Do you avoid the bathroom if there is a transwoman?

[PeachyDaisy]

I’m going to an industry event next week and I know there will be a transwoman attending. Should I use the disabled bathroom to avoid an awkward encounter or just continue to use the women’s and hope not to run into them?

Dr Az Hakeem reckons that there is a sexual element for all of them whether they are homosexual transexuals or AGPs.

That is on the TRA. Maybe take it up with them. I do agree people should not have been mean, but it is true, you have to be male to have CAIS.

I I walked into a women's toilet and there was a man in it, at the sinks. I said out loud, 'Oh, for fuck's sake', turned and left. I waited outside until he left and then entered. This is what I would do every time.

Grayson 'wore a massive visible strap on to a children's charity benefit' Perry?

Astounding, isn't it?

If I felt intimidated or unsafe or uncomfortable I would wait outside until he came out or go elsewhere.
But if I felt the person was benign and I didn’t feel threatened then I’d probably carry on as normal.
But I don’t like it and I’d prefer ‘trans’ people to use their discretion and go to a unisex loo, eg in a Costa, rather than making women feel uncomfortable.

‘If I felt intimidated or unsafe or uncomfortable I would wait outside until he came out or go elsewhere.’

Isn’t that one of the things that doctor fellow in the Sandie Peggie case noted as being ‘hateful’ or something? Maybe passive aggressive. SP had waited patiently in the corridor outside the women’s changing room until he (dr Upton) had finished, so she could change without a man being present.

Yes. That was considered unacceptable behaviour, and we know there have been other cases where women have been in trouble in the workplace for turning around and leaving, or being seen to avoid going in there with the man in question.

Women don't get to choose. They don't get to do anything but shut up, go inside and get their knickers down.

Which is why so many men say they've never had anyone recognise them as men in women's facilities: they have no idea that women who were scared of them, their presence, their reaction, the punishment for leaving or in any way drawing their attention, would have got the fuck out of Dodge as discreetly and quietly as they possibly could, and quite possibly with a 'please don't hurt me' smile.

But since that did not create any consequence the man found objectionable, it doesn't matter, does it? It's not like women are human or anything.

Isn’t that one of the things that doctor fellow in the Sandie Peggie case noted as being ‘hateful’ or something? Maybe passive aggressive. SP had waited patiently in the corridor outside the women’s changing room until he (dr Upton) had finished, so she could change without a man being present.

That's what so annoying - even putting herself out and waiting was wrong.

Many women would then have to spend time and energy finding a way to avoid without looking like they are doing so which then gets taken as no-one has a problem and no-one rasies any complaint.

It's not like women are human or anything.

I honestly think that the crux of it.

Women aren't seen as humans they are just service NPC.

Which is why so many men say they've never had anyone recognise them as men in women's facilities: they have no idea that women who were scared of them, their presence, their reaction, the punishment for leaving or in any way drawing their attention, would have got the fuck out of Dodge as discreetly and quietly as they possibly could, and quite possibly with a 'please don't hurt me' smile.

Men who identify as women can never be in a woman only space as their very presence makes it mixed sex, so have no idea how women behave differently to them.

Which is why so many men say they've never had anyone recognise them as men in women's facilities: they have no idea that women who were scared of them, their presence, their reaction, the punishment for leaving or in any way drawing their attention, would have got the fuck out of Dodge as discreetly and quietly as they possibly could, and quite possibly with a 'please don't hurt me' smile.

Many such cases.

Though actually, when we have posters here saying "I've been using women's facilities for years and nobody has ever clocked me"... call me cynical, but I think they're being disingenuous. They know we know. That's a big part of the thrill.

Which is why so many men say they've never had anyone recognise them as men in women's facilities: they have no idea that women who were scared of them, their presence, their reaction, the punishment for leaving or in any way drawing their attention, would have got the fuck out of Dodge as discreetly and quietly as they possibly could, and quite possibly with a 'please don't hurt me' smile.

