Transgender women will not be prosecuted in the use of women’s single sex facilities

[Theotheruser]

You can support transgender rights or not but the law isn’t itself politics. Transgender women will not be prosecuted in the use of women’s single sex facilities in public in the standard use the facilities was built for.

A standard use is:

• A transgender woman goes into the women’s toilet facilities in a cubicle for the purposes of relieving bodily fluids.
• A transgender woman goes into the women’s changing facilities in a cubicle for the purposes of removing clothing for leisure activities.
• A transgender woman goes into the women’s toilet facilities to protect the transgender women of being attacked or sexually assaulted.

A transgender woman in the standard uses of the women’s facilities are not exposing the users of the single sex facilities.

A transgender woman in the standard uses of the women’s facilities are not exposing child users in the single sex facilities.

A child user using single sex women’s facilities can’t deny other women public access of the facilities the child user believes are transgender.

With official documentation of the new sex will be difficult to disprove the claim of the transgender women being the male sex.

No harassment or sexual offences can be found against the transgender woman in the standard use of the women’s facilities with official documentation of the new sex.

A woman in the women’s single sex facility can be prosecuted for an offence and or removed if the woman is abusing or harassing the other user of being transgender without proof.

A woman recording and sharing publicly the other user without proof of being transgender can prosecuted.

The Supreme Court ruling or EHRC guidance has not changed the law to prosecute transgender women in women’s single sex spaces.

Transgender women have history of official records to support beyond a reasonable doubt the new gender identity. Have protection of gender discrimination.

Prosecution of transgender women is not going to work in the standard uses of the women’s facilities.

A woman can complain to management but unless management decides to take action to resolve the issue no action can be taken against the other user.

Plop!!!

Damn, that's a big cow pat. 🐄

Any legal challenge will most likely be against the service-provider or employer, as in Peggie or the Darlington nurses.

It is therefore up to service-providers and employers to ensure they observe the law.

Once again, we need to point out that decent people will obey the law.

Is the OP implying that men with trans identities are not decent people?

See, it’s the ‘relieving bodily fluids’ that we don’t like. Well, not just that, obviously, but some of you lads seem to like relieving different fluids from the actual women using the toilet.

Activists have now plumbed new depths in the hunt for new and exciting ways to persuade us to ignore reality and the rule of law: simply deny everything! Simples!

This. OP is either being deliberately obtuse or hasn’t been paying attention.

And, in a separate post in case it gets deleted, apparently using either a very bad AI not trained in English as the first language, or, my personal fav, a Russian bot! 😄

Don't know about "in the standard uses of the facilities", but that's a criminal nonstandard use of the English language.

Are you saying that transgender women (who are biological men) are refusing to obey a very clear law regarding single sex spaces?

I really, really don't want to be around biological men who refuse to accept the law (in any situation).

Just in case this is genuine, I'd like to see your evidence for these assertions, please, OP, thanks!

Men that call themselves ’transwomen’ have no ‘standard use’ of spaces set aside for women.

The Supreme Court ruling or EHRC guidance has not changed the law to prosecute transgender women in women’s single sex spaces.

Obviously not. It clarified that a GRC or GRC altered birth certificate is irrelevant when considering access to women spaces.

Offences of voyeurism or indecent exposure are covered under the Sexual Offences Act 2003.

Any man entering a women’s space is at automatic risk of prosecution for voyeurism or potentially indecent exposure. If I, my daughters or my husband come across any man entering women’s spaces, we will be reporting it to the space owner to get them removed and banned and calling the police.

It would be deeply transphobic to make the blanket assumption that trans people are not capable of or willing to respect the law. I’m sure men with a trans identity are perfectly capable to reading a sign on the door and choosing the correct space for their sex.

I was going for "a tale told by an idiot".

Fairy tales are generally untrue, based on stereotypes, and fairly entertaining.

Oh well, two out of three ain’t bad.

Dostoevsky?

Well, it made me laugh!

Macbeth, "full of sound and fury. Signifying nothing"😉

Criminally perhaps?

Gender fluids?

Just stop it! Just stop. 😆

And in English?

The offences of voyeurism and or indecent exposure under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 doesn’t discriminate sex.

Any man or woman entering a women’s space is at risk of prosecution for voyeurism or potentially indecent exposure.

If I, my daughters or my husband come across any man entering women’s spaces, we will be reporting it to the space owner to get them removed and banned and calling the police.

Unless you’ve got proof to prove the person is transgender then it is unlikely you will get the person removed. You will be removed from the situation causing a nuisance and harassment of space owner customers.

A transgender woman having a pee in the toilet cubicle in the women’s single sex will not be prosecuted by the police or CPS.

A transgender woman will continue to use single sex spaces. There is no law against it. Transgender people have spent years transitioning and why stop now?

Getting desperate now.

In the event that as you seem to think, men with trans identities are all law breakers with no respect for women, or capacity to understand the need for women to have rights too - (seems a bit prejudiced to me)

Service providers will not permit males into single sex groups, resources and services, that's over. Finite incantatem. The mixed sex provisions will be available though.

Service providers can absolutely ask someone they suspect to be a male to leave a single sex women's space and use the mixed sex provision - and can ban them from the resource and space altogether if they will not follow the rules of the service, or if they behave badly/shout/become aggressive etc, as per notices everywhere these days about not taking your emotional incontinence issues out on staff and everyone else in the vicinity. That part is nothing to do with gender, that's a basic standard requirement of appropriate behaviour. And yes police could be called if person refuses to go or to stop being inappropriate. (See Stonewall, this week.)

If men really need to get their jollies by barging into women's single sex spaces and aggressively breaking women's rights and law in places like public loos doing a 'ha, you can't stop me!' thing -

well firstly they're behaving like dicks and there'll be no point in looking baffled and hurt when the general public start getting really fed up with this and thinking that men with trans identities tend to be in general really badly behaved men who don't want equality but just to make women's lives difficult - the PR there could get problematic -

and secondly, the need for prosecution will probably eventually come, won't it? Because those men will have created the need and forced it to that point.

Many things weren't prosecutable until some idiots behaved so badly and jumped up and down on other people's rights that it became necessary. Ball is kind of in the court of these men now.

More “we’re not going to obey the law and you can’t make us” bollocks.
What a surprise.

Unless you’ve got proof to prove the person is transgender then it is unlikely you will get the person removed. You will be removed from the situation causing a nuisance and harassment of space owner customers.

You have misunderstood the law, there is no requirement for 'proof to prove'

And, as many GC women have already discovered to their detriment - often, the process is the punishment

ETA, what on earth is a 'space owner customer'?