Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 25/09/2025 15:40

I'm struggling to imagine encountering a more intimidating person in a women's toilet or changing room.

Helleofabore · 25/09/2025 15:44

mamagogo1 · 25/09/2025 15:39

Has no idea just hyperbole, though some of the comments here are equally wrong. Whilst they do have gendered facilities in some parts of the military, actually many roles do not, my dd shares a mess (sleeping area) with men sometimes when she deploys, because she shares with others doing her role for practicality, and she doesn’t mind at all. Toilets and showers are unisex too. (Be glad you actually have them now!) the guys are all really respectful apparently

as for mess dress, women are already allowed to wear trousers if they want anyway, my dd chooses a skirt

So, they do still have some single sex provisions in the military then. Thank you for confirming.

Do you know then when there is a need for single sex provisions, are male people in the UK military accessing these single sex provisions? Or, are those male people need special arrangements?

The point is, why if there is no male people accessing female single sex provisions of any kind, why is this Colonel saying that trans people will no longer be serving in the UK military services?

Merrymouse · 25/09/2025 15:51

Btowngirl · 25/09/2025 14:24

lol, no there are not female and male facilities out in the desert for example. Very much an adult and respectful approach to using the toilet, having a wash, having a period etc.

Use of language is much less of an issue when using rank, which is what is expected. They/them is used a lot when receiving an email from ‘Capt Bloggs’ for example as the rank does not indicate gender (obviously if it’s an email from someone you don’t know). If you do know someone, you would still generally use rank as a sign of respect and out of politeness.

There aren’t gendered fitness tests in the british army, they’re job specific. You want to be a chef? Great do the chef fitness tests. You want to be a mechanic? Great, do the REME fitness test.

It’s much less of a significant issue in my lived experience than this thread reads.

Show quote history

So do you think the colonel is right? From what you say it is hyperbole.

NotTellingYouMyRealOne · 25/09/2025 16:13

If they are taking hormones, and therefore reliant on daily medication, surely they are making themselves ineligible for deployment anyway?

(FWIW... I have met a transgender Navy officer at an official event. They had an individual "gender neutral" toilet they could use and they wete not permitted to enter opposite facilities at the gym etc. They took extreme care to always meet dress standards. But it was like everyone fawned over to them to their face,but were unhappy with the situation away from them as they couldn't do everything. )

Pharazon · 25/09/2025 16:34

NotTellingYouMyRealOne · 25/09/2025 16:13

If they are taking hormones, and therefore reliant on daily medication, surely they are making themselves ineligible for deployment anyway?

(FWIW... I have met a transgender Navy officer at an official event. They had an individual "gender neutral" toilet they could use and they wete not permitted to enter opposite facilities at the gym etc. They took extreme care to always meet dress standards. But it was like everyone fawned over to them to their face,but were unhappy with the situation away from them as they couldn't do everything. )

Being reliant on daily medication doesn't make you ineligible for deployment. Many, many active service personnel have long term conditions (often related to injury) that require daily medication. And of course many female personnel will be on the pill.

JellySaurus · 25/09/2025 16:47

ThatBlackCat · 25/09/2025 13:16

Still looking for the video, but I came across this in my twitter bookmarks, from a (female) US cop (now works in homocide/DV/sex abuse cases) who served in the US military:

"The main reason why trans people have no business in the military or in law enforcement is the prevalence of suicide attempts in gender dysphorics, but it’s not the only reason. Integrity is an essential part of both soldiering and police work.

Your buddies/colleagues have to be able to trust you with their lives, and no one who is willing to lie about such a basic and obvious fact as their own gender deserves that kind of trust.

It’s way more important for cops and soldiers to go home in one piece the end of the day than it is to pander to and placate a group of people who all seem to have the worst case of main character syndrome the world has ever seen."

Whoops, careful with all that common sense. Wouldn’t want it to get in the way of hyperbole.

