JKR asking similar questions to what I have been asking for years on here.

[DialSquare]

Copied from Nitter

J.K. Rowling@jk_rowling29m
As another man who once worked with me declares himself saddened by my beliefs on gender and sex, I thought it might be useful to compile a list for handy reference. Which of the following do you imagine makes actors and directors who aren’t involved with the HBO reboot of Harry Potter so miserable?

Is it my belief that women and girls should have their own public changing rooms and bathrooms?

That women should retain female-only rape crisis centres?

That men don’t belong in women’s sport?

That female prisoners shouldn’t be incarcerated with violent men and male sex offenders?

That women should remain a protected class in law, because they have sex-specific needs and issues?

That language should reflect reality rather than ideological jargon, especially in a medical context?

That women shouldn’t be harassed, persecuted or fired for refusing to pretend humans can change sex?

That women should not be threatened with violence and rape when they assert their rights?

That freedom of speech and belief are essential to a pluralistic democratic society?

That troubled minors, especially those who are gay, autistic and trauma-experienced, should be given mental health support instead of irreversible surgeries and drug treatments on non-existent evidence of benefit?

That gay people shouldn’t be pressured to include the opposite sex in their dating pools, nor should they be smeared as ‘genital fetishists’ when they don’t?

That cross-dressing heterosexual male fetishists aren’t actually oppressed, but having the time of their lives piggybacking off gender identity ideology?

That said ideology, and the privileged, blinkered fools pushing it because they suffer zero consequences themselves, have done more damage to the political left’s credibility than Trump and Farage could have achieved in a century?

Let me have your thoughts.

This sums up the views of the majority of posters on this board, however, we often have other posters tell us they don’t agree with us, but never what views they don’t actually agree with.

So, those of you that don’t agree with the majority view on here, what is it about the above that you don’t agree with?

Everyone is more likely to experience violence from men than from women. That's because men (including trans identifying men) are more violent than women.

The group most likely to be murdered by men, is men. Then women.

Trans people are less likely to be murdered than any other demographic.

"This is from the US (where they don't give a shit about women's rights) and not in any way relevant to what happens in the UK.
In the UK we have had Karen White sexually assaulting female prisoners in a women's prison, Katie Dolatowski sexually assaulting pre-teen girls in women's toilets, and trans activists threatening to rape and murder gender critical feminists thousands of times per day.
So yes, there is a very obvious risk.
I would say that letting men who don't claim to identify as women use women's toilets would actually be less risky than letting trans identifying men use them."

Isolated instances don't qualify as significant statistical data.

Oooh so then your proof of males with a trans identity being attacked in male spaces can also be ignored. So therefore there is no reason to let males into female spaces. I knew we’d get there in the end. Don’t forget your antibacterial wipes before you change hands. 😙

Um, the data I linked from THE UK GOVERNMENT proving trans people experience violence is not statistically insignificant.

That’s a man problem then. Nothing to do with women. Don’t forget to antibac your keyboard. #goodhygiene .

You are trying to use flawed data to argue for men to be allowed into womens single sex spaces.

The data you are relying on is warning labled at the bottom of the page

OK, but would you agree that a couple of isolated incidents are more statistically significant than no incidents at all?

The UK government data is fatally flawed because equivalent crimes against women are not considered hate crimes.

As I said above, if all protected characteristics were given equal treatment in the hate crime legislation, you'd probably find more hate crimes being committed by trans people against women than against trans people, even taking into account the fact that trans people are a tiny minority. Because most of their online activity would be considered hate crimes.

Yes they DO.
Male-on-male violence does not justify males being placed in female toilets.
There has never been 1 (one) recorded incidence of a transwoman attacked in a male facility.
There are around 50 accounts of transwomen attacking females in female facilities.

Risk of harm either way does of which research shows statistically insignificant for women from trans women & statistically significant from men.

Indeed.

Very much the case.

Still male on male violence. Go take it up with men. #notwomensproblem. Don’t forget to drink some water. Those fluids need replacing. 😙

TRANS WOMEN ARE MEN.

The fact that this group of men may be at risk of violence from other men in men's spaces (which is not backed up by any data at all, statistically significant or otherwise) is not a good reason to put women at risk from this group of men.

As a reminder, the men you want to have full and free access to women's toilets, changing rooms and rape crisis groups are the same men who keep threatening to rape and murder us for not believing they are real women.

The evidence of the risk of harm from this group is the fact that they keep threatening to harm us.

The facts show transwomen sexually offend 5 times higher than males. The risk of harm to females from transwomen is statistically significant.
The risk to transwomen from males is not just statistically insignificant, it is non-existent.

"OK, but would you agree that a couple of isolated incidents are more statistically significant than no incidents at all?
The UK government data is fatally flawed because equivalent crimes against women are not considered hate crimes.
As I said above, if all protected characteristics were given equal treatment in the hate crime legislation, you'd probably find more hate crimes being committed by trans people against women than against trans people, even taking into account the fact that trans people are a tiny minority. Because most of their online activity would be considered hate crimes."

