The myth of 'bathroom bans' harming 'cis' women

[ItsCoolForCats]

What can we do to put this nonsense to bed?

Marie Goldman, the Lib Dem MP, has written to Bridget Phillipson about the leaked EHRC code of practice, and has posted this on her Facebook page:

"Imagine being turned away from a bathroom, a hospital, or even a cinema just for “not looking female enough”.

That’s exactly what the leaked EHRC guidance on single-sex services could lead to. Along with over 40 Lib Dem colleagues, I’ve written to the Minister for Women & Equalities to raise serious concerns.

The draft could have staff questioning anyone’s sex based on appearance and refusing access if there’s any doubt. That risks putting trans and non-binary people – and all women and girls – in unsafe, humiliating situations.

It’s confusing, unworkable for businesses, and a backward step for equality. We urgently need new, inclusive, practical guidance that protects everyone’s rights, safety, and dignity".

The comments under her post are pretty wild (with a smattering of common sense). And when you click on the profile pictures of some of the 'women' claiming this will harm 'cis' women and is unenforceable, it is apparent within half a second of looking at their profile pictures that they are male. And of course there are the usual compliant women saying it's "cis het" men that are the issue.

Why can't people see this for what is? Emotional manipulation and blackmail designed to allow men to keep accessing women's single sex spaces. I find it astonishing that intelligent people fall for this.

If it happens then it is because men won't stay out of women's single sex spaces. Good men stay out - which means it's only bad men who are pushing this. That they wear frocks is immaterial. We can differentiated between men and women - we are hard-wired to do so.

I'm going to ask anyone who raises this to first establish if they agree that women have the right to single sex spaces.

If they don't agree their point is irrelevant because they think men should be allowed in there anyway so stop pretending your motivation is women's feelings.

If they do agree I'll ask them how this should be arranged and enforced? If they think this 'downside' to the ehrc is not acceptable what's their alternative and better suggestion for women?

I agree Malaga.

I'm also going to ask whether we had a free-for-all piss-wherever-you-like scenario before the SC judgment and if not, how was society organised in this regard?

This is a very potted history but it’s fascinating how much loos have shaped society…

Before public toilets it was a piss where you like. Even after public toilets were introduced more widely (men had them first), men would still piss on buildings etc and so urinals were free to try and stop this. Buildings had urine deflectors to try and stop this. Women always had to ‘spend a penny’ and their loos closed sooner as women weren’t supposed to be out that late. Selfridges, in a clever move, put ladies loos in their shop and so women could shop there longer. It also meant the Suffragettes used Selfridges a lot when they gathered.

We then have building standards and regulations and legislation that has always been based on female and male toilets being the main provision.

Public toilets have always had problems, particularly since there’s no attendants. Anyone saying ‘but we have mixed sex toilet at home’ doesn’t understand the difference.
The reason we have vanishingly few council run toilets is because of misuse (and economics related to misuse).

For example, the first Standards were based around what pubs had been trying to sort so the cubicle sizes were based on how much room a man needed to wee. Later, one organisation’s attempt to stop people having sex in toilets was to make the cubicle so small you physically couldn’t get 2 people in.

No consideration for women and how they need more space for going to the loo!

@MalagaNights the ridiculous thing is that the people complaining about toilets being accessed based on “how you look” are the people who actually want toilets accessed not on sex but on “the gender that you present in” aka how you look.

They are the ones saying we have to let men in dresses and makeup into female toilets, we’re the ones saying it doesn’t matter how you look, just what sex you are.

Proves really it's a whole lot of incoherent wittering meant to mean that women stay in their toilets but men get to go in there and use those women.

It can all fuck off.

Thanks for this it's interesting and important to understand the history of this.

What did women do before there were public toilets? How did they travel or go out to shop/ carry out business etc?

Did workplaces e.g factories provide separate toilets for women and men?

That was ‘the urinary leash’.

This is good:
www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/History-of-Womens-Public-Toilets-in-Britain/

https://www.londonmuseum.org.uk/collections/london-stories/womens-toilets-fight-for-right-to-work/

This is also interesting though the last paragraph is wrong.

It is very wrong!

it was decades later, with the 2010 Equality Act, when transgender people had explicit protection against discrimination and the right to access single-sex spaces and facilities.

Have you told them @Keeptoiletssafe ?

@Greyskybluesky No I haven’t told them. That’s not the worst. It’s the academic articles that irritate me as they provide ‘credibility’ without safety and crime data.

It boils my piss that this is even a thing- biological women now having to prove we're women because some men in dresses wanted access to our spaces. The level of smugness some transwomen will feel over this too- particularly those who shout from the rafters about looking more feminine than real women, having better p***s than real women etc really annoys me as if this comes into effect, they're right aren't they? Real women risk being questioned about their sex for not wearing a mini skirt and fishnets like 'real women' should do. After all, according to most transwomen, that is what makes us women isn't it?

Trust in others to do the right thing is what has changed. Granted, there have always been deviants who have gone against the social contract but they were called out for what they were and punished/shamed which was used as a deterrent for it happening often.

Zoot suits have a pegged leg.

Ahhh. I did not know that.

TBH, I don't know why I do. Magpie brain, all kinds of useless, glittery nonsense in there. 😆

That’s fab though. And it came in Useful today. 💐

A lot of TRAs that aren’t trans seem to genuinely think that most trans identifying people actually pass as the opposite sex, but is this based on their real world experience or just on tv? The ones cast on tv are almost always semi-passing (Abigail Thorn, Tasha Cordera, Indya Moore), but this just isn’t a good representative sample and it’s so misleading. Is there a good way to explain this to people?

Filters and self denial

I wouldn’t ever mind being asked. I don’t think most biological women would. It’s a small price to pay for getting our bathrooms
back to single SEX only. Or are we supposed to believe it is “literal violence” to be asked. Bullshit.

The other thing they never point out is that a man in the women’s toilets would never look like a butch lesbian, i.e. short hair, gender neutral clothes, they would be the hulking great men wearing a mini skirt and badly applied make up.

A lot of TRAs that aren’t trans seem to genuinely think that most trans identifying people actually pass as the opposite sex,

Force of habit. They are so used to considering trans people as the other sex that their judgement becomes skewed, literally. I experienced that back when I was "in the community". I thought quite a few other people passed well enough when I was meeting them in a closed room - and then one day we went out in the city, and I saw everyone clocking us just fine, and I realised most of us didn't pass at all. I had just simply become used to a skewed reality.

There's also the refusal to acknowledge that the vast majority of people don't mind playing along, while at the same time being perfectly aware of people's true sex. They mistakenly assume that people agreeing to treat trans people as the opposite sex, necessarily means that people don't actually clock those trans people. That couldn't be less true, but it gives a vastly skewed idea of what is actually going on.

Most people do mind playing along but feel unable to object.

Ah, very true, that, thank you for the correction.

This says it all.

Also, please stop saying Cis woman. There is a woman and there is a man,

Any man who calls himself a Trans woman is a man. Everytine I see transwoman written down or spoken I change it to man.

Language is so important.

Let's not buy into this dangerous nonsense by using these terms. A trans woman is a man and when you replace transwoman with man, every single time, it shows it up for the madness it is. "A man has won the Woman of the Year."

If we keep saying Transwoman, we accept that these men are some sort of woman.