a certain tendency in your arguments.

"No, I'm not disputing that men tend to do work requiring greater physical strength. They tend to have greater physical strength. But given that it's not very relevant to the matter in hand, the fact that you dragged it in just further illuminates a certain tendency in your arguments."

Context fail.
The discussion at that point 'deviated' to a poster claiming that trans women experiencing violence at the hands of men was not 'women's problem'. So it was in fact the poster that changed the discussion I merely pointed out the consequences of this flawed argument.

Perhaps listen before mouth open in future?

I was just flicking through your posts. You hold that (a) there is no evidence that transwomen using women's toilets risks biological women and (b) in the absence of risk they should be allowed to use them. Is that correct?

Do you also hold there's no reason to exclude transwomen from changing facilities, showers and so on?

"Do you also hold there's no reason to exclude transwomen from changing facilities, showers and so on?"

Yes but I would add that those facilities should be also locked cubicles. Lots of people are uncomfortable with nudity regardless of sex.

The fact that men and women are to some extent interdependent (not least because you need one of each sex to make more of them) hardly means that women are responsible for sorting out brawls in the men's toilets. So it was a bit of a non-sequitur and rather a revealing one.

"The fact that men and women are to some extent interdependent (not least because you need one of each sex to make more of them) hardly means that women are responsible for sorting out brawls in the men's toilets. So it was a bit of a non-sequitur and rather a revealing one."

You could say that about any group. 'If pedo men want to abuse boys that's not a woman problem'

See where this idiocy goes? Yeah & quite revealing indeed.

If you can't see the difference between the need to protect a child from a grown man; and hostility between two grown men, one of whom claims he's a woman, then I'm afraid I can't help you.

So if men are causing problems for men, in men's spaces ...

Why would that be women's problem to sort out? 🙄

"Should be locked cubicles" - at least where I am we simply don't have the space to add large individual changing facilities to facilitate all users i.e. gyms and hospitals, plus you would need more showers for people to dress in them.

So you would argue it's okay for an obviously intact transwomen to sit in their boxers and watch biological nurses get changed? For an intact transwomen to enter a women's changing room where there are naked teenage girls post swim?

So long as there's no evidence they pose any risk?

"and hostility between two grown men"

'Hostility' as in violent assault occasioning in death?

There's a reason why gender criticals are stereotyped as irrational zealots…

"So if men are causing problems for men, in men's spaces ...
Why would that be women's problem to sort out?"

The social irresponsibilty in this one is strong…

"watch"

It's not okay to 'watch' regardless of sex. As far as 'in tact' goes. having a penis doesn't guarantee someone will use it. See: THE WORK PLACE.

I would say, okay so some transwomen wanted to be in women's spaces away from men who might mean them harm...

But that's one of the same reasons.we don't want them in our spaces - they are men (or if in TRA lingo AMAB) who might mean us harm!

As a woman my risk from a male is far far greater than that of any woman. And voyeurism and indecent exposure are the most common sexual offences.

Of course privacy and decency are also relevant considerations. Many of us post puberty don't want to change in front of the opposite sex.

Why? I don't see one single reason for them to be included. What's the logic for their inclusion?

"But that's one of the same reasons.we don't want them in our spaces - they are men (or if in TRA lingo AMAB) who might mean us harm!"

This is where risk assessment comes in. For the risk to be assessed as unacceptable evidence from harm from Trans women not men needs to exist. There's no evidence trans women offend at the same rates as men nor have changes that have legalised trans women in women's toilets (i linked study upthread) brought about increased crime & that makes sense if you understand the necessary conditions of sexual violence & that's not a permission structure by an isolated environment that enables it.

Very well, we solve the problem by allowing vulnerable men who may be attacked to use the ladies toilets...
Teenage boys? Oddly enough, despite the fact that they could indeed be at risk from paedophiles, nobody seems to be pressuring women to accommodate them.
Old men? Disabled men? Men with learning difficulties? All of whom could present an easy target. Nobody's asking us to take them in. It seems they have to take their chance.
Gay men, who also definitely face hostility. Nope, not them either.
Men who say they are women? Oh yes. It would be so unkind not to.
The strange thing about the WeMustBeKinders is how very very selective their "kindness" is. Almost as if it's not really about who is unsafe in the men's toilets, after all.

Here are two of the cases we have been supporting in workplaces:

In one, Dr. Upton a transwomen complained that a nurse waited politely outside the communal changing room before entering and changing herself.

The other, Rose, is a transgender woman sat in the communal changing room i.e. asking a nurse when she was getting changed herself, causing her to have panic attacks.

In both cases, which I would consider wanting to watch someone change. the NHS supported the transgenders' alleged right to use these facilities - based entirely on self ID as women.

Unfortunately I have absolutely no way of telling if someone is watching me or even filming me change. It's normal practice to.face the other way in my changing rooms as much as possible.

The vast majority of crimes of voyeurism and related fetishes are men against women. There's no evidence being gender transition changes male factor risk factors.

That's not to mention privacy and dignity, most do not want to be changing with.someone perceivably the opposite sex. Regardless of how they identify.

"Why? I don't see one single reason for them to be included. What's the logic for their inclusion?"

That's because you don't see their commonalities with women as a valid association with womanhood. But that is a subjective opinion that you are entitled to but your personal opinion doesn't make it a fact.

Teenage boys?

Trans people are four times as likely to be assaulted in public bathrooms. So the rate of violence towards them is significantly higher & that only makes sense when they are stereotyped as freaks, predators & sex pests.

What commonalities do they have with women that they do not also have with men?

"There's no evidence being gender transition changes male factor risk factors."

You would need to show evidence they are the same which research shows they aren't.