Janice Turner in the Times today

[13RidgmontRoad]

“It is entirely feasible for everyone, women and trans people, to enjoy swimming and sport. It requires no more than practical compromises, repurposed spaces, a few more gender neutral loos. But this would mean acknowledging biological sex exists, that sometimes female safety takes precedence over male feelings, and that the mantra “trans women are women” is not literally true.

“The Greens — plus some Labour folk and Lib Dems — will never concede this. (Nor will many trans activists, including groups like Bash Back, whose members pledge to defend their right to women’s spaces via threats and violence.) They prefer to live in a state of perpetual outrage about the impossibility of something they could instantly solve, even if it means escalating division and fear.”

Clear-minded and articulate as ever. I live in one of the affected councils and seeing our newly-elected councillors froth over this while umpteen public service, repair and welfare issues sail down the river has been quite something.

https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/posturing-council-culture-war-over-single-sex-spaces-f9tlq8tcr

Of course it has never been legal, or fair, or appropriate to use the facilities designated for the opposite sex.

The main compromise, i suggest, lies in giving up trying to force people to validate or accept your/one's private belief.......by just accepting that you can get on with your life in the same way as everyone else does, and in such a way which respects that others also have specific rights and protections too.

There are established protections for those with trans identities...that has not changed. Everyone has the same civil rights.

I think the compromise she refers to is to stop fighting to get the law changed so they can legally use women's spaces and work instead on getting and using gender neutral
facilities.

The compromise would be in the agreement to stop trying to change the law, which they have every right to try and do.

Tbf, a lot of TRAs haven't been working seriously on trying to change the law; rather, they've been trying to pretend, and to convince the unsuspecting to believe, that the Law is and always has been what they would like it to be.

A lot of them are doing a lot of things. Some very bad indeed. But "they" aren't all the same, especially the people who transitioned many years ago.

I feel quite sorry for the ones who were quietly pretending to be women, never held a banner or tweeted a hateful statement in their lives, who were assured by Stonewall that they had every right to do what they were doing and then suddenly have been told that they don't.

I've heard of one who captained (I'm sure that's relevant btw, that a male became captain) a local cricket side for 20 years who suddenly isn't allowed to play for that team any more. I do believe that there are some who would be very afraid to use the men's loos in the local authority toilet blocks that you used to see everywhere in town car parks.

It is a complete mess, and I blame Stonewall for this and I'm beyond cross that they are throwing everything now into getting the law changed instead of doing the right thing for everyone.

If Stonewall had campaigned for third spaces in the first place, or for trans people to be safe & welcome in the spaces for their own sex, this might never have been a problem.

I have no sympathy to spare. I’ve run out.

Because women who say they are men are zero threat to men?

Which says absolutely nothing about female to male trans people so I still don't see the point your post was making.

All trans people should be subject to the same rules.

I am disappointed that nobody has asked for Mothin Ali's opinion on this.

These councils are declaring that they don't respect the right of religious people to know whether they are doing something that might be against their religious principles.

To be pedantic they aren't, because men and women are not the same and the reasons for single sex provision are not the same. As long as no drugs are involved, I don't think anyone cares about the existence of an open division for sport, for instance.

However, the rationale behind single sex toilets is privacy, which does apply equally to both sexes.

Janice stating that Samantha Niblett is top seed in Stella Creasy's 2026 virtue signalling Olympics is so on the money.
The alt right in politics is currently totting up the ledger on the left establishment refusing to budge on this, even when the SC has ruled unequivocally, and Phillipson published the official advice.
Once that ledger is complete, and if the alt right ascend to power, we'll see the mother of all battles on the law being changed on illegals, leaving the ECHR etc.
The left establishment will not budge on this, so something will have to make them budge. And everything else the left won't negotiate on.

I have a friend who mentors a young woman refugee. This young woman swims and swims, in one of these boroughs, before college every day. She also has specific trauma, and when she saw this news she asked my friend to find out whether male bodied people would now be in the showers and changing room.

My friend asked on a local Facebook group that often discusses council goings on but was not even able to ask for the answer without being attacked and her post removed.

Is the culture war changing?

It's compromises on both sides.

A compromise by trans-identified people by asking them to accept that their sex is relevant in some settings.

And a compromise by society by providing people who are distressed at the prospect, or would feel and potentially look out of place in single sex faciliities for their own sex with a unisex alternative.

Entirely fair. I have no issue with trans people being provided with unisex alternatives to single sex space (provided that single sex space is not replaced entirely to facilitate this).

I can certainly see the utility for people who are distressed about their sex and for those who are medicalised and could be unwelcome or even intimidating (in the case of male passing trans-identified women) in single sex spaces for their own sex.

Yes, and I don't think anyone on this thread would disagree with that. But it's never enough, is it?

I hope those councillors are absolutely mortified at having their nonsensical obfuscations aired openly in the Sunday Times for all to see.

Stonewall started pushing their trans agenda about 10 years ago. The cricket captain you mention was deliberately pretending to be a woman and cheating in their sport long before then.

Female safety takes precedence always and every single time. I want this to be a priority forever.

They had a sincerely held belief that they were not cheating. They've lost a sport they loved playing and it's thrown their entire social life up in the air. They were shat on along with others in this whole mess that Stonewall created.

I hope he recognises that it’s Stonewall’s fault.

I used to know a TIM who played for his local women’s croquet team and I expect he’s very upset too.

They had a sincerely held belief that they were not cheating. They've lost a sport they loved playing and it's thrown their entire social life up in the air.

Sorry, but why didn't he play for a men's team?
Not good enough? Train harder then. Or not accepted by other men? Then up to him to try to educate the other men. Not dump the problem on women.

I assume that the Captain is in a playing position, which makes it very nice for the team he is on, and not as good for those he's playing against. Maybe the opposing team could press a spare man into their team also?

yeah, my sympathy for a man who is pretending he has changed sex and consequently transgressing women's boundaries is severely limited I'm afraid

unless he is completely psychotic, he will understand that he has not changed sex. In which case he knew he was wrong (or should have done)

She offers no solution to reconciling trans and women’s rights, just rails against hateful gender critical feminists to signify that she/her, Niblett, flogger of John Lewis dildos, is among the sainted few.

Flogger of dildos. John Lewis dildos at that! How have I never heard of this?

I did wonder about the john lewis dildos, but i've been taking a leave of absence and assumed you lot all knew what that was about

to google..

But he was in the women's cricket team for 10 years before Stonewall decided to start getting into trans rights. So I don't think you can blame Stonewall for this one - it's totally on the man himself. He presumably got into the team because he was good at cricket. He was good at cricket largely because he had a male advantage - strong, fast bowling, strong batting, etc. Very nice for him to get into a team so easily, and no doubt the male advantage helped him to become captain too. Maybe a woman would have liked to join the team, and wasn't able to because all places were filled? And his team performed well against other teams in part because they had a man in the team. So I wouldn't shed too many tears for him. He has spent 20 years helping his team to cheat by pretending to be a women's team rather than a mixed team. And he knew exactly what he was doing.

blimey
https://x.com/spectator/status/2081668426901139855