Isn’t AGP also what every woman experiences when they get dressed up & feel good about themselves?

[Theboredpanda]

I have no agenda here. I’ve always just been interested in exploring other perspectives of debates…although I’m sure this particular thought will get flamed on here and end up very one-sided indeed 🤣
I don’t believe every trans woman has AGP, but I believe a significant proportion do. And I’ve always considered that proportion to be creepy, I feel anger at the fact these men get to walk around, at least in some circles, socially accepted as women, just so they can satisfy a sexual fetish. However, I was thinking about how I feel as a woman who’s comfortable and happy about being a woman when I get dressed up in my favourite sexy outfit and put on some makeup. It makes me feel sexy. Not sexually aroused but I do feel sexy. Is that vastly different to what a trans woman feels like when they get dressed up and look (at least in their eyes) like a woman? Could it be that it’s either not AGP and we all feel sexy when we know we look good as the gender we are or want to be…or everyone’s a bit AGP when they think they look sexy because they therefore feel sexy? Or is this a totally unoriginal thought that’s already been troped out by TRAs and actually there is a huge difference??

If a man goes into a women's toilet, most women and girls would care very much. They'd likely feel uncomfortable and unsafe. If the toilet isn't busy this would be even more frightening, not less. I'm assuming you're not female, or you'd know this?

Women and girls are people too. They're not unconsenting support players for a man cosplaying his idea of 'femininity'.

The Equality Act 2010 is very clear that trans women are men. All trans women are excluded from all women's spaces because their sex is male. By still choosing to go into a women's toilet he IS a selfish predator who ignores the law requiring him to stay out.

A quarter of a century. They were annoying idiots then, even without the concept of genders and the new generation seem to be exactly the same

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeman_on_the_land_movement

'From last year' is not a source.
Could you please say where the alleged transwoman story comes from, so we can read it in its original version.
That means stating where you read it - the publication, the date etc.

And what about the source you quoted at
Skywinn · Today 19:11?

Giving sources for quotes is standard practice, for understandable reasons.

What's a 'typically' 'feminine' personality?

So what? They are segregated by sex, they should have always been because no one sought the consent of the female people using them.

It is irrelevant what you and your mum want. Go use the many mixed sex toilets. Leave female single sex provision for those who need it.

If this were true, then why all the drama about transwomen not being welcome in the ladies? Nobody cares so who would object?

You know women would go 'excuse me, this is the ladies' making their objection known. Because either no woman cares about men in the womens toilets so there is no problem with the SC ruling or women do care which is why you are arguing about bloody toilets again instead of healthcare, hospital wards, changing room, tape counseling, domestic violence refugees, changing rooms, prisons and sports.

A man in a female single sex toilet can be removed. A man in a female single sex toilet has no 'right' to be there and no reason to be there and therefore they can be removed and in some situations will experience negative repercussions for their decision.

Any male person above the age of about 8 years old can cause harm to female people who need that female single sex provision to remain female. Regardless of his intention. Your constant focus around physical attack is frankly unnecessary for the decision to be lawfully applied.

No female person, for instance, would able to be removed from a female single sex toilet for simply using it. This is not the case for a male person using a female single sex toilet.

It's the same kind of reasoning people use when they accuse women of using gender affirming care when they do literally anything for looks.

Women don't need to do anything for their body to be more female, because it already is. They already are women. They can do things that might mean they look more or less stereotypically feminine, but sex/gender and gender stereotypes are not the same thing.

Same thing here.

You can absolutely have a safeguarding policy for a publicly accessible provision. Yes, 'rapists can already go in there'... we know and yes, they do.

Your continued demonstration of not understanding safeguarding or consent is revealing. Safeguarding policy can only reduce the risk of harm to people in a single sex provision, it cannot eliminate it all together as it is a publicly accessible provision with no monitoring. However, due to a strong safeguarding policy that follows the Supreme Court clarification of the EA 2010, people can act with confidence when they encounter a male person in a female single sex provision and have security remove them, alert other female people that there is a male person in the toilets amongst other remedies available to them.

Your understanding of safeguarding and consent is nil.

