Are you tired of winning?

[FlakyRobin]

Councils aren’t going for the ‘guidance’ and it is routinely ignored by trans people. When do you expect something to change?

The men (and the OP) certainly seem to think so! It is as it ever was.

From what I understand the current status is that Lambeth et al have decided to declare all toilets mixed sex and ignore building standards.

We will have to see how well that goes for those councils.

I am very interested to know whether they have consulted the relevant underwriters.

Also really want to know Mothin Ali's position on all this.

But spaces are divided by sex, not gender.

Gender has no bearing on what space anyone should use.

From a safeguarding point of view no it's not safe for women to share spaces designed as single sex with men, that's one of the main reasons for why they are designated single sex.

Which is why ALL men, and yes that includes the ones who wish they were women, need to follow the rules and use the gents.

And using your imaginary man that passes as woman...

I don't give a fuck where he pees as long as its not in the women's toilets. That is wholly his issue to solve. If there's a women's single sex loo then there will be a male version near by. If the man doesn't want to use that then that's his problem to work through.

Decency

It's a weird concept, but until, what, ten years ago...? no man, whether wearing a dress or believing himself whatever he believes, would have thought he deserves access to the ladies toilet. Or changing rooms. Or any other single sex space.

Even if he gets his kicks from pretending to be a woman, his love for - and respect for - his mother, sister, daughter, niece... would mean that he would never, ever, colonise their safe and hard-fought space.

This is hilarious 😂 You don’t think it’s safe for biological women to share spaces with men, but in the same breath you’re advocating for men (In dresses) to be welcomed into women’s spaces. Haven’t you worked it out yet?

Then they are self centred pricks. And don’t give a shit about how female people feel about this.

@FlakyRobin

If a neutral spaces isn’t provided and the accessible space is off limits, then trans people are going to use the space that is most comfortable. It’s just the reality of the situation.

or they could simply comply with the law and use the facilities set up for their sex…

As has been stated so often - there is no such thing as trans - you can’t physically or in any other way transition from man to woman or woman to man - therefore no ability to transition = no such thing as trans.

therefore, they are not trans - they are men / women as per their biological sex… so they do what every other man and woman does - use the spaces provided for their biological sex.

if they don’t then we need to protect others by ensuring that their breaking the law is seen to have consequences - to them and to the organisations that allow it…

Like 2 ?

A few months ago I was in a pub and went to use the ladies’ toilet. As I went down the corridor towards it a man (middle-aged, absolutely bog standard bloke) pushed past me and went to go in - I was just behind him at that point and said, politely, ‘sorry, this is the Ladies.’
Well. You’d have thought I had called him a needle-dicked pervent to his face. He gave me a look of pure hatred, muttered something unpleasant, turned and shoulder barged me out of the way.
He was totally, unreasonably, put out at being prevented from using the ladies toilet. The entitlement quite shook me, TBH.
When I went in it was empty. There were two stalls so I think he had been waiting for a chance to go in ahead and ….wait/wank/take photos? Shudder.

Yeah, he jumped the shark with that one!

Yes, you're right. It's the law that hasn't changed but the guidance on how to follow the law has changed.

The previous guidance said that some men (those who identify as women) were allowed to use women's spaces.

This has now been clarified to have been incorrect. The replacement guidance says that they can't.

It never said that explicitly.

It talked about SSE, but also said 'when deciding whether to use an exception, providers of a single-sex service must take a number of factors into consideration. These include the rights and needs of all users, including trans people.'

Maybe you are right. But that’s a pretty low opinion you have of trans people.

”Most comfortable”: thinking only of themselves? Given what you just said about threat, don’t you think at least some transwomen will want to avoid inflicting that?

And at least some will know the law has clarified this and will abide by that because that’s the right thing to do? It would be more comfortable for me to use the blue badge spaces but I don’t becuase they aren’t for me.

There must be some good ones, surely. Don’t you think?

Well. They can use the cubicles can't they?
That's dignity and privacy taken care of.
There's no evidence that their safety is at risk in the men's. So we're all good then?
Good.

Ah, ok. Thank you. I thought the previous guidance referred to "case by case" but that may have been something else.

The previous guidance was unclear. I think this is where the case by case idea came from

"A service provider provides single-sex services. The Equality Act allows a lawfully established separate or single-sex service provider to prevent, limit or modify people’s access on the basis of gender reassignment in some circumstances. However, limiting or modifying access to, or excluding a trans person from, the separate or single-sex service of the gender in which they present will be unlawful if you cannot show such action is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. This applies whether or not the person has a Gender Recognition Certificate."

Which could be seen as a provider has to justify why an individual man with a GRC or PC of GR can be excluded from a womans single sex services.

Or that the provider could determine if the service could include all men with gender, or no men with gender.

proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim seemed to be used twice, once to justify single sex services in the first places, and again to exclude men with gender.

I’m not tired of being proved right.

I am tired of being abused.

An entire thread, created for the purpose of bullying women is a great example of the tactics of transactivism.

I just don’t think you should expect to always get what you want.

So why do you?

The Equality Act allows a lawfully established separate or single-sex service provider to prevent, limit or modify people’s access on the basis of gender reassignment in some circumstances.

Previously this was interpreted as referring to people with the PC of gender reassignment using spaces of the opposite sex.

Following the SC ruling, it is interpreted as referring to people with the PC of gender reassignment using spaces for their sex.

This. I don't know why saying you're going to keep on with the predatory behaviour is seen as a win.

I think service providers were confident providing single sex services because they knew men wouldnt complain, and they wouldn't be faced with court costs.

They weren't so confident when excluding men with gender from womens spaces, because these men would complain and the risk of costs was real.

They basically relied on women shutting up and men with gender threatening court action. The guidance let women down by not being clear. The idea that men could, in theory, be indistinguishable from women and couldn't be outed lead to any man using womens spaces when he felt like it. But it was never written as such in the guidance.

I just don’t think you should expect to always get what you want.

Too late, mate. We have exactly what we want.

Men are not allowed in women's loos.

The end.

Apparently, OP thinks we should get rid of separate male and female provisions and replace them with "people who might feel at risk from others" and "people who might pose a risk to others" on a self identified basis.

😆

That's exactly what they think.

Its why it was never about safety.