BundleBoogie · 25/09/2025 17:39

ThatZanyFatball · 25/09/2025 13:57

Lol, of course the whole show starts with him removing his clothing! As always, the opportunity to get their histrionics on is really what this community is all about I'm honestly not the least bit shocked or surprised.

I'm in the US and I don't believe there needs to be a "ban" on service members who identify as trans bc it is completely irrelevant. As with anyone who wishes to serve in the military, you need to meet a certain physical criteria of combat readiness. Heck even having flat feet can disqualify you from serving. So if you're coming into the military with some "condition" that "requires" a ton of medical interventions that should automatically disqualify you anyway as it impacts your combat readiness.

Additionally, we're all pretty much accepting at this point that when it comes to physical activity biological sex matters. And serving in the armed forces is primarily about physical activity and about physical bodies. So if you're a male and you're doing things to your body that decreases your combat readiness obviously that would disqualify you. If you're a female and you're taking medication that can have a negative impact on your physical and mental health obviously that would disqualify you. And certainly the armed forces should not be required to provide unnecessary, voluntarily medical treatments to anyone - especially ones that DECREASE combat readiness.

There's no need to ban anyone simply state that when it comes to military service you will be identified, housed, classified, etc according to your biological sex and if you have medical requirements or demands that negatively impact your combat readiness you're simply not fit to serve. Otherwise what you do, call yourself, etc out of uniform is your prerogative.

That sounds like exactly the right solution. No rasin to make exceptions for a certain group if people which would undermine the effectiveness of the armed forces. Traits like narcissism, eye watering levels of ‘entitledness’ etc are not conducive.

LeftieRightsHoarder · 25/09/2025 19:55

PaterPower · 25/09/2025 12:44

So the usual evidence-free hyperbole then?

What he means is that the Forces will be obliged to stop allowing men like him into Female soldiers’ accommodation, shower blocks or toilets.

He will still be able to serve - he just has to use correctly sexed facilities.

Exactly. I’ve run out of compassion for these men who lie, lie, lie to achieve their aim of erasing the category of Women as a sex class and repurpose it as a playground for men.

Soontobe60 · 25/09/2025 20:13

Duckyfondant · 25/09/2025 13:01

They took off their dress to make clear that they weren't representing the military. Although a t-shirt underneath would have made more sense.
I like to think our country wouldn't discriminate against trans people by banning them from the military, as Trump has done.

They won’t - but they will be treated for practical purposes as the sex they are, not some fantasy of the sex they wish to be.

JanesLittleGirl · 25/09/2025 21:48

I could guess that Greg is upset that he has been told that he will not be the next Brigadier, 1st Military Police Brigade and is getting his retaliation in early.

moresoup · 25/09/2025 21:49

PaterPower · 25/09/2025 12:44

So the usual evidence-free hyperbole then?

What he means is that the Forces will be obliged to stop allowing men like him into Female soldiers’ accommodation, shower blocks or toilets.

He will still be able to serve - he just has to use correctly sexed facilities.

Quite

Helleofabore · 25/09/2025 21:55

Has anyone read anything about what this person is referring to at all?

Did I hear right that the speech in the video referred to April this year and how trans people were not consulted? Would that be a reference to the Supreme Court clarifying the EA2010? Is there anything else that has sparked this declaration ?

SternJoyousBeev2 · 25/09/2025 23:00

Helleofabore · 25/09/2025 15:44

So, they do still have some single sex provisions in the military then. Thank you for confirming.

Do you know then when there is a need for single sex provisions, are male people in the UK military accessing these single sex provisions? Or, are those male people need special arrangements?

The point is, why if there is no male people accessing female single sex provisions of any kind, why is this Colonel saying that trans people will no longer be serving in the UK military services?

Edited
Show quote history

Military personnel also gave Civil Service and contractor colleagues who shouldn’t be overlooked. It’s not just the accommodation for those who live in, but there are toilets and often showers in the office accommodations and these are single sex and need to remain that way.

