Trans women and single-sex spaces

I think there is a difference between intact males and surgically 'transitioned' ones. Yes, both are male, but the one who has undergone surgery is (a) obviously committed to the cause, and (b) much less likely to be a risk to women.

It is when a man pretends to be a woman in order to access female spaces that I object. Whether or not he intends to harm women is irrelevant. My husband and son wouldn't harm women but both are able to understand that we don't want them (or their friends) watching us undress or being in our spaces when we are doing personal things.

Most trans women are heterosexual men, and most do not take female hormones. Look at how many claim to be lesbian, and object when real lesbians don't want to have sex with them. They are men who are attracted to women, so should not be in female spaces.

There are very few sex-based spaces. Loos, changing rooms and some medical spaces are the only ones to spring to mind, although there are things like women-only times in swimming pools and so on. The reasons those places are single-sex is because they are places where women remove clothing or are otherwise vulnerable to attack by men. Not all men, to coin the phrase, but the risk is always there. Men are men, whatever they wear and whomever they claim to be. The risk, therefore, remains the same regardless of how they 'identify'.

As I have said several times, where new facilities are being built there is no reason why they can't be enclosed spaces, so long as they are sensibly sited (ie not along corridors away from main seating areas), but existing buildings are not always compatible, and there is not always a budget for providing brand new plumbing and accommodation.

Our local museum recently re-opened after a refurb, the toilets are unisex cubicles. I find it strange to be sharing the wash basin area with men, but I am not sure there is any reason to object to it. What does really irritate me though is that the sanitary bags in the cubicles are labelled 'men's continence bags'. How many men with continence problems need bags, compared with the number of women who need bags for period products? Perhaps if women choose to assume the bags are not for their use and flush period products down the toilet then the blockages that will result will lead to a rethink.

Sharing the wash basin area with the opposite sex presents the exact problems that initiated Sandie Peggie's complaint; a man pretending to a woman insisting on staying and watching her while she attempted intimate washing.
Sounds as though the academics are imposing their ideology.

Quercus, That’s actually another example of discrimination. Either label them for sanitary pad disposal or have two different packs.
Of course it could be discriminatory in implying that men are too thick to grasp the fact that their incontinence pads should not be flushed away.
If you are continent, you don't need pads anyway.
Continence is the ability to control your bladder and bowel function, while incontinence is the opposite – bladder or bowel leakage.

eazybee

Sharing the wash basin area with the opposite sex presents the exact problems that initiated Sandie Peggie's complaint; a man pretending to a woman insisting on staying and watching her while she attempted intimate washing.
Sounds as though the academics are imposing their ideology.

If the washing facilities are in the cubicles there is t s problem. It's a poor use of space that could be used to provide more actusl toilets.

I think the situation that Quercus is referring is where there are individual toilet cubicles, but the handwashing area is communal. So you would do your 'business' in the cubicle, but could then find yourself washing your hands next to someone of the opposite sex.

I think there is a difference between intact males and surgically 'transitioned' ones. Yes, both are male, but the one who has undergone surgery is (a) obviously committed to the cause, and (b) much less likely to be a risk to women.

We have no idea which is which.
It's not up to women to try to assess how dangerous a man might be. He shouldn't be in a 'single-sex' place.

One place you didn't mention Doodledog is prisons.
A majority of women prisoners have suffered male violence and it's plain cruelty to lock men in with them, however harmless those men might be thought to be.
The women are traumatised by being locked in with men who may turn out to be dangerous to them.

ViceVersa

I think the situation that Quercus is referring is where there are individual toilet cubicles, but the handwashing area is communal. So you would do your 'business' in the cubicle, but could then find yourself washing your hands next to someone of the opposite sex.

Yes but that's bad planning, put a washhand basin in the cubicle.

I'd rather be washing my hands next s man than next to a woman washing out her mooncup.

We are in the 21st century so let's have some decent toilets although in lots of places public toilets seem to be closing so I suppose we are supposed to be grateful.

theworriedwell

ViceVersa

I think the situation that Quercus is referring is where there are individual toilet cubicles, but the handwashing area is communal. So you would do your 'business' in the cubicle, but could then find yourself washing your hands next to someone of the opposite sex.

Yes but that's bad planning, put a washhand basin in the cubicle.

I'd rather be washing my hands next s man than next to a woman washing out her mooncup.

We are in the 21st century so let's have some decent toilets although in lots of places public toilets seem to be closing so I suppose we are supposed to be grateful.

But in your previous post, you said "If the washing facilities are in the cubicles there is t s problem. It's a poor use of space that could be used to provide more actusl toilets."

I meant arent in the cubicles. My arthritis and using a smart phone can be a nightmare. I mean a big open area for hand washing is a waste of space. No need to use much if any space in the cubicle, you can get the basin built into the top of the cistern.

My is t a problem back in that post missed the n so isn't became is t.

As well as prisons there are refuges, it always gets brought back to toilets because I think that is an easier place to justify men being in a female spaces.

theworriedwell

I meant arent in the cubicles. My arthritis and using a smart phone can be a nightmare. I mean a big open area for hand washing is a waste of space. No need to use much if any space in the cubicle, you can get the basin built into the top of the cistern.

Ahh, I'm seeing what you mean now. Apologies for misunderstanding.

Dont worry ViceVersa my arthritis and me not checking is the fault not you.

Nearly did it again and got a Do t worry. I wonder why it is n that gets missed?

