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?

Cyclists often change in loos too. Not the cubicle, not enough space, but the washbasin area.

Because if I went into a toilet that is marked for women I would expect that it was for women. Toilets are based on sex and always have been. It’s the reason they didn’t put urinals in the ladies and sanitary bins in the men’s.

Female people get called ‘sheevy’ and ‘obsessed’ discussing their needs and their experiences in female toilets.

Male people demanding access to toilets are centred by those same group of people dismissing or derogating others for needing female single sex provisions.

Absolutely. Even on this thread we have been mocked and belittled.

Yes, it’s quite disgusting and inhuman that someone would react like that to you.

I would hope they’d be ashamed of themselves but trans activists don’t seem to have that capacity.

I hope you know you have support from the majority here. 💐

It is incredibly obvious that this response was generated by a chatbot. Copying and pasting a generic AI script that relies on emotional talking points and 1930s comparisons completely avoids the actual data.

Let's address the reality that your AI completely ignored:
First, providing separate facilities based on biological sex is not 'removing a minority group into 3rd spaces.' It is the exact, standard safeguarding boundary that has existed for generations. A separate, standalone gender-neutral option allows everyone to have privacy without forcing biological females to surrender their hard-earned single-sex spaces.

Second, the pushback from women isn't funded by a 'conservative Christian conspiracy.' It is a grassroots movement of ordinary women, mothers, and workers who refuse to be gaslighted.

Third, pointing out the physical power imbalance and crime statistics of the male sex isn't 'monstering' anyone. It is stating material facts. A male who identifies as a woman remains a biological male with male physical capacity, which is why the law does not allow them to override female consent.

The highest authorities in the UK are not acting on a 'culture war.' The Supreme Court made it ironclad that under the Equality Act, 'sex' means biological sex. And Faye’s monumental tribunal victory against NHS England proved that forcing female workers to share private spaces with males is a direct failure of safeguarding.

The law has spoken, the data is clear, and no amount of copied-and-pasted AI deflection changes physical reality. The line stands.

How would anyone know the difference between being treated like a woman because you are a woman, and being treated like a man pretending to be a woman but people are too polite to point out that they know you are not a woman?

(WTF is sluggish puberty?)

This point has never been answered satisfactorily. They just know, apparently.

Sluggish puberty was, I believe, his description of it. He then claimed to have a DSD.

As to the first part of your post, I agree. Added to that, if a male person is telling you they are a female person, it is clear that you cannot trust what they say to be accurate.

It’s very telling that some in here run to an AI to script for responses. A chatbot cannot code entitlement into a virtue.

Their entire argument relies on women acting as shields. If a group of males feel uncomfortable or vulnerable in standard male spaces, the logical solution would have been to lobby for their own distinct, separate facilities or gender neutral ones. Instead, they demand that biological women step aside, give up their privacy, and carry the entire physical and social cost of their identity. Expecting females to compromise their safeguarding boundaries just to validate a male ego isn't inclusion—it is pure entitlement. Women are done being the buffer.

Also, the moment anyone blurs that absolute biological boundary, the door is open to all men, and the entire concept of sex segregation becomes completely moot. It turns our private facilities into an unpoliceable free-for-all, which will inevitably lead to single-sex spaces being removed altogether to save corporate money.

It'd be like a domino effect. If we allow some biological males into our facilities based on identity, what is to stop any other typical male from walking straight in, using the argument that there are already men in there?

What the actual fuck? Like Taztoy I'm a rape survivor. I've had a LOT of therapy. I've got CPTSD. How on earth can someone else "hold" my trauma? It's not a fucking suitcase that I can put down. If I could I would have binned it years ago. I

I know others have addressed this but this is so minimising and insulting.

It also assumes that therapy will help. It made my CPTSD much, much worse.

I was severely dissociative but it worked very well for me. Since I've become less dissociative, I often struggle with PTSD.

There's double standards as well.

Transwomen: we can't use male toilets as some men are violent and we fear for our safety.

Women: we don't want transwomen in our toilets as some transwomen are violent and we fear for our safety.
Transwomen: women are nasty transphobic bigots

If we are handing out therapy recommendations, maybe the advice should be directed at the specific subset of men on this thread who compulsively refuse to accept women telling them 'no.'

Demanding that female rape survivors go to therapy until they are sufficiently numb enough to tolerate sharing intimate spaces with biological males is a sickness. It is the men who throw performative tantrums when a female boundary is drawn who genuinely need to seek out a well-qualified therapist.
They need professional help to figure out why they feel entitled to override women's consent to feed their own egos. Women's safeguarding is non-negotiable.

My goodness, some of these posts. Just wow.

Spot on. This is the ultimate, hypocritical double standard of the entire movement.

They explicitly admit that the male facilities are unsafe due to male-pattern violence, yet their solution is to demand that biological women absorb that risk instead. They expect women to surrender their hard-earned single-sex sanctuary to act as a shield for a male's comfort.

When a male demands safety from men, it's called a human right. When a woman demands safety from men, she's called a bigot. It is a completely one-way system built on pure entitlement.

I think there has been a shift in allies logic over the years, in part because of trans awareness and visibility.

Years ago it was said that men could literally transition, be indistinguishable from women, couldn't be perpetrators and were victims of violence in exactly the same way women are.

I don't hear that as much. But its difficult when trans awareness has discredited all of those assumptions.

So allies had to go one of two ways - promote transphobia as far worse than misogyny allowing men to use women's spaces because their need is greater. Or ridicule women for wanting single sex spaces. Safety and dignity is framed as paranoid and prissy.

Violence against women and girls is seen as something that happens in private, not in public. Therefore why would toilets need to be single sex? Transphobia is seen as something that happens in public. Therefore these men need space away from strangers transphobia in a way that women don't.

Absolutely yes! You have brilliantly tracked the desperate shift in their strategy. Because the original pseudo-scientific lies completely collapsed under the weight of reality, they had to resort to overt misogyny to keep pushing their demands.
Ranking a male's public comfort above a female's physical safety is a sickness. And the attempt to frame women's natural safeguarding instincts as 'paranoid' or 'prissy' is just a modern version of the age-old patriarchal tactic of calling women 'hysterical' when they dare to say no to men.
They want women to carry the entire physical and social cost of their identity, acting as a shield for their comfort. The hypocrisy has been fully exposed on this thread!!

I think it’s quite a good idea to accept that if people want to use a women’s toilet, they will, and there’s not much you can do about it. You can however look at whatever that brings up for you.

Perhaps men (which includes TW) can just stay the fuck out of female spaces. Like the law says they have to.

Stop minimising and shutting down womens trauma responses.

Typical male aggressive defeatism and passive-aggressive shaming. "Men are going to take over your spaces anyway, so just submit to it and go to therapy to deal with your problem." Tantrum, tantrums 😂

Trantrums.....

Mantrums

Who started this thread ? 🤣

🎯

You can also see a shift in the messaging from a mile off. Certain lines of argument first appear on TRA media and then, lo and behold, eventually turn up here.

The latest ones are:
(as you already said) Violence against women and girls happens in private, not in public. Domestic violence is a bigger danger to women than trans identifying men.
Cis men are the problem. Not trans identifying men.
Cis butch women will suffer.

It's like a script.

(*I'm using "cis" to make the TRA point.)

I disagree.

I was attacked by boys while using 'third spaces' in school.

I was raped during a night out with friends.

I've been stalked, harassed, followed, flashed and assaulted by men throughout my life.

There's no way I'm spending any amount of time in men's spaces. Including toilets. Trans women are the least of my concerns.

Transphobic bigots are transphobic bigots regardless of their fears or toilet philosophy.