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.

Never does. They have a total fixation on the man and his needs, and only see the world in the terms he describes it. They want to solve his problem on his terms, never see the problem from any other angle even though as soon as you take his demand that the solution must validare him as a women out of the equation the problem becomes almost trivial to solve.

Don't worry, it's all been noted... <giggles childishly>

TRAs and their hangers on of both sexes have said to me more than once “if you just accept that trans women are women, the problem goes away” 🙄

You're a better woman than I am, Marie!

After the shit I've heard in tribunals about what organisations get up to in order to allow men into women's spaces I work on the principle that if someone can imagine a shitty work scenario then law of averages it's probably happening at someone's place of employment somewhere.

"Lie down and let me drive this truck over you because I want to."

My employer is okay and pay well. I won’t say as I don’t want to lose my job. UC doesn’t cover rent.

@Theotheruser is my assumption for the reasons under article 9 conditions correct? Because that puts a different slant on things. Can you confirm? Thanks.

They’re clearly not okay of even half of what you say is true.

They’re not ok.

Yes, “if you just pretend the truck isn’t there, the problem goes away”

If you're prepared to - or have to - put up with that kind of management, that's up to you and I've expressed my genuine concern for your workers rights, but I'll leave it at that.
Just don't think that it is 'okay', it's not - the law is the law, workplace regs are workplace regs and employers can't pick and choose.

They really are not OK. They are very bad employers who are taking advantage of their female staff rather than tell Gary to get a bloody grip and use the gents just like he did for however many decades he did prior to his come to Jesus moment.

I left school with no GCSEs and was pregnant. When on UC and lived at my parents house until they were evicted by section 21 three years later. I moved in temporarily housing and later got a job and moved in a good area with my daughter who is doing good at school. I am not giving it up.

And as I’ve said, the second a new woman joins, the illegal policy would make the company potentially guilty of harassment/discrimination against women and she is perfectly entitled to reject the arrangement and the company would be ill advised to insist on it.

I don’t ask you to give it up. That doesn’t mean they’re a good employer though.

You are free to do whatever you like. It isn’t up to you what other women do.

I’m speaking from my experience. The other women are more vocal than me.

This is definitely more than one person. Now we're going for "sympathy."

It doesn’t matter what your experience is though. At the end of the day, your employers are acting illegally on several fronts.

You don’t have to give that all up because there are women who are fighting this for all women.

However don’t go telling other women not to fight because you don’t want to.

There are ways of quietly supporting that fight back which hopefully will mean your daughter won’t have to put up with this when she’s working age.

Again, what is the point of this thread? You are poorly informed and unconvincing. There is no need to prosecute these men, we can put pressure on employers and service providers as is already being done, and any “truce” will necessarily involve them using third spaces, not a hostile violation of women’s boundaries. They’re men. You know they are and so does everyone else, whatever twee little mantras they chant.

Do you actually want Gary in the women's toilets? Or would you actually like him to fuck off?

So why aren’t you glad they are?

They may be more trans allies vocal though!