NittWitt

^I think there is a difference between intact males and surgically 'transitioned' ones. Yes, both are male, but the one who has undergone surgery is (a) obviously committed to the cause, and (b) much less likely to be a risk to women.^

We have no idea which is which.
It's not up to women to try to assess how dangerous a man might be. He shouldn't be in a 'single-sex' place.

One place you didn't mention Doodledog is prisons.
A majority of women prisoners have suffered male violence and it's plain cruelty to lock men in with them, however harmless those men might be thought to be.
The women are traumatised by being locked in with men who may turn out to be dangerous to them.

Yes that’s true about prisons and also DV hostels, Girl Guide camps and so on.

Not to mention the WI and other groups for women and girls - if men can gatecrash them by saying they are women, women have nowhere to go without men being there.

A friend who manages a community hall says that cubicles with handwashing inside are only practical if there are going to be small numbers of people using them, or there is an increase in the number of cubicles, and extra allowed as replacements for urinals, because the handwashing takes extra time before the next person can get into the cubicle.

I expect many men will helpfully save time by not washing their hands, tho.

NittWitt

A friend who manages a community hall says that cubicles with handwashing inside are only practical if there are going to be small numbers of people using them, or there is an increase in the number of cubicles, and extra allowed as replacements for urinals, because the handwashing takes extra time before the next person can get into the cubicle.

I expect many men will helpfully save time by not washing their hands, tho.

But men will queue longer and women shorter. There's equality right there, ever stood queuing for the loo in a theatre thinking your going to be late back to your seat while men just wander in and out of the gents. So annoying.

Thank you Doodledog for mentioning the WI which from April Fools Day (how apt) is no longer allowing transwomen to be members.

The head of WI Melissa Green sent every member a ‘mealy mouthed’ not my words but I agree, apology to transwomen for being forced to ask them to leave the WI. The members were not given a free vote on accepting transwomen and those of us who have stood up for biological women have been harassed and treated imo badly.

Melissa is starting up a Sisterhood Groups to include transwomen. I will be asking her who will be funding these new groups. I will no doubt be receiving an unhelpful reply as usual. I am seen as a troublemaker but nothing will stop me from protesting.

I’ll be following the idea of sisterhood groups with interest. Will the TW be happy with those?
Will all the women who wanted to include males in their group flock of the sisterhood groups?

Will there still be complaints like those I’ve read on GN, that the TW take over and want to run things their way?

By the very name, it seems they’re determined to imply that TW are not male, despite the fact that,
A sister is a female sibling who shares one or both parents with another individual, or a woman with a similar background or affiliation. Usage includes familial relationships ("my older sister"), religious nuns, senior nurses in Britain, sorority members, or close female friends.

I have just read that only biological females will be allowed to compete in the Olympics 2028. Excellent, this is called fairness.

NanKate

I have just read that only biological females will be allowed to compete in the Olympics 2028. Excellent, this is called fairness.

Yes, I heard that on the car radio earlier. I am exceptionally happy with this decision 👏👏👏

There will be a mandatory once in a lifetime test to ensure they are biologically female.

I guess that there will be similar tests for biological male categories

Great news .

PoliticsNerd

Grandmabatty

I feel quite sad for trans women who gave quietly lived alongside the rest of us for decades. However, this recent influx of aggressive males pretending to be women to hijack our spaces in order to feed their fetish has to be dealt with firmly. Every organisation has bent over backwards to accommodate them and god only knows why. It is about time this was sorted

Where can I find confirmation about this influx of aggressive males pretending to be women to hijack our spaces in order to feed their fetish? I, and I would guess, many others, think this is all in the heads of middle-age and elderly women on internet forums, etc.

That doesn't mean calling changing spaces unisex or whatever is a bad thing - perhaps it will finally stop the hysteria.

transcrimeuk.com/2017/12/16/transgender-individuals-who-have-killed-attempted-to-kill-others-in-the-uk/

I guess that there will be similar tests for biological male categories no I don't think there are plans for the male categories. A female, not even on testosterone which would be a drug offence, is no competition for an elite male so very unlikely to get within a mile of an olympic event. There are tables out there that show that women's world records in every event are surpassed by schoolboys, not elite athletes, every single year.

Taking a slightly different tack on the subject of men in women’s spaces, I’m still haunted by the way a physically weaker woman was treated at the Paris Olympics a couple of years ago. Right from first sight we could see that the Algerian and Italian women's boxing contestants were incompatible.

The Algerian was tall, big and powerful, and made their Italian opponent look diminutive in comparison.Apparently the Algerian was born female, but has XY chromosomes, internal testes, and no uterus. Surely this in itself is questionable in a women’s event?

Also, I thought boxing categories pitched contestants fairly against each other by size and weight, such as bantam weight, light weight, heavy weight, etc.What happened here? Were categories just ignored?

I was watching the match with friends, and we all thought it must be a joke! The Algerian was so much bigger and more powerful than the Italian, we all gave a sigh of relief when the Italian woman withdrew from the competition.

Question: plain evidence of contestant incompatibility was there for the world to see. Why didn't those setting up the match use some common sense? The Italian contestant did, and probably saved herself bad injury, but everyone else involved in this ‘carry-on’ remained in what I call 'Emperor's New Clothes' mode, and the debatable ‘winner’ was carried away shoulder high. Was this a gender issue? Or simply a dubious mismatch in the name of gender equality/inclusivity? Both probably, and should never have happened, least of all in an Olympic event for the world to see.