Women’s privacy and dignity

[Mrspenguinsschoolforfreaks]

I’ve just been to my local leisure centre swimming pool and while I was in the changing rooms a woman walked in from the showers, fully naked. I averted my eyes, and she walked quite close past me in a way which to me (and I fully accept I may well have imagined it) felt a bit pointed. I felt vaguely uncomfortable and embarrassed in the same way I would have if a man had walked in naked.

My impression is that the vast majority of people on this forum believe that it is a fundamental breach of women’s privacy and dignity if people with male biology (whether cisgender men or trans women) share changing facilities with women. Yet they do not consider that it undermines a woman’s privacy or dignity to have to get changed in front of other women, or to see other women naked.

I understand that many women have had experiences with men’s exhibitionist or voyeuristic behaviour which makes them specifically uncomfortable being undressed around men, or being around men who are undressed. But I’ve often seen the argument on here that it equally undermines men’s privacy and dignity to have to share changing facilities with women.

So my question is, do you think privacy and dignity are not infringed by having to get changed in front of people of the same sex? If not, why not?

Are we into grammatical pendantry now?

Motte bailey.

You aren't just arguing for private spaces tho. See: vitriol & denial.

I do have another username, but you’re probably right I have only rarely posted elsewhere. I read lots of other forums on MN (when the ‘most read’ list catches my eye) but don’t often post

Safeguarding was never used anywhere as a reason for gay sex consent.

I have now arrived at my office so I will have to leave you all to spend the day arguing, enjoy

Eeerr we have.

Did you miss all the links provided showing the problem with not safeguarding and the risk it poses to women and girls on this thread which we used to try and shut down this conversation.

Or were you reading selectively?

You aren't interested in anything we have to say on the subject. Not really despite your protests of innocence.

It is a red flag to categorise legitimate discussions about the safeguarding needs of female people as being ‘weaponised’.

Do you understand the difference?

I am not sure that poster can make their point any clearer for you. They believe that the current discussions of safeguarding principles, particularly of sex segregation, is “weaponised”. Do you agree with them?

Should we also assume you don’t understand safeguarding if you are using the term ‘allegedly founded’ on safeguarding. Because the very basic safeguarding provision is to provide single sex spaces based on a person’s sex which doesn’t change when someone claims to have a gender identity.

What is ‘unfair’ about excluding all male people from female single sex provisions?

Strawman.

Dear commenter,
Use quotes to prove your claims.

I was hoping @Mrspenguinsschoolforfreaks that as you said you are a lawyer you would have better judgement about safeguarding being a priority.

I spent a long time crafting several responses to show you exactly why single sex spaces are safer, being totally honest in my reply. This is because, even though I recognised the tone was off, I was responding in good faith as you were thanking people for their thoughtful responses and I hoped you (or whoever you were collecting information/sharing this with) would digest what I was saying. I laid my cards out and showed you why single sex design is best for everyone, including trans people.

I am hoping that mumsnet don’t delete your posts with @Howseitgoin particularly in reference to safeguarding. The affirmation and the way your tone has changed again is a very good exercise in critical analysis.

More denial from you.

We are indeed just arguing for private spaces. You are attempting to gaslight and misrepresent.

Also, the lack of any empathy or a kind word from you to a survivor speaks volumes on Male Pattern Thought Process.

Actually, no. Most men have more humanity and compassion than you.

Single sex spaces. That's what we're arguing for. And to most people, men arguing vociferously for the right to go into spaces where women are naked or undressing looks like a strange thing to argue for.

But keep going, Howseitgoin. You are here to convince someone that men have the right to use women's spaces, as far as I can tell. Do expand.

“It appears to be a tactic to shut them down.”

WTAF!

So you are now making an accusation of group collusion. Rather than understanding that each person on MN has free choice and ability to express their opinion in reaction to someone else’s opinion.

You have accused posters of ‘piling on’ while they are expressing individual opinions.

Are posters supposed to form an orderly line while posting just so a reaction is not repeated causing a poster an uncomfortable moment where they might have to consider what they have posted?

I look forward to the answers to the questions about what is unfair about excluding all male people from female single sex spaces.

You read the thread and agreed with the poster who is on your thread only to argue for male to be allowed into all womens single sex spaces.

You’ve [ < the poster who claims rape of children can be ignored if it gets men into WSSS] summed it up perfectly. It’s sad, because on other areas of MN people are able to have interesting, genuine discussions on all sorts of topics, [your topic was is your privacy and dignity infringed in single sex space or a mixed sex space while the posters only topic is why men should be allowed into WSSS ] without the same group of users [that would be posters who do not share the view that males should be allowed into WSSS] coming in every time [to reply on the topic if a womans right to WSSS should be a womans right (or not) ] to bully and hector and repeat the same catch phrases over and over [ a group (not the poster who wants males in WSSS) are wrong to point out that women and girls should have WSSS. That VAWaG is real. That men should be told to solve male on male violence]

It certainly has clarified some reservations I had around this thread.

It's unfair because it makes those men sad, I assume. Because it stops them from having access to naked women.

But strictly that would only be unfair if women had access to naked men

only women don’t tend to want that

I’d missed the post where OP says she’s a lawyer. think I’ve come across the OP before here. She said she’s bored with our points, after all.

Why did you start this odd thread if you don’t want to hear from people?

Its evidence based.

Safeguarding children is protecting them from themselves as well as "bad actors".

Arguing against safeguarding appears again and again when we see "TRA" being charged with CSA or sex crimes against adults.

The theme that L or G or B children should not be protected in same way is a feature not an accident.

The argument is to allow the victim to be less protected because ... [ stupid reason ] ... was bolted into the activism and exploited to shut down women (and it was mainly women) who pointed out the safeguarding fails

Anyway, the answer, whether you’re ok with “trans women” or any other men in female spaces or not, is still no. Hope that’s clear. But happy to keep clarifying it until it sinks in.

You posted about your personal discomfort about seeing female people naked in a communal changing room on a board that was created against the wishes of most of the posters on the original board at the time’s wishes.

I have read your arguments as being somehow relevant to whether female single sex spaces should exist at all. Because we have seen you mention how other countries have mixed sex nudity as if it is relevant (hint: that mixed sex nudity is also consensual).

If you are in a legal profession, you should understand consent and what is considered consent in using a single sex communal space.

People pointing out that your post didn’t seem to show understanding in the areas you were trying to make points. If you have been bullied, please report the posts. If you have been robustly disagreed with, this is not bullying.

I am surprised though at your mention of bullying and repeating the same phrase over and over and not quite understanding that the poster you have been defending has used the tactics you are accusing others of. Maybe take a step back and reread this thread and other recent threads and maybe you will see what you seem to have missed. Or maybe you haven’t missed it but believe that a poster is righteous and justified in their posting pattern.

It's a changing room. The key word is change. You take one set of clothes off and put another on, maybe with a shower in the middle. Everyone in that changing room should have the same body parts. So while parading about naked, drying your hair without putting your bra and pants on, using your towel for your hair rather than your body wouldn't be my choice, I don't find it offensive. I just get the job done!
And no, I would not want a male in there (unless under the age of 7), however HE chooses to identify HIMself.

You should have written:

age of consent for sex between boys or a boy and a man should have remained higher than that for straight sex?

To answer your unasked question children should not be given criminal records for sexual activity once there was actual consent. Where possible they should be protected from engaging sexual activity as it can have real life consequences.

And an other unasked question adults who facilitate children being abused or engaging in sexual activity by removing safeguarding should be investigated for criminal activity.