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?

What a ridiculous thread.

the data shows trans women experience higher rates of violence & in men's prisons/bathrooms etc.

Male-on-male violence is a problem for men to sort out amongst themselves. And not to be used as an excuse for single-sex provisions to be removed from women.

Yes. I do get the impression that the main objection to the SC judgement is that somebody has dared to say 'no' to men.

Whether or not those men were even that interested in accessing the forbidden fruit, now that it's been made clear it wasn't their fruit, and they can't have it, they're actually having die-ins in the street and undressing in public and exposing themselves to prove how they ought to be entitled to use women's spaces.

Trans women might experience higher rates of harm in men's spaces, but I don't suppose there's much evidence either way since they haven't been using those spaces, they've been using women's spaces instead.

Does your link take into account the fact that trans identifying men have actually been convicted of sexually assaulting female victims in women's spaces in the UK? Because if it does, the data should show an increase. If there is no increase, it's because relevant data has been ignored.

“It's about harm. And the data shows trans women experience higher rates of violence & in men's prisons/bathrooms etc.”

Then they should do what women have had to do for centuries and modify the way they dress and present themselves. Any ‘transwoman’ could put on a hoodie and jeans and identify themselves out of harms way. Problem solved, you’re welcome.

It is, but it's led me to think about just how absurd it is that mentally unstable men thought the best way to protest being excluded from women's spaces was to regularly and repeatedly strip off and show off their artificial breasts in public.

Bless 'em. We really couldn't have come up with a more effective demonstration had we thought long and hard.

"What part of "trans identifying men have actually been convicted of sexually assaulting female victims in women's toilets in the UK" doesn't meet the threshold of evidenced harm, in your opinion?"

And there are already laws in place to prevent that. You seem to be under the delusion that it's female identification that enabled the crime when in fact it was the isolated environment that did.

Don't forget the socially unacceptable piss protests as well. So very revealing in every way.

Safeguarding isnt proscuting perpetrators after the crime, its making steps to avoid the crime taking place.

The instances of men committing indecent exposure against women in public toilets will be minimised if men arent allowed access to womens public toilets.

It’s just some crappy study in Massachusetts years ago that misogynists trot out. The terms aren’t defined well, and absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence. It’s been discussed on FWR hundreds of times.

Also, I’m not sure why privacy and dignity is being handwaved away. Or the sexual harassment element.

😂

Piss protests! Die-ins! Moob exposure!

God help us all.

You are conflating two seperate issues. The unavoidable risk of sexual harassment of women in their day to day sharing of communal spaces, like work, and the entirely avoidable risk of barring men from spaces they have no need to be, such as women's toilets. Risk management needs to be proportional, weighing up the disadvantage of the mitigation against the benefit of removing the risk. Segregation of women and men in all aspects of life would disadvantage women too greatly to justify, as we see in societies where this is customary. Allowing women to segregate themselves from their own choice by barring men from certain spaces brings a benefit to women that outweighs any 'disadvantage' caused to the men upset by it.

"And the data shows trans women experience higher rates of violence & in men's prisons/bathrooms etc."

The answer to this was never to allow those male people into female single sex spaces, not for protection or any reason.

The answer to this is to firstly provide segregated areas for vulnerable male prisoners within the male prison system. The answer to the dealing with male violence in male single sex spaces is to deal with the issue within those single sex spaces.

There are many other vulnerable male groups in the population who may experience higher rates of violence in male single sex spaces. And a nationwide campaign is therefore required to make male single sex spaces safe for ALL male people.

You simply repeating 'And the data shows trans women experience higher rates of violence & in men's prisons/bathrooms etc.' is not supporting your arguments at all. And making this an issue for female people to then have to deal with is misogynistic.

Yes, female people need privacy and dignity. And allowing any male person over the age of about 8 years old to enter a female single sex space turns that single sex space into a mixed sex space. There is no way that you can dismiss this, because male people remain male people all through their life.

Still not clear why you are referring to ‘bathrooms’.

Men as a group are more likely to be victims of violence. Should they all be allowed to use women’s services on that basis?

It’s really not clear what argument you are trying to make.

Pissing on the front of the EHRC?

Don't give them any ideas, Eresh!

This OP must be in bad faith? Obviously there are laws. But what we try to do in society in addition to simply having the laws is make those laws workable as best we can. So we don't only, for example, tell people that they shouldn't abuse children, we also put in place a dbs system. Of course it doesn't work for every criminal. But it's one way of minimising risk. Or in contract law, the clauses in the contract are not always abided by, and the party that breaks that clause may 'get away with it' because for example the other party cant afford to sue, but it doesn't mean that contract law is pointless and that contractual terms don't matter. It's minimising the risk of a total free for all in business transactions.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/pissed-off-trannies-ehrc-protest/

'We just want to pee'

And pour pee over ourselves in see through dresses so as to show off our penises.

So female. Much woman.

Yes exactly @PennyAnnLane, and that is what is SO offensive and frankly idiotic about this post by the OP which I am quoting now for ease of reference.

Feminism isn't "predicated on self determination not limited biology". Women are oppressed and mistreated because of their biology, not because of how they identify.

Does @Howseitgoin seriously imagine that if women in Afghanistan or little girls at risk of FGM in Somalia could escape their fate simply by identifying as male, they wouldn't all jump at the chance?

If feminism is "predicated on self determination not limited by biology", why is abortion a feminist issue? It only affects people with uteruses, not women, so logically it should have nothing to do with feminism.

🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡

"Male-on-male violence is a problem for men to sort out amongst themselves. And not to be used as an excuse for single-sex provisions to be removed from women."

There's this thing called 'the social contract' where social responsibility applies to us all if we want the benefits of it.

Now if you have a problem with that you are welcome to set up shop again outside of civilisation in 'the state of nature' where you don't have to rely on men to do the dirty jobs anymore.

OP is, if you don't mind me saying so, a bog standard MRA. Here because he enjoys berating women.

It's dull, and I'm sure the thread will vanish soon. Nice Leviathan engraving, though, cheers.

Men staying out of women's spaces is also part of the social contract, @Howseitgoin. Or did you conveniently forget that part?

At the root of all this is the power of men's demands to be present / observe when women are undressing / otherwise vulnerable. For society to have allowed any of them to breach the social contract like this is unforgivable.

Thank heavens for the SC judgment. Although as is daily evidenced on here - the demands of men to continue to have access to women's single sex spaces is out of control - twisting and turning in every way to try to coerce women into submission.
Fortunately women are getting very comfortable in saying no to these predatory demands.

There's also the fact that female and male toilets are designed differently to accommodate our different needs.

Consider why we don't have urinals in the female facilities, for example. Or why the cubicles in male toilets won't have sanitary bins for female hygiene products.

Men are scared women will laugh at them.

Women are scared men will kill them.