James Murray on R4 just now - TWANW

[FlossieF]

New health secretary asked if he thinks TWAW- said he has changed his mind about this (as per Wes S) and supports single sex spaces on the basis of biological sex. As well he should, but still good to hear.

I agree, people in general just zoned out they never truly believed it and most people would be performative to the trans person.

I had an interesting conversation to day with someone whose son has several trans friends and knows someone else with several trans friends. The older friends all worked in academia and pyschology. She didn't seem that bothered by it, and hadn't thought about what it meant for women and she hates men.

If trans women were really women, they wouldn’t need the adjective in front of it. Good on him!

I wonder why it isn't universally accepted.

I can't tell if it is gay politicians projecting their own shit onto the trans community i.e. taking Gender Dysphoria out of the DSM, or if people genuinely believe that you can change your sex.

I don't think any woman would deny that TW would be more unsafe than other men in male single sex spaces. Transwoman are constantly bullied in public

2021x, I would deny the assertion in your first sentence. Plenty of posters here have disputed that (both men and women). Is there evidence that trans-identified men are unsafe in male single-sex spaces?

As for being "constantly bullied " do you have any concrete evidence of that? How would you define "bullying" because some activists (and others) seem to define it as "saying anything I don't want to hear."

It doesn't matter what he really thinks, if he says he believes in the SC definition and protecting women's spaces then he won't be actively thwarting attempts to ensure toilets, wards and changing rooms are single sex. We might have had to drag them kicking and screaming to this position but once they have recanted TWAW they are no longer an active trans ally and effectively out of the game. We are rolling all this nonsense up albeit slower than we might like but the direction of travel is clear now and inexorable. It is definetley a win.

I think we all understand that there would be many political people who would follow the current direction of political power. Whether that has been due to them reading and listening and reaching a deeper understanding or political expediency.

I think with some of these men though, it is good to remain sceptical and expect flip flops depending on what is good for them at the time. It is good though if he has reached a permanent decision to support female single sex provisions with no special exclusions for any male person who has a transgender identity.

If he's serious when he says "..single sex spaces within the NHS need to be protected on the basis of sex", then he needs a copy of Knotty Auty and team's audit of health bodies' policies.

And he needs to read it, every word, and then do something about it.

Speaking from the island to the west of Terf Island, I am envious - our health minister is full-on TWAW, speaks about the need for specific transgender healthcare etc etc
.
When she called to my house before the last election, I asked her my go-to [and very useful and productive] question for canvassers:
'You don't really believe that men can actually become women, I mean, really?'
asked in a friendly tone of voice.

Her face changed. She literally as in literally literally, recoiled. She started burbling about inclusivity as she moved swiftly away from the doorstep.

It was very revealing, showing the power of that simple challenge: do you really believe that TWAW?

Well done, Terf Islanders, for getting to the situation where senior politicians - whether genuinely or for expediency - are now prepared to say 'no I don't' in public.

Yes, the "permanent position" is key. Politicians lie. In my opinion, that's all they ever do. It's expedient for him to say this now.

However, I think it's important that people hear him say it. The more people speak the truth, the more people will feel able to speak the truth.

What comes next is what I'm interested in. Words are cheap. Implementation is everything.

I have anectdotal evidence. I have seen transwomen/non-binary men be targeted by groups other men and I think trans women would be at risk in the male toilets in the same way that any gay man would be i.e. private space with no cameras.

The risk is different profile is differnent because of the sex. A transwoman would be much more at risk of physical violence for example and much less risk of sexual violence i.e the violence that women experience.

None of this means that tranwomen should be permitted into the female spaces. It does mean that we can recognise there is a need for an alternative in certain situations. I understand that Trans people are really worried about being "outed" in the same way that gay people were because it would materially effect their ability to participate in life. How true this is I couldn't tell but we can make space in society for them to exist without it causing any extra issues for women.

The situation needs a ‘safe space’ campaign.

I don’t believe I have seen anyone of influence take up that campaign. I know that Fionne and Miranda Yardley tried to get something off the ground to that effect.

If any male person is in danger in a male single sex provision, that needs to be fixed.

Anecdotal evidence cannot be proven, so forgive me if I don't take your word for it. Plenty of posters here also have anecdotal evidence that there is no more risk to trans-identified men than for other men. So we'll have to leave it at "anecdotal."

All of which is by the by: If men of whatever persuasion stay out of female single-sex spaces, then what happens to men is for men to figure out. Not women's problem.

I suspect he never believed it in the first place. Secretly grateful to Justin Webb .