It’s an example of how belief in gender identity ideology is so very very similar to aspects of belief in some (many?) organised religions - the required display of total faith in something on someone else’s say so. If women don’t pretend convincingly enough that they believe these men have ‘gender identities’ which magically cause them to be indistinguishable from females (transubstantiation) they risk becoming subject to repercussions such as public shaming, death and rape threats, loss of employment or egregious disciplinary action by employers such as that endured by Sandie Peggie, Jennifer Melle or the Darlington nurses, physical violence, intimidation and public displays of male rage from the likes of bashback, etc. Declining to get your knickers down use public changing rooms or loos definitely falls into the blasphemous ‘unconvincing’ category for these self-appointed Inquisitors.

I worked somewhere which only had one toilet, so it was shared with everyone- I did have to clean it periodically during the day as men are grim, and we did have a TW there some days. One of my staff would not use that toilet the day he was there, which I found a bit odd given that other days she was happy to share with everyone!

We have a TW in the wider family and I was very conscious at a family event in a hall that he might use the ladies. As we were quite close to the home of a family member, my daughter and I popped over to that home to use the loo - my teenage daughter felt uncomfortable that she might encounter him in the hall loos.

I think it’s utterly awful that these men disrupt so much just by their presence. Your teenage daughter has now had to think thoughts that were previously unnecessary and is now having her tricky teenager years made more unpleasant by the narcissism of that family member.

The least he could do is make it clear that he respects women and will continue to use the mens so his female family don’t have to worry but he’s not going to do that is he?

Probably not. I have no idea which toilets he actually used, but it was the thought that he could have used the ladies that was anxiety-inducing. What I do know is that he has torn his immediate family apart.

Thankfully we don’t see him very often, this event was two and a half years ago and we’ve only seen him very briefly in a house since (we were leaving as he was arriving).

I think it’s unfair to insist a person with a DSD who sees themselves as one sex is in fact the other.

How are you defining male sex anyway?
It shouldn’t all be based on a Y chromosome imho.
People with Swyer syndrome for example have a Y chromosome, but also a uterus. They can become pregnant (with assistance as they don’t have ovaries) and give birth.

What about chimerism or mosaicism, when some of a person’s cells carry a Y chromosome and others don’t? Or when a person has both ovarian and testicular tissue?

DSDs can be very complex.
Leave people with DSDs out of the trans debate and stop insisting they’re one sex or the other, please. Let them make their own decision about their sex with assistance from medical professionals.

it was the thought that he could have used the ladies that was anxiety-inducing

And that’s it, in a nutshell. Women need to know that when they see “ladies” on the sign, that it is what it says on the tin.

I know people with severe food allergies who never eat food that someone else has cooked. The food could be perfectly safe, but there is a possibility that it might not be. They cannot enjoy it because they will be worrying the whole time.

Leave people with DSDs out of the trans debate and stop insisting they’re one sex or the other, please. Let them make their own decision about their sex with assistance from medical professionals.

Tell that to the trans activists who dragged them into the debate (against the will of many) because they thought their existence undermined the sex binary.

They were not bright enough to grasp that the existence of anomalies like DSDs actually reinforces the binary nature of sex.

Don’t blame women for responding to their ridiculous and desperate shenanigans in their quest to remove women’s rights.

Let them make their own decision about their sex with assistance from medical professionals.

Well, unfortunately that is partly how we ended up with a man with 5-alpha reductase deficiency hitting a woman in an Olympic sport. Women as a sex-class do have a right, or even duty, to have a close look at exactly who the medical professionals are allocating to our class and to be part of that discussion.

I’d be very surprised if a specialist doctor is telling a person who has testes (even streak tissue when no ovarian tissue is found) regardless of whether they are producing testosterone or not and whether their bodies are utilising that testosterone or not, that they are ‘female’ for the purpose of sex categorisation.

And I would be surprised by any medical doctor allowing a patient to tell them to ignore the sex their patient’s body is when treating them. So I doubt any doctor should ‘Let them (a patient) make their own decision about their sex’. I would think the doctors will have made a decision using whatever testing is available to make a decision and it will be based on them considering the range of variables that contribute to a person’s body formation.

”I think it’s unfair to insist a person with a DSD who sees themselves as one sex is in fact the other.”

How a person chooses to live in society might require some accommodations if needed. Such as the accommodations for some relevant conditions under the sporting policies.

