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?

Indeed this is true.

I think you are being very kind.

Including whilst they're using their penis to rape someone, inviting TERFs to suck their girl dicks, punching elderly ladies in the head at women's rights demonstrations or staging a dirty protest on the steps of the Equality and Human Rights Commission?

I think not, mate.

Oh come on Miss, those pink legging@s Isla Bryson wore to court, clear signs of "feminine shopping"

“No. Trans women just like CIS women are capable of committing rape. Their individual criminality has no bearing on whether they qualify as women.”

I think you need to clarify further. I will make it simple for you.

Is Dolatowski a woman or not?

Not kind necessairly but if I can empathise with him, then I can help him see that he is creating his own private hell.

There is nothing he can say that will actually offend any of us, because he can't form an argument that actually challenges the experience of women. I am practicing not getting drawn into pointless circular screaming matches, and committed moving things along.

Transvestites I think will be a lot harder to move along, because they have a vested interest in being in womens spaces, where as I don't think people with ASD actually do even the misogyinistic ones, they just can't handle when their reality breaks down. This whole trans-rights thing will end in the next 3-4 years I predict because Gen Alpha do not care, and that is going to be tough for ASD TG people.

You see, your absolutism arguments are continuing to fail you. Just as they always have failed you.
Because comfort is not the only aspect to be considered in sex segregation. It is safety and privacy and dignity away from the opposite sex.
If you need it simplified even further how about this:
privacy from opposite sex - reasonable expectation in single sex spaces
privacy from people of your own sex - not reasonable expectation in single sex spaces

And your subjective arguments are continuing to fail you…

Shall we just continue to go around and around. Your posts keep the thread in trending and that brings new readers in. Thanks for that.

Um, I'm not the one with something to lose here. I'm in a hostile environment for a reason. Preaching to the choir isn't going to bring in any new singers & you know that that's why your insecurity defence alarm is blaring…😂

"Is Dolatowski a woman or not?"

If this person genuinely identifies as a woman yes.

Did you read the article you posted?

So why have you referred to Dolatowski as ‘he’?

"Woman" is not an identity. It is biological reality, a genetic reality and lived experience based on the differences of the biological reality and the genetic reality of men.

Actually, I am here because you make me laugh.

Look at this cracker!

“And your subjective arguments are continuing to fail you…”

The hypocrisy though is off the scale.

And this gem…

“I'm in a hostile environment for a reason. Preaching to the choir isn't going to bring in any new singers”

Mate…. I love it. You are here to do good work. Thank you! You are here to shine the light on the flaws and falsity of the arguments which support male people accessing female single sex provisions!

Outstanding!

"'ve now seen your list up thread about alleged behavioural resemblances between transwomen and women, but I'm not quite sure what it's supposed to prove in terms of bodily privacy, dignity and safety. I'm no safer just because somebody likes shopping. A very visible minority of the men who claim to be women have made it plain that they are not "agreeable" in any sense of the word and have male physical capabilities if they decide to be unpleasant. Why should women expose themselves to the risk?"

Your'e confusing two different issues here.

No one claimed trans women like shopping ergo they belong in women's bathrooms. It's been stated repeatedly that trans women require the use of women’s bathrooms for safety. As a separate question a poster obsessively demanded to to know what commonalities CIS women & trans women had so I answered that question.

As I said, you are very kind.

Whereas you are thinking this poster is genuine, I grew up with this type of interaction everyday in Australia. In saying that, I understand your hesitancy.

Did you read the article you posted?

Yep & here's the relevant quote:

"Holroyde said the statistics were too low and had insufficient detail to provide a safe basis for conclusions, adding: “I can accept, at any rate for present purposes, that the unconditional introduction of a transgender woman into the general population of a women’s prison carries a statistically greater risk of sexual assault upon non-transgender prisoners than would be the case if a non-transgender woman were introduced. But that statistical conclusion takes no account of the risk assessment which the policies require.”

He's basically saying that the data isn't enough to make any conclusions but if a trans woman isnt individually risk assessed then there's the possibility of increased harm. So yeah you up sh*t creek on that one.

So why have you referred to Dolatowski as ‘he’?

Did I? My bad if a trans woman. I don't know the details of that case. Sorry.

He also said

“I can accept, at any rate for present purposes, that the unconditional introduction of a transgender woman into the general population of a women’s prison carries a statistically greater risk of sexual assault upon non-transgender prisoners than would be the case if a non-transgender woman were introduced. But that statistical conclusion takes no account of the risk assessment which the policies require.”

Hence requiring a risk assessment.

So a woman is just anyone who says they are one then?

A nearly eight hour stretch of relentless mansplaining. Astounding achievement.

So, let me get this straight.

You must have said, about 20 times in this thread, that allowing trans identifying men to use women's toilets does not represent a risk to women and girls.

And I have mentioned Katie Dolatowski's name each and every time as an example of a trans identifying man being convicted of sexually assaulting a female child in a women's public toilet.

And you are still claiming you don't know who Katie Dolatowski is or the details of the case?

I mean, you didn't even have to Google it. I have told you the details of the case repeatedly on this thread.

I don't give a fuck what trans identifying men think they require.

Women and girls require the use of toilets, without ANY males but PARTICULARLY trans identifying males (who are the demographic most likely to commit sex crimes against them) in them.

No. I personally would expect that person to have some behavioural associations to women as a group & be socially out/living their life as a woman. Just saying so isn't enough in my view just as in saying 'I am a penguin' but have nothing in common with penguins.

Speaking of statistical significance.

You seem to have missed my post on about the stats you are relying on from the William's Institute. Can I recommend that you go back and read that post. It puts your posts about statistical significance into a whole other perspective.

Talk about being up shit creek.

How the fuck is anyone supposed to know whether he genuinely believes he identifies as a woman or not?

The fact that he molests children would suggest that he doesn't.

How do we live as women? Tell us "staunch feminist"!

So, you don't know the details of the case, yet you have confidently posted about that case.

oops... shit creek indeed....