I agree with you. This isn't an issue for women to solve and in my submission to the NZ amendment bill I said the confusion about not having a clear definition for a men and women disproportinatley effects women.

I have also been emailing the Human Rights Commission and my local MP asking them to give clearer guidlines to gyms regarding permitting males in single sex female changing rooms as I am being indirectly discriminated against because no gym can guarentee when I was into a changing room that there will not be a man in there.

That doesn't mean that there isn't a threat to transwomen which comes from the same route of misogyny that women deal with all the time. To preven the SCR from going backwards we are going to have to start giving the TRAs an out, so they can get their attention by campaigning for something acheivable.

Well, then that's what they need to campaign about. Where I work we have plenty of single-sex multi-cubicle toilets and we also have several single-user toilets (with a basin etc inside) which are all labelled either men's or women's. Only the single-user toilets for people with disabilities have been labelled unisex.

The fable about being "outed" which was originally intended to force men into women's facilities is now an "own goal" which has successfully created an atmosphere where I'm afraid to ask if our single-user toilets could all be rebranded as unisex for fear of being labelled transphobic.

But it's very hard to be gracious after all the enraging ridiculous TWAW nonsense in recent years that politicians like him have used to do so much damage to women and chlldren.

Indeed ! It's like expecting an abused wife to thank her husband for when he's not being abusive.

I agree some of the things being said about women from TRAs are disgusting. I was fearful to speak up at work because the TWAW supporters were rabid. I am starting a new job this week and I noticed everyone has had pronouns in their signature and I don't want to put it.

They won't go down quietly though, and having access to single cubicles will benefit more people than just trans people so if we could redirect all that anger to campaign for something good it would help us all out alot. To start that we have to be supportive of the issues they have brought up.

You can be glad your abuser has stopped being abusive without thanking them.

Lets just be happy about a return to reality and not dwell on the past.

That doesn't mean that there isn't a threat to transwomen which comes from the same route of misogyny that women deal with all the time.

You see, this , to my mind, is where you start losing me on your posts. You seem to start out from a position of women's rights, then suddenly veer off onto some kind of TRA tangent, so, again, you'll have to excuse me if I disagree with you. "Transwomen" are not women, and therefore cannot suffer "threats" that come from "misogyny." That, to me, is a nonsensical, activist statement that stems from a misguided belief that trans-identified men are somehow a subset of women. I think you would agree that they are not. So, I'm really not sure where to put your statement.

To preven the SCR from going backwards we are going to have to start giving the TRAs an out,

Again, no. WE (meaning women) do not have to give TRAs anything. "To prevent the SCR from going backwards " all that has to happen is that the law is enforced. I'm done giving away my rights and my energy to thugs. Whatever happens now, all I care about is that the law is enforced. I will put my energy into that.

so if we could redirect all that anger to campaign for something good it would help us all out alot. To start that we have to be supportive of the issues they have brought up.

Again, I disagree. WE do not need to campaign for anything for trans-identified people. They can campaign for themselves. If it takes them 20 years, then so be it. They can use mixed-sex spaces until then. Or stay home.

It's more than Keir Starmer has ever said. Unless I missed it.

I understand that Trans people are really worried about being "outed" in the same way that gay people were

Not sure what you mean by this: trans people are obviously 'out', that is the whole point.
How could a transwoman not be 'out'? A typically male-looking man being somehow trans inside but not changing his appearance or clothing at all? That his internal sense of gender didn't match his sex, but he hadn't done anything about it?

TRAs have cried wolf wrt to 'hate crimes'. They have had campaigns urging reporting of misgendering and other micro aggressions to bump the numbers up.

The end result is that we cannot really know what was a genuine instance of bullying or aggression - which undoubtedly does happen, and yes on the basis of someone's 'gender presentation' or whatever you want to call it - or a complete nothing-burger of a person muddling pronouns.

"That doesn't mean that there isn't a threat to transwomen which comes from the same route of misogyny that women deal with all the time. To preven the SCR from going backwards we are going to have to start giving the TRAs an out, so they can get their attention by campaigning for something acheivable."

Well I would strongly disagree that it's misogyny - it's just male violence, which of course combined with misogyny creates MVAW, but has many other instances too: male violence against other males is just as common - that doesn't make it misogyny.

And what sort of an "out" do you have in mind? I think the problem is that if it's just campaigning for third spaces, the reason TRAs didn't do that before is because that's not what they want. They want admission to female spaces - or the activist ones do anyway.

Like fuck we do!