TIFs in single-sex spaces

[MiddleCyclone]

Long-time Mumsnet browser (I remember watching penis beaker go semi-viral while I was already on here and god knows how long ago that was), left for a few years after all the trans stuff got too much for me, back to ask a question.

I’m a trans man who’s been on hormones long enough to pass nearly all of the time, who finally stopped using the women’s loos a couple of years back when a young girl watched me drying my hands and yelped “Mummy there’s a boy in here!”.

If the new guidance on single-sex spaces is to be followed I, read mostly as male (well, as a man), should go back in there and keep having these interactions, and keep making women and girls uncomfortable with my presence. Surely this can’t be the ideal outcome? It feels like the legislation has completely overlooked this.

This lovely chap has gone full inverted penis, has even posted pictures of himself dilating on a toilet floor (presumably the women’s) - would you really be happy to share a toilet with him?
Heather Herbert

Agreed. There are plenty of TIMs who have gone the whole hog who are just as predatory, misogynistic and dangerous as the ones who haven't. A woman is not a penis-less man and men, regardless of mutilation and cosmetic body modifications, are not welcome in our spaces.

By all means build an additional unisex toilet for them if you're so worried about them going in the men's and it means women are left in peace. But access to female only space is for women only and that is a hard line, now backed up by the law, regardless of surgical status or special certificates.

@MiddleCyclone
If the new guidance on single-sex spaces is to be followed I, read mostly as male (well, as a man), should go back in there and keep having these interactions, and keep making women and girls uncomfortable with my presence. Surely this can’t be the ideal outcome? It feels like the legislation has completely overlooked this.

The legislation (the EA) has been in place since 2010. We have had single sex spaces for far longer than that. Did you really never consider the potential consequences on your everyday life of taking medication which would alter your appearance so dramatically and make you look like a man?

You've made the decision to do things to your body so that you no longer look like a woman and are often mistaken for a man, and now you're complaining to women (who had nothing to do with you making your own decision) that there are problems associated with your decision to masquerade as the opposite sex. It's not our fault you're in this position, it's yours.

But the doctors and psychologists who treated you should also take some of the blame. They should never have encouraged you to take this path without you having a complete understanding of the consequences. You could go back to them for further advice. Or you could sue if you think you didn't give properly informed consent because you didn't really understand what you were doing.

Nope. She should use the women's. She can deal with the issues she's caused herself as she goes. She's a woman.

She can try the men's if she really wants to, and most men won't object because she's not a danger to them.

But no, ethically and legally she should use the women's. Because she's a woman.

No, legally and ethically she should use the women's and deal with the problems she has caused herself.

However, if she does want to sneak into the men's most of them won't care. She will probably get away with it because most men will just shrug. She's not dangerous to them, after all, as she is a woman.

But that's for her to deal with case by case as she has caused herself these issues unfortunately.

But no, I won't be encouraging anyone who is a woman to use a man's toilet or facilities. Men have rights, and that includes the right to privacy and dignity too.

@Tinks2026
I bloody well hope that if the puberty blockers trial goes ahead (which I hope it does not) that those children are told that when they persist and go on to cross sex hormones (as most, according to what we already know, will) that they will not have the rights they think they have to enter cross-sex spaces.

I doubt it. They'll just be further enabled to think that they have changed sex and that because they've been enabled to 'pass' even better, no harm no foul

They are accessible toilets not disabled toilets. They are for anyone with an access need. That can be temporary or permanent.

Examples of temporary needs - someone with a broken leg needing the help of the rails and extra space. Pregnant women with urgency issues. A parent with a pram, or parent with opposite sex child who cannot use the sexed toilet of the parent. All of these people can use accessible toilets.

Being a trans person would count as an accessibility need. Though in this case a permanent one.

Not every access need is visible.

I didn't mention the puberty blocker trials. But completely agree that these poor children should not be encouraged to think they'll receive extra privileges because they harm themselves like this. They are just creating a lifetime of suffering for themselves, and it is deeply sad but their lives will be shortened too and their health will suffer if they take wrong sex hormones.

And unfortunately girls and women taking wrong sex male hormones are also harmed more dramatically and more permanently than men who take wrong sex female hormones, even if they later desist.