Violence is specified in that data.

The 'only a few is enough' ould include women on women sexual assaults so what then? Individual loos for all? There's such a thing as 'logistics' where we just can't cater for everyone.

The facts show transwomen sexually offend 5 times higher than males. The risk of harm to females from transwomen is statistically significant.
The risk to transwomen from males is not just statistically insignificant, it is non-existent.

No they don't. You are making shit up. Put up evidence or shut up.

Yeah. That’s why males don’t get to cone into female facilities. They can go tell men to #bekind. Don’t forget to eat a biscuit or something. You need to keep your energy up.

TRANS WOMEN ARE MEN.
The fact that this group of men may be at risk of violence from other men in men's spaces (which is not backed up by any data at all, statistically significant or otherwise) is not a good reason to put women at risk from this group of men.
As a reminder, the men you want to have full and free access to women's toilets, changing rooms and rape crisis groups are the same men who keep threatening to rape and murder us for not believing they are real women.
The evidence of the risk of harm from this group is the fact that they keep threatening to harm us.

Just saying so won't make it so…

I have NUMEROUS times.

it’s basic biology. Did you skip that lesson at school?

Exactly. And you saying transwomen are women won’t make it so either. You are not Jean Luc. Done forget to take a 20 second rest from the screen every 20 minutes. You don’t want eye strain and wrist strain do you?

We have the MoJ prison stats showing that sex offenders make up around 20% of male prisoners and over 50% of trans identified males in the prison estate. And TIMs occur more frequently in the prison estate than you would guess from their percentage of the population.

Now we here might concede that Prison Onset Gender Dysphoria is a thing, and some of these men might not be "trans" in any meaningful sense, but just trying to exploit loopholes. But trans ideology doesn't allow for that possibility, insisting that people are exactly what they say they are, no exceptions.

Bananas are a good snack. You lose a lot of potassium in your semen.

And even with an easy to follow visual aid!

One of the reasons why men and women have separate facilities is because men (including trans identifying men) carry out over 98% of sexual assaults and over 80% of victims are women (not including trans identifying men).

The statistics very clearly show that men present a risk to women which is why we keep men out of women's spaces. This applies to all men, even the nice ones who do not present a risk to women.

This rule is not compatible with letting some men into women's spaces on the basis that they believe they identify as women.

EVEN IF YOU COULD PROVE THAT TRANS IDENTIFYING MEN PRESENT NO RISK TO WOMEN, letting them use women's spaces creates a risk for women because there is no legal or practical way of distinguishing between trans identifying men and other men, so if you let trans identifying men in you are letting all men in. There is no way to let one in and keep the other out.

However, the above is actually irrelevant because there is ample evidence that trans identifying men do actually present at least as much risk to women as other men do, and arguably a higher risk.

Over 50% of trans identifying men serving custodial sentences have been convicted of sex offences, compared to just 16% of men overall. They are literally the last group of people who should be allowed into women's single sex spaces.

You dont get it that is what the computer coding does.

Or what this means

In the process of recording a crime, the police can flag an offence as being motivated by one or more of these 5 monitored strands

The 2 NDN start to batter each other
2 assaults take place

No hate crime takes place if neither NDN said I am trans
Only 1 hate crime is recorded if 1 NDN said I am trans
2 hate crimes are recorded if both say the words I am trans
3 hate crimes happen if one said I am trans and the other said I am gay and trans

This is why it is important to understand what is being recorded and what charges are brought and what the conviction rate is.

If the CPS is not winning cases is this because the report was wrong or the police could not find the evidence or the CPS did not charge or the case was not proven.

All of that is important.

Why I am engaging:

1.I noticed the last mumsnet post @Howseitgoin was on was linked on a X thread I think speakoutsister (?) so I am trying to spread the message about how dangerous certain toilet designs are for everyone. I figure if I try and explain why to as many people as possible that’s a good thing. There is a compromise though as I don’t like really discussing some of the info I have as it’s disturbing so I am always weighing up pros/cons in my head.

2.I genuinely also want an overview of what is happening. So far, @Howseitgoin has just reinforced my long reference list to show that all people need the safer single sex toilets with door gaps in out-of-home environments. These single sex spaces need to be single sex, otherwise the design goes completely private.

If they aren’t men it’s a bit of a problem for them because they can’t claim the PC of gender reassignment.

No, biology makes it so.

Saying that they are women will not make it so.

OK, so you admit it's men that's the problem.

To protect women we keep all males out of their spaces. That's one problem solved.

Now what do we do to protect men from other men? Men should be working on this, since it's their problem. Try a male dominated forum for that, and the women here can get back to discussing issues which affect women.