How do we deal with this? Transmen have police called on them

[SadiraOfTyr]

I honestly don’t know how this can be addressed. A group of male-identifying women used the women’s toilets, as they are required to where they live, and got the police called on them.

Obviously they did it as a stunt, but what really might the solution be? They are committing a criminal offence using the men’s.

www.erininthemorning.com/p/police-called-on-trans-men-using

Where does a trans man and trans women’s intense vulnerability come from?

For trans men - often it’s trauma, mistreatment and/autism. There is a mental fragility.

At what point do we as a society have to change the societal rules, laws and conduct of the majority to accommodate someone’s intense vulnerability? This is a serious question.

Is intense vulnerability the measurement? The last word? The most compelling reasons to make such changes?

I think it’s got to be more measured, thought through and logical than reactive.

Stop campaigning against tampon machines/bins in the Gents?

Nobody is campaigning against them, just pointing out how stupid it is to have them in there, which it is.

Doubling up on everything costs money, you also need sany bins in there, it's too expensive for service providers to have to provide these things for no good reason whatsoever.
The whole gist of the genderwangers spiel is how it's too expensive right, so they could save the service providers money if men use the men's loo's and women use the women's loos. Not rocket science.

There is a campaign to get the bins into men's toilets for continence reasons. Men with issues have to dispose of waste somewhere.

So the law is on their side if they get abused ( which they didn’t).
What it clearly highlights is women don’t want problems in their toilets hence all the dirty looks.

Probably the same group of women, who reported themselves to the police for using the women’s toilets. I’d be willing to bet on it.

I used to clean in pubs. All of them had bins somewhere. I would often find a pair of shitty pants in it.

According to habitual liar Erin in the Morning:

"But at Long Branch Lagoon, members of the Kansas Compliance Crew resorted to having to describe their genitals to police in order to resolve the matter and avoid arrest."

I'm not sure, if the police did ask this, that it was the first thing the police demanded of them (it's a trans activist fantasy that people will have to look at their genitalia to work out whether they're men or women) and if they did ask it would only have been because they were being deliberately obtuse in answering other questions, but the implication would be that their female parts are intact.

As Erin points out, this law they were objecting to:

"purported to invalidate driver’s licenses of trans Kansans who had changed their gender marker."

So they could simply have shown their driver's licence to prove that they were eligible to use the women's toilets.

Clearly, the answer is for people's ID to correctly state their sex and for people to give clear answers about their sex. It's pretty simple so I'm not sure why OP is panicking. Although, reading the nonsense of Erin in the Morning does tend to induce hysteria and confusion.

Yes the language and the allegations peppered through the article make me doubt the whole account.

I know Morrisons have just been on a PR campaign to say they're the first supermarket chain to put them in. Myself I would of though they would be better off using the nappy bins in the disabled/baby changing room for it.

Not that I'm suggesting that men with this issue are wearing nappies but there is a service in place for the disposable of unhygienic waste, that's been running a long time that could be shared, instead of some empty preformative gesture. Men with these issues have been disposing of them up to now. People find away.

Bingo.

If this stunt occurred at all, I have no doubt the reactions to it were staged.

And whether it did or didn’t happen, the account probably bears little resemblance to the truth.

What’s the saying? If a man wil lie about his sex, who on earth would trust anything else he says?

We don't have to "deal with it". Using opposite-sex toilets is not a criminal offence in the UK. If someone managed to lay on a stunt that caused any negative outcome for the participants at all, it would just be a civil kerfuffle - being asked to leave a shop or whatever. And I guess they would have to work quite hard to achieve even that.

The stunt in Kansas was silly, but it is also silly to post about it here as if it were a real problem. It is treating the issue like chewing gum -- i.e. as if it were something we can endlessly move around in our mouths just for relaxation. That risks undermining the real issues, reinforcing the gotcha that GC people are a 'cult' or whatever.

Just leave it alone and stop picking on every bit of silliness that feeds an appetite for Being Angry Online.

Agree. That’s fairly obviously a group of women. They’ve spent a fair bit of time and money trying to pass as men then they pull a silly stunt. In a country far far away. The OP’s attempt at a gotcha is pretty weak because this is definitely not my problem to solve.

You think women are reasonable to be alarmed by the idea of males coming into their facilities, and that the law should be changed to prevent this?

What’s your preferred solution to this?

No thank you. We have rights to privacy as well you know.

Men don't want this. No reasonable man wants to be alone in a washroom with a young woman he could be accused of inappropriate behaviour toward for one thing.

And plenty of men do actually want some privacy, and some men have religious rules about such things, just like some women.

I don't think the men's toilets etc should be mixed sex, for the reasons you mention; I do, though, think it's useful to think about why that wasn't suggested as a solution and why the onus was put on women to solve a male problem (because let's face it, nobody gave a toss about transmen until it was expedient).

Yes, and the suggested solution in the UK is to have men's single sex, women's single sex plus mixed sex provision. So everyone is catered for.

So if women similar to those in the OP had concerns about causing distress to other women in the ladies' toilets because they've tried to make themselves look male, then they can use the mixed sex spaces.

All good!

"Maybe recognise trans men's intense vulnerability?"

Hang on, aren't they MEN? They take hormones to grow beards and muscle and mustaches to be MEN. MEN aren't intensly vunerable are they? They are strong and tough ones? It is men that are violent and aggressive and the protectors. All the sterotypes they try and imitate?

Isn't that how it goes? They want to be men, be seen as men....but they want their intense vulnerability acknowledged??

Inwould say the intense vulnerability of a transman is down to the fact they are actually women in predominantly mens spaces. Which generally isn't safe for women.

So which is it? Do they want to be seen as burly men or intensly vunerable -women- transmen?

Me too. I've had this conversation with BIL who is rabidly "TWAW" and he honestly believes that because TW feel "uncomfortable" in men's toilets, it's not a problem HE can solve. TWAT.

That’s an interesting insight because it highlights that the issue for so many of us is privacy, quite apart from any issues relating to religion or safety. I do wish that simple, privacy could be remembered.

Absolutely this. People who have such extreme plastic surgery and hormone treatments that they pass for the opposite sex have created this problem for themselves- it’s not for anyone else to solve. In reality I imagine most transmen who convincingly pass continue to use men’s facilities. That’s fine by me- it doesn’t affect me and it is unlikely to put anyone at risk apart from the transman herself.

Yup. With the intent of destroying women's single sex protections.

And they're using women to do it. Or women are actually colluding against other women who need this resource, and being patsys for men.

It's beyond revolting.

Mixed sex spaces ffs, it's what they're for. To accommodate those who suffer with, or want everyone else to suffer with, sex based confusion. Chaos gremlin all you like in there.

I think adults need to understand that their extreme deliberate choices and actions have extreme consequences.

Just like choosing to get a sweary, offensive tattoo on your face means that you will never get any kind of professional job (in fact will struggle to get any job at all); choosing as a woman to look as much like a male as possible will mean that you have chosen to close off normal access to single-sex female opportunities and facilities by the same token. You chose it; it's what you wanted.

Had they not gone in together, wearing those shirts, desiring to cause a scene I doubt anyone would have guven a monkeys

But they did. And most if the story is according to them...

So the whole idea that women can look how they like and dress how they like goes out the window?

Women have a right to single sex spaces - unless they make choices about their appearances that make other women uncomfortable?