So you are a woman, who dresses like a man and for some unknown reason you decided to take hormones which will have detrimentally altered your bodies normal hormonal functions for a pipe dream when you subscribed to a cult.

Toilets are the least of your worries but as an aside how frequently do you need to use them as they seem to be an utter obsession for the cross dressing community. Amazingly I can be out and about for many hours without having to have a wee, maybe the unnecessary hormones that you have subjected your body to have had an impact.

To clarify you are a woman so use the female toilets.

Just musing on the fact that this will be another generation of kids who probably won't be told the truth about how their desire to pretend to be the other sex actually plays out in real life.

@Wowthatwasabigstep
I am menopausal and I can't go very long at all without a toilet, so that's a good point. Menopause has affected me so much that I find it so very sad to have induced that at a young age when you should not be dealing with loss of libido, genito-urinary problems and aches and pains.

Except it’s not just her who has to deal with the problems imposed by her presence. It’s women who are making use of the space. Many would rightfully feel intimidated and distressed at the presence of someone they believed to be a man.

Furthermore allowing people who look like men to frequent female toilets threatens the integrity of female only space. It’s a safeguarding issue and women shouldn’t pay the price for her choice to impersonate a man. We know that TIMs are using TIFs like her as cover to try and manipulate their way into female toilets.

If men have an issue with her then she can use a unisex toilet if there’s one available and if not the accessible toilet. She has precluded herself from having the right to enter female only space.

Yes, women will have to deal with their discomfort/shock at a woman pretending to be a man in the toilet/changing room/facilities and that's horribly unfair. This is another thing inflicted on us by this idealogy.

But nevertheless women should, ethically and legally, use female facilities and women who have harmed themselves with wrong sex hormones will have to figure it out every time they go out in public.

And even though these mentally unwell women are causing other women distress at times, they are still women, and from a safeguarding stance they should use female facilities.

Most things are very straightforward, and I have come to realise that "nuance" usually means "I am going to tell a lie or say something unacceptable and demand that you agree with me" in modern discourse. This is straightforward. Women use women's facilities.

And, of course, almost none of them come close to passing and a quick shock is all you will receive when you catch them out of the corner of your eye, before swiftly realising it's a woman who has harmed herself with wrong sex drugs.

The good news is, this entire fiction is collapsing and in another ten years it will be absolutely burned out. The bad news is that the carnage of those who are left with damaged bodies will be diminishing by the year. In another 20 years few, if any, women who harmed themselves like this will be functional or seen in public at all. And that's a horror story, but it's true.

Out of interest Op, how do you think the legislation should have dealt with it?
Personally, I don't have an issue with you using women's spaces but I understand that could make you and others feel uncomfortable.
I was at the theatre recently and they had single sex and gender neutral facilities as probably many other places do too.I thought that was a great solution so perhaps that could be something I could
support more generally if such a thing was started. However it seems that Trans ideology is mainly based around the desires of TW and a vocal element don't appear to find this a palatable solution. I agree that TM seem to be an afterthought,
plus ca change.

There is nothing ethically or legally that forces women into female only space against their will. It's perfectly ethical and legal to use unisex or accessible facilities. It is also perfectly safe for them to use those facilities. What is your obsession with trying to pigeonhole TIFs into female single sex space despite the obvious safeguarding and comfort concerns for women who haven't betrayed their sex?

Er, yes of course there is. Legally men are entitled to some single sex spaces. So if a woman wants to use a man's single sex space, she can't, either legally or ethically.

She can try to slyly slip into men's spaces and men might let her, of course. That's her choice, and her problem to deal with.

Unisex areas were not being discussed, because it doesn't matter. The discussion is should a woman use men or women's spaces. Of course if the spaces are unisex there is no problem. But that's not the discussion.

There is no safeguarding issue of any kind with a woman using women's spaces. Discomfort or surprise is not a safeguarding issue.

What a weird response.

Not being allowed into female single sex space does not mean being permitted into male single sex spaces. That's a strawman argument and you know it. That's why you're pretending that unisex and accessible facilities are irrelevant when they are deeply relevant. The OP put up two far from ideal scenarios as if they were the only options that existed. They're not.

Passing TIFs do not belong in single sex space at all. They are not male and don't belong there, and they have modified their appearance to the point that they have precluded themselves from using female spaces.