There is concern over young boys using male single sex toilets alone. It is discussed a lot. This is after all a parenting forum.

I am not sure though why the harms to boys is relevant to female single sex provisions being respected by all male people over the age of about 8 years old. You do keep bringing in irrelevant whatabouts. This is another one.

If male single sex provisions need to have their safety improved, then that is an entirely different situation. And if it is needed for boys protection, then I am very sure that many people will be supportive of improving the safety of those provisions.

Still irrelevant to female single sex provisions remaining female only though.

... and after all that, the answer to the question in the OP is still: 'No. AGP is not something that a woman (female) can experience. A woman (female) getting dressed up & feeling good about herself is not the same thing as a man experiencing the paraphilia known as AGP.'

Trans is all about adhering to sexist stereotypes - take away the dogged use of stereotypes as attempts at social signalling (and ways of generating euphoria boners) and there's nothing viable there because no human being can change their sex.

The adherence to stereotypes is such that I've seen trans-identified women (on Reddit) discussing their inability to sneeze in a sufficiently masculine way and giving each other pointless advice on other equally foolish (and nitpicky) ways of trying to convince society that they're male.

So, it is quite clear by now that some people don't understand safeguarding principles, consent and neither do they understand how male people can abuse female people by simply showing that they have the power to harm them when the female is not able to stop them.

Any male person who makes a conscious choice to enter into a female single sex provision is one who has decided to ignore the boundaries, conventions and policies that have been put into place to give female people some protections. This is a show of power on that male person's part, a reminder that male people have power and female people cannot simply say 'no' and have that 'no' respected.

The question remains, what word describes the male person who behaves like this? What motivates any male person to ignore female people's consent and just enter a provision that they understand has been designated as being female single sex only?

Do you understand that those other women don't speak for me either? And they cannot give consent on my behalf. One "no" is enough. One no overrides any number of yesses. My "no" does not negate the consent of another woman's "yes" as she can always choose to share with men in unisex spaces, whereas I can't have the single sex spaces I need, if her yes overrides my no.
The answer is no. I DO mind - a lot.

If the majority of the population are not supportive of reducing the strength of safeguarding, that is an indication that governments and organisations should take note and give full consideration to the needs of the majority of female people.

It is, after all, just one of the ways that governments work out what the majority of their electorate think about issues.

Well that's how it usually works 😂

How it usually works on OUR planet, but not on planet Solipsistia Prime where Sky lives....🤷‍♀️

So what innocent reason can a man have to use a female facility?

The problem isn't when men cross-dress. The problem is when men come waltzing into women's single-sex spaces. Unfortunately, there's a larger-than-expected overlap between male cross-dressers and men who enter women's single-sex spaces.

Men who wish to cross-dress can best communicate their respect for women's rights and boundaries by staying out of women's single-sex spaces.

I never went into the Ladies with my small daughter; I would have to be on the very verge of soiling myself and have absolutely no other option (this has not happened yet) before going into the Ladies. The reason for this is that I, like the majority of other men, have a modicum of respect for women. If I was trans, I could still respect women – being trans doesn't mean abandoning decency and respect for women's privacy. Does it?

Do those women who disagree with her speak for her?

"Little boys are at risk from adult men in the men's, so let's make loos mixed-sex so that little girls can be at risk from adult men too" is not the convincing argument that you think it is.

The security measures for public loos are that a bystander witnessing a man entering the women's loos sees what he's doing and can challenge him, shout a warning to the women inside, or summon a staff member. If nothing else, the bystander can act as a witness who can describe the man for any ensuing court case. A female bystander can go in herself, if she feels confident to do so. If I saw a man enter the women's loos, I'd go in to make sure he was alone in there and not e.g. following a little girl in.

As soon as public loos are made mixed-sex, that potential for bystander intervention is lost. A man following a little girl into mixed-sex loos is doing nothing wrong and the woman who follows him in "just in case" is open to accusations of harassment. The risk he poses to the little girl is still present.

Cover the face of the left one from the nose down. She's female.

The one on the right, Shakira said it best, "hips don't lie".

😁

being trans doesn't mean abandoning decency and respect for women's privacy. Does it?

Sky is pretty sure it does.