Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Trans Women are Real Women and Should Have Access to Women's Spaces

1000 replies

user08101988 · Yesterday 12:32

Started because a thread on Girlguiding was getting too off topic.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
18
murasaki · Yesterday 16:56

Sunnibee · Yesterday 16:55

I guess it's gone the other way now. Presumably if I posted a potato in response to a gender critical post I disagreed with, that would be reported by a mob of users as well.

Not at all. But you were mocking someone's abuse. Which is entirely different from disagreeing.

Taztoy · Yesterday 16:56

Why is it not discrimination against me as a disabled person to have to use the disabled loo? I have to out myself every time I go to the loo. All loos should be designated disabled. Otherwise it’s discrimination and forcing me to out myself.

Sunnibee · Yesterday 16:56

Why was my post saying we have to agree to disagree deleted?

Boiledbeetle · Yesterday 16:56

Sunnibee · Yesterday 16:42

Is an eye roll emoji against the rules on mumsnet? Or does that only apply to people who challenge gender critical propaganda ?

Not against the rules. Your decision however to use it as a response to Taz was the bit that left people going what the fuck?

It was uncalled for, and showed a side of your character that was unpleasant at best and came across as despicably cruel.

Zimunya · Yesterday 16:56

Zun · Yesterday 12:36

Aw diddums you’ve never been told no before have you?

This is when I miss the laugh emoji. Good response.

WearyAuldWumman · Yesterday 16:57

SidewaysOtter · Yesterday 16:48

Ah, the old "both sides" argument. Because women only deserve safety, respect and single sex spaces if they've been nice Hmm

As for how many trans women are frequenting women's loos, it doesn't really matter. One is too many - I've found myself in the ladies with a hulking great big trans-identifying bloke in there and it was not a pleasant experience, not least because he was between me and the door - but even the fear that one might be there. Men, however they present, retain the advantages of puberty and the vast majority of transwomen have not had hormones, let alone surgery. They still retain the ability to assault, over-power and sexually abuse us.

There's always the "my friend is a transwoman, she's lovely and would never hurt a fly" argument which doesn't work because other women don't know your friend is not a risk. Good men stay out so bad men stand out.

In the conflict between transwomen's desire to use facilities that validate them and women's need to have safe spaces away from men of all types/identities, the latter is always the path of least harm.

I've said elsewhere that the case that brought this home to me was the trial of Katie/Lennon Dolatowski. He used his supposed female identity to access women's spaces including supermarket toilets in two separate Fife towns.

His first victim was a a 12 yr old victim of voyeurism. The second victim was a 10 yr old who had to punch Katie/Lennon in the groin in order fend off a sexual assault.

Those of us from the area are well aware that Katie/Lennon is a particularly large, violent man and yet the powers that be continually bowed to his wish to enter women's spaces, even to the extent of allowing this paedophile to be discharged to a women's shelter which housed mothers and their children.

He was only removed when some of the mothers at the refuge contacted the local newspaper.

The authorities valued a man's feelings more than the safety of women and children.

Sunnibee · Yesterday 16:58

murasaki · Yesterday 16:56

Not at all. But you were mocking someone's abuse. Which is entirely different from disagreeing.

I wasn't doing that no.

I was responding to the fact that imv the claim that "women need protection " has no place in a debate about whether trans women are women.

Ereshkigalangcleg · Yesterday 16:58

ErrolTheDragon · Yesterday 16:52

It was a while ago, when gender critical posters were being pretty heavily monitored - MN was pretty much the only place we were able to talk at all though. Before the Forstater judgment and Supreme Court etc.

Writing the word “yawn” also ISTR

WrongKindOfFeminist · Yesterday 16:58

So, the normal human response after doing something really egregious like mocking a woman for talking about her abuse, would be to apologise. Rather than doubling down and having a petted lip about being deleted.

Are there not courses people can take in empathy and social interaction? An app or something that tells you what is appropriate and not?

