Please help be articulate my thoughts, ‘be kind’ is heavily linked to privilege/class

[Temporaryusernamefortoday]

I will start off by prefacing this post with the fact that my title is badly written but I couldn’t think of a better way to phrase it.

This though process was sparked by seeing a post mourning the ‘exclusion’ of trans girls from Girlguiding and seeing a good friend respond with the ‘crying’ emoji.

I can’t help feeling that the invasion of female only spaces, in a way that most likely to pose a threat to mental or physical wellbeing disproportionately effects the most vulnerable women in society and those of ‘lower socio/economic status’.

In my mind the potential for greatest harm is in:

• Prisons
• Rape crisis
• Refuges
• Police custody/searching
• Intimate care spaces ie hospitals/carehomes
• public toilets.

The greatest service users of these spaces are not the ones shouting at everyone to ‘be kind’. They are those who are most vulnerable in society, those who often have fewwer options or a poorer start in life and are therefore more likely to end up as victims of DV, SA, in the prison system, in hospital etc.

I genuinely think that most of the Be Kind brigade view the issue through their own lenses of

• being willing to occasionally be mildly uncomfortable in a public toilet to signal their ‘credentials’
• the TiM

I think they find it easier to empathise with a male of a potentially similar ‘class’ than a woman who is unlike them.

If be intrigued to hear if others think there is an un acknowledged class element to this or if I am barking up the wrong tree/oversimplified this?

This is exactly what crossed my mind too. JKR is so right and bang on point it’s painful.

This is precisely what I was thinking of. Be kind does seem to be tied to privilege and power, whether it’s celebrities like Emma who experience no real-world consequences for their views or politicians or NHS leaders imposing policies on patients and staff, when they aren’t the ones in the changing rooms.

Thank you! I am very
impressed you found that @CliantheLang

Yes but do those women feel that way? That's what I am asking. Is there research to say that women from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are more likely to be against sharing female spaces with transwomen than other demographics

Re the article I meant in the last paragraph, I have just seen @CliantheLang 13:40 had already posted it.

It is so worth reading if anyone missed it.

In my experience poorer people are indeed more likely to be tolerant and in favour of live and let live. I think the difference is that it’s middle class people who are more likely to preach about it and go around telling other people to be kind, regardless of the hypocrisy when in the next breath they’re calling women names for wanting single sex spaces etc.
When poorer people say it it’s more likely to be a ‘this is how I live my life’ statement rather than ‘you! Do what I tell you!’

In my view it is more that women from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are more likely to be forced into a situation where they have to share space. Kate Searle was just fine with being kind and having Beth Upton get changed in the women’s changing room. But Kate Searle had her own office that she could get changed in so was completely unaffected by her “kindness”.

The Fife & Dalrington tribunals have laid bare the pressure on working class women to comply with the demands of more powerful colleagues.

Not just the Uptons of the world but the management / lanyard classes who cheerfully threatened sanctions against these nurses for objecting. All of who, as the OP points out, are not required to remove their clothes for the pleasure of male colleagues.

Luxury beliefs imposed by predatory men and privileged women and men.

Right but what do those women actually say. That's what I am asking.

In my view it is more that women from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are more likely to be forced into a situation where they have to share space.

This, and we have less power to complain. All the 'be kind' crowd in my neck of the woods are middle class, and they are now escalating from 'be kind' to 'if you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem'. Its actually getting a bit scary now.

This is exactly what the phrase "luxury belief" was coined to describe.

The people who can afford to welcome men into women's prisons or rape shelters or workplace changing rooms are exactly those who know they will never go to prison, need a rape shelter or work in the kind of job that requires you to get dressed in a communal changing room.

This is called a ‘luxury belief’, which I believe was coined by a US commentator. Maybe Rob Henderson? Does anyone remember who coined it?

Anyway, it’s basically what you’ve described OP. Being immune from the consequences of your ‘kindness’ due to your privilege.

You beat me to it! 😉

I think the be kind is largely linked to social media use in general. As in certain trends/movements tend to be known by those who use social media.
People at work might discuss memes etc, and it's not necessarily age or class, or even gender. It's how much they're online (and that's not purely related to age or class).

"Those women" aren't a homogenous block. There will be some who haven't given it much thought and don't mind, and there will be others who do. It's not possible for those who do mind to say anything else they be labelled as bigots and threatened with losing their jobs.

"Live and let live" is very different to 'be kind'.

Live and let live assumes that everyone can live exactly how they want and have no effect on others.

If working class women say 'live and let live', im betting its about the men wearing a skirt in tesco, rather than the man wanting to follow their daughter into a changing room or provide intimate care for their elderly mother.

Be kind is, as other have pointed out, enforcing a rule "be kind and dont highlight that eddie izzard is using the women toilets". Its not a passive, its telling every other women and girls that they are mean to object.

YouGov Survey from last year has a breakdown by social class.
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/51545-where-does-the-british-public-stand-on-transgender-rights-in-202425

I've collected the raw data from that in attached images.

Theres not that much difference BUT i cavet by saying we aren't seeing ABC1 / C2DE by sex either though which might hide a few things.

There was arguably more difference between London and the three other english regions though.

ABC1s were more likely to be paying attention to the media on these stories.
ABC1 were more likely to say you should be able to identify as the opposite sex.

38% of ABC1s said you should be allowed to change your documents
28% of C2DEs said you should be allowed to change your documents.
46% of ABC1s said you shouldn't be allowed to change your documents
50% of C2DEs said you shouldn't be allowed to change your documents.

A clear majority on both didn't think the process should be made easier.

A VERY clear majority thought that under 16s should not be able to medically transition. Only a small number for both were in favour, but there was a notably higher % for ABC1

A majority for both against males in female sport, changing rooms and toilets.

More on social class

Thank you @RedToothBrush - was hoping you or someone like you would show up with the numbers!

Want to know where the BIGGEST differences, that YouGov found were?

Yes here is the Trans Family Member effect.

I would argue that what this data isn't showing is how THE most privileged are more likely to fall into this catergory in many cases. And they are more influential.

They are the most out of step with the general population btw.

@redtoothbrush

Thanks

I note that data is now 12 months old and PRE-DATE the Sandy Peggie case.

I suspect we will see greater change in the next one of these too.

But basically the 'moral majority' on this STILL lies with those who AGREE with the SC ruling.

Are transwomen more likely to be men from the middle and upper classes?
Yes.

The Question that supports this statement....

Many traumatised girls have issues with toilets. Many have been punished and abused in bathrooms. As a consequence, they struggle with going to toilets outside home, with closed toilet doors and the confined space of a toilet: they may avoid going to the toilet altogether and develop constipation, or soil or wet themselves day or night. They may need a safe adult present and might struggle with bathroom's smells, sounds and cold surfaces, and they cannot share bathrooms with men. On top of that, they experience a lot of shame and struggle to talk about these issues. These are all longterm issues.

Since trauma, poverty, stress, violence, substance abuse, poor mental health, health issues and class are interconnected, these girls, later women, very likely struggle with sharing their spaces to a much greater extend than others. That is also what I see in the (admittedly small group) of traumatised young women I know.