For the purposes of accessing those accommodations, then unfortunately, those accessing the provision will need to accept their personal situation.

I don’t believe it serves any purpose to allow an athlete such as Khelif to believe that they should compete in female boxing events when they have a male body that is clearly processing the testosterone that his male body processes. As has been admitted by his team when they admitted he was suppressing testosterone as only male people with the ability to utilise that testosterone were required to do at the last Olympics.

I’ve never been one for going to the loo with anyone else. For instance if I was at a bar and someone said ‘I’m just popping to the loo’, even if I needed the loo, I’d wait for them to come back and then go myself. If for example, this transwoman in your workplace got up from the dinner table or left the boardroom for a comfort break, I’d probably wait until they returned before going myself. If they headed into the toilet ahead of me, I actually might think twice and wait around until they finished but only for privacy’s sake. I don’t like going to the toilet next to someone I know, even a best friend. Don’t get me wrong, as a teen in a club I’ve shared a stall with a pissed friend or two but those days are long gone. Any transwoman who made a deal about me not following them into the Ladies is exactly the kind of transwoman I would be suspicious of. Any ‘offence’ taken would confirm they were after some sort of bullshit ‘validation’ and I’m not playing those games with any one. If I came out of a stall and saw them standing at the sink, I’d probably avoid eye contact and quickly wash my hands and leave. I certainly wouldn’t want to make any small talk, or ‘talk make-up’ or any of that stereotyped drivel many trans people seems to think as some sort of rite of female passage.

Two wrongs don’t make a right.
Women should simply respond by saying leave people with DSDs out of it as they’re not relevant to the argument.

Instead some GC women insist a woman with a DSD is actually a man, as a @Notmeagain12 described upthread, regardless of the hurt that causes. Or even if it’s true in certain cases. Does Y make one a male even if it’s non-functional? Or testes?
What if you have a testis and an ovary?
Some cases are very complex. And nuture has an effect on how a person identifies as well as nature. If you believe you’re a girl until late teens that has to have an impact on your brain development.

Medical professionals and scientists working in the area of DSDs don’t make these distinctions as easily as MNetters seem to do. They provide services for CAIS girls for example. I’m not sure why some GC people think they know better and I say that as someone who is GC myself.

Obviously when it comes to sports there should be rules so people don’t have an unfair advantage. The infamous boxers should not have been eligible to compete in the woman’s category as they had a male physiology to a large extent. However, we don’t get to judge whether they (as people with DSDs) see themselves as men or women.

Which is all very nice until the logical end point is: women, you must not object to this very obvious bloke in your changing room helicoptering his willy around and having a lovely time, because some of these blokes might, potentially, be in a minute number of cases, a woman with a DSD. As opposed to a bloke having a lovely jolly.

And this excludes and harms women.

This was discussed in the CSJ. There will be some individual tragic situations, but this has to work for the massive (massive) majority. And this is a very useful lever that has been thoroughly overused by transactivism.

The answer is additional facilities, or the person with the DSD making use of the disabled facilities; not to require women to accept men in their facilities and be unable to resist or refuse this. Particularly as this means a lot more and wholly unseen individual tragedies of women who cannot access resources, services and facilities at all because they cannot use mixed sex spaces.

As has been said by PPs, it is the trans activists who deploy people with differences of sex development as useful flags to wave.

If you've been following discussions on this board, you'll know that the only reason we refer to people with DSDs at all is if the subject has been forced on us, e.g. when TRAs cynically use the inaccurate term 'Intersex' as some kind of faux justification for transgenderism, or to point out the fact that DSDs are either differences of development of male sex, or female sex, so either male DSDs or female DSDs.

The presence of people with male DSDs in female sports is an obvious injustice, which has attracted widespread publicity, and is difficult for anybody to ignore.

It would be more accurate to criticise the inclusion of the letter 'I' for Intersex in the LGBTQIA++ acronym, than those of us who object to it.

It's not possible to just ignore the mis-use of people with differences of sex development by trans activists - people with DSDs have asked them to stop using them, it would be great if they respected that, and then we didn't have to respond.