OneDreamyAquaEagle · Yesterday 16:58

Sunnibee · Yesterday 16:50

They were not adjudicating on the meaning of sex or gender or the definition of "women" other than how that word is used in a specific piece of legislation enacted by parliament - the EA 2010. It's really important people understand that and stop saying things like "the Supreme Court has confirmed trans women aren't women."

The Supreme Court para 209 confirms the legal definition of woman. You may wish to extrapolate from that.

helderste · Yesterday 16:58

PrettyPickle · Yesterday 16:48

I’m not suggesting dismantling single‑sex spaces at all, quite the opposite. I think single‑sex spaces are essential for safeguarding, dignity and privacy, and they should remain exactly as they are.

My point is that the conversation gets stuck when it’s framed as “either trans women are women and get full access” or “single‑sex spaces must disappear”. That’s a false choice there are other options.

We can keep women‑only spaces and create additional options that include trans people without compromising anyone’s safety. Things like:

  • single‑occupancy unisex toilets
  • individual changing cubicles
  • mixed‑gender facilities alongside women‑only ones
These don’t replace single‑sex spaces, they sit alongside them.

That’s why I keep saying the useful question is about design and policy, not ideology. We don’t need to redefine womanhood or remove boundaries to make sure everyone has somewhere appropriate to go.

You do know that the suggestion that trans identified men use gender neutral (mixed sex) loos has been rejected out of hand by them for years, don’t you?

Ereshkigalangcleg · Yesterday 16:58

Sunnibee · Yesterday 16:58

I wasn't doing that no.

I was responding to the fact that imv the claim that "women need protection " has no place in a debate about whether trans women are women.

Did you miss the second part of the OP by any chance? I mean, they’re not women, they are men, this has been clarified by the Supreme Court, not that we needed that.

So men, including this particular group, are not in fact welcome in women’s spaces, and one of the key reasons for this is because men pose a risk to women and another is that it is a violation of our privacy and dignity for men to invade female only spaces.

What exactly are we missing? Why can you not understand the relevance of women’s lived experience to this?

ErrolTheDragon · Yesterday 16:58

Nomad2009 · Yesterday 16:51

I have 2 transwomen friends, and know others more superficially. One has had top and bottom surgery, a surgically created vagina for penetrative sex, breasts, she is on life long hormone treatment, changed her name, and has been living as a woman since her late teens.

Friend number two, who is in her 60s, has been living as a woman since her 40s and has changed her name. She's kept her penis, and has not undergone hormone treatment. She's bisexual and has penetrative sex with her female partner.
I am comfortable with friend 1 to be in female only spaces because although she was borne male her body is no longer such. Friend number 2 however is still very much a man, even though she lives as a woman as that's how she feels comfortable with.

You may be comfortable with one but not the other. Maybe I would be ok too…
That has absolutely no bearing on the rights of other women - rape survivors etc - who would not be remotely comfortable with any male being in single sex spaces.

GreyskySexRealistsky · Yesterday 16:59

Amiiee · Yesterday 16:51

Yes. I have to go and do something right now but I will be back tonight or tomorrow afternoon to discuss :)

I am actually interested in this but I think you should start a new thread so it doesn't get caught up in this one

Just to add: by the time you come back, this one might have reached its limit anyway!

BlakeCarrington · Yesterday 16:59

I really don’t think it’s worth your time @murasaki, it’s just crappy rage bait with nothing to back it up. You’ve lost @Sunnibee, you need to find a way to deal with that.

💐 @Taztoy

Sweetdreamsbeautifulnightmare · Yesterday 16:59

Unless you’re born as a woman you are not a woman. Sorry

Sunnibee · Yesterday 16:59

OneDreamyAquaEagle · Yesterday 16:58

The Supreme Court para 209 confirms the legal definition of woman. You may wish to extrapolate from that.

No it doesn't conform the "legal definition of woman". It confirms the legal definition of the word "woman" as it appears in one specific piece of legislation - the EA 2010,

EmpressDomesticatednottamed · Yesterday 16:59

PrettyPickle · Yesterday 16:48

I’m not suggesting dismantling single‑sex spaces at all, quite the opposite. I think single‑sex spaces are essential for safeguarding, dignity and privacy, and they should remain exactly as they are.

