A space for respectful dialogue about sex, gender and diversity

[Tandora]

This is a thread for posters who want to talk and share a diverse range of opinions about sex, gender, being gender non-conforming and/or trans, and public policy. It is to learn from each other; to engage in a productive exchange, and to hear different sides of the story.

It is not a space for bullying and insults. Please do not join if your intention is to control the conversation and undermine those who disagree with you.

Your idea of a safe space for everyone is nice in theory but I’m not sure how John Lewis are going to accommodate the range of loos or changing rooms you suggest, let alone for those with disabilities. Individual cubicles seem sad and somehow more divisive but I guess may be the solution?

The solution is always going to be no women only space - either because men are entitled to use them, or they will be removed completely as compromises.

TRA are going though every single women only space and opportunity and demanding access or justification why they exist.

They never seem to have to justify why their 'knowing sex' is relevant, its women having to talk about their trauma, religion or why they want a chance of winning some money playing snooker.

In general, pupils are aware that "Ms X" was previously "Mr X" and now wears different clothes. Teenagers are savvy enough not to say anything that might get them into trouble. Younger pupils do sometimes seem confused and I have heard them asking "isn't that a man" or similar. To which the standard answer is along the lines of, "that teacher used to be called Mr X, but now wishes to be called Ms X".

I suppose yes, we have "lost" one female toilet. There are many others. Perhaps I would feel differently if there weren't. It's no longer labelled as a female loo, as its a single cubicle it is now labelled as a "non-gendered toilet".

In this case I don't see it that female staff have lost anything significant. Female staff still have female-only spaces for toilets/changing. It's not like a sport where there is an element of unfair competition. Nor is it a women's prison. So I do consider it a reasonable position. I suppose its not a true compromise as no, female staff don't gain anything in exchange. But I don't gain anything if some toileting areas are reserved/specialised for people with physical disabilities either.

This is why I am asking (and sadly getting absolutely no response from @Tandora ). Would this sort of solution be more generally acceptable? Transwomen to have a choice between using facilities for those who are male, or using a small number of single-cubicle facilities that are not for either sex. But not having access to female-only spaces. Or is the only solution acceptable to the trans community that transwomen have full rights to access female-only areas as they identify as female?

The (completely unnecessary) special toilet for Mr X should have been carved out of male provision.

Without seeming to be having a go at you, can I ask if you personally think it's ok that the children are having to pretend? It's clear that the teens at least know he's a man and you know they know but none of the kids aren't allowed to acknowledge it. Is this healthy? Why do you think Mr X has been granted so much power?

I'd actually say the vast majority of men who have adopted trans identities are motivated by AGP in some form; even the younger and more overtly homosexually oriented. The reason for saying that is that all of these men are fetishising womanhood by the act and process turning it into an object to be attained, or performed, more or less convincingly.

No - I don't think anyone actually believes he is a women but that wasn't the point I was replying to - the point I was asking was in response to the statement that women had somehow lost something or had to compromise somewhere specifically in relation to the cubicle - not the wider societal compromise of having to believe he was a woman.

Yes - it had previously been earmarked as a 'female' toilet - but women can still use it, it's a single cubicle so no women is being made unsafe by him using it, and single cubicles are rarely single sex anyway. To me, that seemed like a non-issue, so I was just trying to understand why the poster thought it was a compromise.

Why is it important that a single cubicle room is single sex forever, just because it once had a female sign on it? It doesn't put anyone's safety or dignity at risk, so in that particular circumstance, what is the compromise?

That was Ray Blanchard's eventual conclusion, I believe.

Bluntly, what some people call 'true transgender' and what was historically called 'transexualism' is an enormously rare diagnosis, whereas men with paraphilias are relatively common.

The two things have been collapsed into one category, to the advantage of men with paraphilias, and the disadvantage of what Blanchard calls 'homosexual transexuals'.

What The OP finds impossible to accept is that the sort of "open and respectful dialogue" they have requested does not automatically lead to agreement with their position. What the OP is seeking is aquiesence, not mutual exchange. Anything but aquiesence is interpreted as disrespect.

Even the homosexuals are fetishising womanhood, though. Just taking it one step further than a drag act.

There is that argument, yes.

Bingo.

Women have offered that solution for years. And met with unequivocal refusal. Women even offered to help campaign. The answer was no. And death threats and rape threats. And violence. And women’s meetings being disrupted. So forgive me if I say if a make with a trans identity is uncomfortable in male spaces, I don’t care. Not my circus. Not my monkeys.

Juno Dawson on what motivated him.

Err did you not get the memo about being respectful? @Tandora you need to have a word?

Oh, did The Righteous scolders not get the message about being "respectful" or is it an irregular adjective?

My stock response to this idiocy is:

TERF Tired of Explaining Reality to Fools.

This is the Feminism and Women's Rights board. What else do you expect in response to someone so utterly dedicated to arguing that men with womanly feelings should share all our sex-based rights?

He also wrote the guidelines to allow boys to use girls toilets and changing rooms in schools.
The fact that he acknowledges his sex doesn't change the fact that his actions have been harmful

@spannasaurus

Thought I'd replied to this earlier, but I don't think I pressed post (it wouldn't let me quote the post)

I haven't read his book and didn't realise that he wrote those guidelines? I'd seen this where he says that he doesn't think that boys should have been allowed in girls toilets to start with: https://debbiehayton.com/2024/01/10/this-transgender-schools-guidance-leaves-a-lot-to-be-desired/

Do you have a link to any info about him writing some previous guidelines? Would be interesting to read given he seems to have undertaken a complete about turn.

Yet here you are. 🙄

Why do you have a problem with women asserting their sex based rights?

<Sad eyes of "respectful" OP>

@Tandora maybe this poster needs one of your posts?

Respectfully, what was the gist of the deleted post?

Calling women TERFs. That was it.

@BloominNora

https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/id/eprint/33503/1/085066bb-c224-40de-b79e2a1358801ee9.pdf