Sex Matters - Hampstead Heath Ponds -

[SexRealismBeliefs]

Sex Matters, a charity that campaigns for single-sex rights, will argue that the City of London Corporation is breaching equality law by allowing trans women to use Kenwood Ladies’ Pond on Hampstead Heath.

Hearing this Wednesday.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/cceca8ca-4167-4b04-875a-40ddacfea782?shareToken=e9fe25a546d20835f1a5a66564cbf27b

There are number of selfish men who either can't stand the thought of women having anything for themselves, or pervert men who relish the thought of getting their dicks out in front of women who might be in a state of undress.

The only thing that's "changed" is that these men are now emboldened, instead of being rightly told to fuck right off.

They've been emboldened by the "be kind" crew, the luxury beliefs crew who never have to face it themselves, the perverts who've jumped on the bandwagon, and the people who've fallen for the "sex inspection at the gate" bollocks hook line and sinker.

If they want to make all of them mixed sex then they need to change the bloody signage to Pond 1, Pond 2, and Pond 3.

Of course, the men who want women to have nothing for themselves will be fucking delighted. The pervs will be disappointed obviously but they'll still be women to flash at I'm sure.

But some women will self exclude, and they'll fade away quietly, while everyone else is patting themselves on the back. Their world will get smaller and duller, and no one will care. Because a number of men wanted. And because they're men, they got.

Good for you. Do you understand how selfish your attitude is? Just because YOU'RE ok with sharing with men, does not make it ok for you to expect other women to do so if they are unhappy about it.

while still avoiding the rather horrific scenario of swimmers being asked to confirm their biological sex at the gate

why is it horrific to ask some to say what their biological sex is?

Like pp, not really getting the “horrific scenario” of people being asked what sex they are?

while still avoiding the rather horrific scenario of swimmers being asked to confirm their biological sex at the gate

Good lord. Being asked to confirm that you're eligible to use a service is only 'horrific' if you're not eligible.

'Horrific scenario'. Honestly 🙄

I suppose it's horrific verifying you're over 15 too. The trauma.

Yes, it's odd isn't how being asked to prove you are eg over 18 ti get unti a club fir adults is absolutely fine but being asked to prove you're a woman to use women spaces is "horrific"

I used to look very young for my age and was being asked to prove I was over 18 into my late 20s. How was the not horrific? Or traumatising? Or all the other hyperbolic words TRA use. Was it because I knew I was an adult and had every right to be there and they know they actually aren't women and don't?

As if that weren't bad enough, what happens when someone rocks up to the Ladies' pond and confidently says they're a woman, and the staffer on the gate doesn't believe them? Do they simply get turned away? Or will they be asked to prove it - and how?

If everyone just used the single-sex pond for their sex then there wouldn’t be any need for anyone to be asked to prove it.
One of the many ways in which a small group of men is fucking things up is by eroding the perfectly sensible social contract.

Indeed! If the men larping as women would obey the fucking law then we wouldn't be in this mess but apparently they can't and it's just omg soooooo difficult to make them try that we should give up on having single sex spaces for women

This.

I wouldn't particularly like to be asked to confirm my sex, no. But why are we at that point? It's not because of women is it.

What happens when someone like 28 year old me rocks up confidently to a club to go in for a drink and their way is barred because the security staff think I look underage? Should I have been turned away? Or asked to prove I was 18?

(if anyone is interested I went home to get my passport and went back to the club to prove I was 18 and was let in by a sheepish security guard. Obviously I was traumatised for life and accused them of being lookingyoungsrthanyouarephobic and demanded the immediate removal of any requirement to prove you are over 18 to get into a club for people over 18. I mean yes there's laws but it's soooo hard to tell who is and isn't over 18 that we may as well not bother amirite??)

So paper ID would be acceptable? It's possible to change the gender marker on your driver's licence or passport (you need a GRC for the latter).

Well ideally men Would just obey the law wouldn't they? Not keep forcing themselves into women's spaces.

you seem so very keen to insist that it's all soooo very impossible to do - all to keep happy a few thousand men who don't like to be told no

Certainly I don't think it's fair on the female gate staff to put them in the position of having to be the "sex police" (unfortunate term, there must be a better one - "bio bouncers"?) It would be awful and possibly dangerous for them. Not to mention super humiliating for any swimmers who are shy, androgenous or non-binary, and get challenged in this way.