My point is that the conversation gets stuck when it’s framed as “either trans women are women and get full access” or “single‑sex spaces must disappear”. That’s a false choice there are other options.

We can keep women‑only spaces and create additional options that include trans people without compromising anyone’s safety. Things like:

  • single‑occupancy unisex toilets
  • individual changing cubicles
  • mixed‑gender facilities alongside women‑only ones
These don’t replace single‑sex spaces, they sit alongside them.

That’s why I keep saying the useful question is about design and policy, not ideology. We don’t need to redefine womanhood or remove boundaries to make sure everyone has somewhere appropriate to go.

There's a resaon why women are out of patience, the kind of practical solutions you are suggesting were suggested years ago, women even offered to help get them built.
But that wasn't good enough, there is a cohort of men who want to get in the womens spaces because that is where the women are.

I listened to the latest This Isn't Working podcast in which a delight by the name of Bobbi Picard of Trans in the City announced that he would continue to use womens toilets and if anyone tried to stop him he was going to urinate on the floor. Said no woman ever.

A few years back I read on X a trans identified male who had found funding for a third/fourth space toilet and was looking for match funding. Did the trans community leap at it? Did they fuck, not a single donation was made.

Women are done with it, it's not our job to offer and help and the goodwill has been literally pissed away. Now the concentration is on hanging onto the spaces that we had to fight for, from about 1860 I believe(?) The men can sort their own shit out, we aren't their mothers and are not obliged to solve their problems.

WrongKindOfFeminist · Yesterday 17:00

Yep. We've had enough of being threatened, attacked, and pissed upon. Men need to put their own house in order.

DrBlackbird · Yesterday 17:00

Boiledbeetle · Yesterday 16:56

Not against the rules. Your decision however to use it as a response to Taz was the bit that left people going what the fuck?

It was uncalled for, and showed a side of your character that was unpleasant at best and came across as despicably cruel.

Still no apology.

Taztoy · Yesterday 17:00

Sunnibee · Yesterday 16:59

No it doesn't conform the "legal definition of woman". It confirms the legal definition of the word "woman" as it appears in one specific piece of legislation - the EA 2010,

And the EA 2010 also prohibits sex based discrimination and permits single sex spaces.

why don’t they matter?

Mapletree1985 · Yesterday 17:01

user08101988 · Yesterday 12:53

They are biological females due to this study: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8955456/

Also, if you think stripping down what women are to their body parts, that's what feminists fought against for years. Now women can get jobs, start bank accounts, own property, and so many more things. This is a very regressive view of what women are.

So, if your brain was scanned and you turned out NOT to have "female brain", you'd accept you were a man?

Second, please explain to me why the physical structure of the brain should count when determining biological sex but the physical structure of the genitalia or the whole body DNA should not. Seems like you're cherry picking, so explain to me why you're not.

HugeMistake999 · Yesterday 17:01

Nope, set up trans spaces.

MrsBlobby64 · Yesterday 17:01

Yawn 🙄

ILikeDungs · Yesterday 17:01

EarthSight · Yesterday 13:52

Does anyone have a recipe for some nice, fiery ginger biscuits? I'd like to also make something with ricotta is someone has any suggestions.

Full disclosure I am still on page eight. Things may have progressed. They often do :) but these are fucking good biscuits:

Treacle Ginger Biscuits

2 cups flour
1/4 tsp salt
2 tsp baking soda
1 tsp cinnamon
1 tsp ground cloves
1 tsp (or more) freshly grated ginger
3/4 cup butter
1 cup sugar
1 egg
1/4 cup black treacle

Combine flour, salt, baking soda, cloves and ginger and set aside. Cream butter and sugar together and then add treacle and beat until light and fluffy. Stir in flour mixture just until blended.Shape into small balls and roll in sugar. Place on an ungreased baking sheet and bake in a hot oven for 8 to 10 minutes. Use a metal spatula to lift from the baking sheet to a clean counter top to cool.

Oh, and men can't be women.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.