There absolutely is a safeguarding issue in letting people who look like men use the female facilities. It opens them up to any man using them. If challenged he can simply say he is a 'trans man' and permitted (or even forced according to some of you) to use it by law.

Sex Matters have written about this exact issue clearly, and the safeguarding and dignity issue it imposes.

@Tinks2026 @Whatchamacallitt

Didn't the UK SC judgement expressly mention that a transman can be excluded from a female single-sex space if they are likely to cause distress to the women in it? Of course, they must then be offered an alternative, most likely a unisex or gender-neutral space.

Yes it did, though I did see a post by Akua Reindorf saying it must be case by case and was unlikely to be proportionate in response to regular services like toilets. It's more applicable to something like a rape crisis service where women are particularly vulnerable and likely to be triggered by a male appearing person.

I don't think therefore that my argument against TIFs in female space is one that the law mandates. I think it's a matter of ethics and that TIFs should have the decency to realise that they are intimidating and undermine the integrity of female single sex space and so should seek out unisex or accessible facilities instead.

Of course there will be times when they require access to female services like gynaecological care or if they were imprisoned. But that is a very different situation to using the toilet with strangers who have no idea of your female sex or medically 'transitioned' status.

For trans identifying men they provide easy validation on a daily basis and/or a wonderful opportunity to make women feel uncomfortable, win win for them.

I don't see much from the OP after the initial post...

As a man, I don't want women in the male toilets. I can just about manage to put up with sharing facilities with other men on a good day to be quite honest! But the way the male loos work, if you come in and just go to a cubicle, wash your hands and leave, I don't see any big problem.

The biggest issue in male toilets (apart from the social terror of negotiating aforementioned urinals) is how do I get out of the place without touching the furniture that the dirty non-handwashing minky bastards have touched. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that OP is not one of those people!

If you pass so well use the men's. Out of curiosity if you committed a crime would you're choice be to be housed in the men's estate?

You know... I'm a transman too, and weirdly enough, when I read this, my immediate answer was, "Well yes, of course, where else would I go?" It took a couple of seconds for my rational brain to kick in and remind me why that would be a terrible idea.

So consciously, I know that I would ask to be housed in the women's estate - but damn if it doesn't feel completely wrong!

It is interesting that despite men's toilets being such dangerous places that if transwomen have to set foot in there - even those in professional offices, cultural venues such as theatres or expensive restaurants - they will be instantly brutally murdered, transmen (actual females) can apparently use them quite safely. Does anyone know why?

You are right, the toilets are not disabled - the users are.

Accessible toilets are intended for people who need the adaptations - the support rails, the extra space for a wheelchair, the positioning of washbasins, the space and privacy to change colostomy bags etc.

Some people will always need these adaptations, and the accessible toilet is the only one they can use. Some people, as you say, need extra support and space temporarily, e.g. if they have a broken leg.

Some disabled people need the adaptations on bad days, when their mobility or balance is particularly bad; on good days they can, should and do use the standard toilets.

The accessible toilets are for people who actually need the adaptations in them, who cannot use any other toilet and who have no choice but to use them.

Looking at some of your examples:

'A parent with a pram' should not use the accessible toilet.
Wider 'ambulant' cubicles are provided in single sex toilets, they have more space and some supports for people who need a bit of extra space or support, but do not need all the adaptations of an accessible toilet.
That's where parents with a pram should go.

They do not need the adaptations in an accessible toilet.

'A parent with opposite sex child' should not use the accessible toilet.

A mother can bring a young boy into the women's toilet. A father can safely let a young girl go into the women's toilet on her own and wait outside, often asking a woman to take her in and keep an eye on her -- that's what my father used to do when I was little
They do not need the adaptations in an accessible toilet.

'Being a trans person would count as an accessibility need' 'an accessibility need' means physically needing the adaptations in the accessible toilet, not choosing not to use all the other available toilets.

They do not need the adaptations in an accessible toilet.

Accessible toilets were campaigned for for decades by people with disabilities, for people with disabilities, who use them not because they prefer them, or they feel more comfortable using them, but because they need them.

There are no toilet police to keep men out of women's toilets, it has to work on trust and respect.
There are no toilet police to keep able-bodied people from using accessible toilets, it also has to work on trust and respect.