It boils down to competing visions for the ponds. There are two ways they could comply with the SC judgement.

They could be seen as a pair of single-sex sanctuaries, spaces that are protected, albeit at a high price in terms of intrusive security.

Or they could have an open-door policy of "all who want to swim here are welcome".

Personally I prefer the latter. You don't, fine; most other pond users don't, fine; the Corporation doesn't, fine. So it will honestly never happen. Which means it's pretty pointless you all having a go at me. I'm not going to change my mind (this is MN; no one ever does) and my vision will never come to pass anyway.

If they can't prove it to the satisfaction of the venue, then yes they get turned away.

Same as every single other eligibility condition.

Strewth.

You're not making any kind of killer argument, you know. You just look like you support men trying to access women through deceit.

The starting point is accepting that all males should be prohibited from using single sex provision for females, therefore, males who try to access, or access female only provision are in the wrong.

Following on from thus, providers should consider reasonable and proportionate measures required take to keep males out, and how to respond should males be found using female only provision.

TRAs focus on the issues arising from the ‘measures to take’ elements without acknowledging the founding principles the measures must be designed to uphold.

TRAs do not underestimate the power of providers stating transwomen are not welcome and should not attempt to use the provision. This won’t deter all transwomen, but it will certainly deter some.

Yes it's so very dull to hear the same tired things trotted out over and over again

it's illegal to drive on a public road without a licence but we dont demand everyone swipes their driving licence everytime they get into a car. Instead we put a process in place that enables you to get a licence if you pass a test. If the police ask to see your licence then you show it to them. Theoretically People without driving licences could easily drive about until or unless they have an accident or someone asks to see their licence. Society relies on ppl complying with the law even when there's no mechanism to force them to do so.

but yet somehow telling men it's illegal to be in women's spaces and requiring them to comply with the law is at the absolute apex of unsolvable human problems

And how exactly do they prove it to the satisfaction of the venue?

Why do you think it would be dangerous for them, exactly?

Do you think dangerous men should just be waved on into the women’s pond?

One wonders what other laws these men feel should be optional. Such as, you know, indecent exposure, I'm sure we can all think of other things that men might do if they're not inclined to think laws mean much. Especially laws protecting women.

Generally speaking once someone's shown they're not inclined to follow the law on one minor thing it tells you something about them. E.g. Wayne Couzens - got away with indecent exposure, went on to murder. It's not fucking rocket science to see that had he been rightly detained and prosecuted for breaking the law the first time, the second offence would have been less likely / not happened.

Having said the above, I'm all for corporations being honest and honestly labelling spaces. So if all the ponds are in fact mixed-sex they should be labelled as such. That way it won't just be the law-breaking men sharing spaces with women which will be safer than it being only the ones who don't give a fuck about the law or women's safety being there.

Edited to add: Obviously it would be better if women can have some basic rights and have access to statistically safer single-sex spaces (also allowing many religious women to access public life). However it's about time organisations like Morrisons are held liable for lying to the public and causing harm (Morrisons allowed the 6ft5 Dolatowski into their 'womens' toilets to attack a child, which she very well might not have used, or used with her Dad if it was accurately labelled 'mixed sex').

Do you give absolutely not one shit at all about the women who feel unable to use the ponds at all with that approach?

Why do you keep insisting it's about the men?

If the Ladies' pond is strictly single-sex and a male tries to get in and is challenged, my worries are 100% for the female gate staff who have to tell him no.

If a trans man or androgynous, butch or non-binary woman tries to get in and is challenged, my worries are for her potentially having to undergo an intrusive and humiliating process of verifying her biological sex.

I was wondering when the butch lesbians would appear

I've never been to the Women's Pond in Hampstead, but in the past I knew a few butch lesbians who were regulars there. Never had a problem.
Never had to undergo a humiliating or intrusive process. A woman in the women's pond, no big deal. Same for all the other women who did not conform to binary gender stereotypes - no big deal.

If all men could be trusted to respect women's space, it would still be no big deal.
Let's keep our focus on the source of the problem, and stop using butch lesbians etc. as straw ..er. people..