LadyBracknellsHandbagg · 26/09/2025 07:26

Duckyfondant · 25/09/2025 13:01

They took off their dress to make clear that they weren't representing the military. Although a t-shirt underneath would have made more sense.
I like to think our country wouldn't discriminate against trans people by banning them from the military, as Trump has done.

He took off his clothes because that’s what he gets off on, he’s clearly an exhibitionist. We shouldn’t have mentally ill people serving in our armed forces.

Helleofabore · 26/09/2025 07:27

This is true.

There seems to be something not quite connecting here. We have posters coming on telling people they are wrong, while then admitting that there are still some single sex provisions.

MagpiePi · 26/09/2025 07:30

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 25/09/2025 15:40

I'm struggling to imagine encountering a more intimidating person in a women's toilet or changing room.

I know!

The first thing I thought when I saw the picture was ‘Wow, he is absolutely stacked’.

outofdate · 26/09/2025 07:33

The thought that there are men like him in the Armed Forces is absolutely terrifying.

ArabellaSaurus · 26/09/2025 07:36

Hmm. Keen to see what ARRSE have to say about this. They are generally fairly sensible.

WandaSiri · 26/09/2025 08:16

ArabellaSaurus · 26/09/2025 07:36

Hmm. Keen to see what ARRSE have to say about this. They are generally fairly sensible.

Who are ARRSE and why do they not realise that their acronym is snorty-funny?

Pharazon · 26/09/2025 08:18

WandaSiri · 26/09/2025 08:16

Who are ARRSE and why do they not realise that their acronym is snorty-funny?

Show quote history

ARmy Rumour SErvice.

TheCountessofFitzdotterel · 26/09/2025 09:32

WandaSiri · 26/09/2025 08:16

Who are ARRSE and why do they not realise that their acronym is snorty-funny?

Show quote history

I think that’s the point!

persephonia · 26/09/2025 09:45

ThatBlackCat · 25/09/2025 13:16

Still looking for the video, but I came across this in my twitter bookmarks, from a (female) US cop (now works in homocide/DV/sex abuse cases) who served in the US military:

"The main reason why trans people have no business in the military or in law enforcement is the prevalence of suicide attempts in gender dysphorics, but it’s not the only reason. Integrity is an essential part of both soldiering and police work.

Your buddies/colleagues have to be able to trust you with their lives, and no one who is willing to lie about such a basic and obvious fact as their own gender deserves that kind of trust.

It’s way more important for cops and soldiers to go home in one piece the end of the day than it is to pander to and placate a group of people who all seem to have the worst case of main character syndrome the world has ever seen."

I think the person giving the speech in their underwear is ridiculous
I also think that spaces in the army should be segregated by sex not gender. If people don't like that/can't cope then they don't need to be in the army.

I am a bit queasy about the framing of all trans people as being untrustworthy because they are "lying". That's because it feels more like a genuinely held belief for some. Catholics aren't untrustworthy because they are lying about wine turning into blood. Hindus aren't lying about reincarnation. The really central point to me is that you can't expect other people to go along with your beliefs (beyond reasonable adjustments). So someone who is trans can't demand other people in the army act as if they believe the same things the trans person does. But I don't like labelling everyone who identified as trans as inherently untrustworthy.
As far as mental health goes, I believe if someone was capable of following the rules above (believe what you want, don't expect other people to) they are likely on the more stable end of the spectrum. That alone should weed out the crazies.

ApplebyArrows · 26/09/2025 09:52

I just don't think people in respected social roles should be taking their clothes off in public like this. Whether you're a colonel, vicar, professor, KC or whatever. It's just unseemly. Or is that too old-fashioned an attitude nowadays?

MarieDeGournay · 26/09/2025 09:58

ApplebyArrows · 26/09/2025 09:52

I just don't think people in respected social roles should be taking their clothes off in public like this. Whether you're a colonel, vicar, professor, KC or whatever. It's just unseemly. Or is that too old-fashioned an attitude nowadays?

I'll join you in being old-fashioned:
'Clothes maketh the man'
[originally Erasmus, acc to GoogleSmile]
or in this case, the lack of them😧