they don't all fully transition it's personal choice isn't it?

Sounds like a sane, common sense system to me.

:joker: This is how things should be really isn't it. Signs on the doors 'penis people this way' 'vulva people that way'. Would be a lot easier. though tbh, male and female are the same thing really. No idea how so many cannot understand that it is separated by bloody sex, not some random feeling in your head. Once someone has actually transitioned, fair enough. But until then, no penises in female spaces.

“Fully transition” ?

What?do some just get the bolloxs cut off and call it a day?

I feel like the conversation is more about individuals which makes general umbrella words meaningless. I'd take a common sense approach, I don't personally think a drag queen or a transvestite should be allowed in a womans area unless they were actively planning on transistioning in the near future. In an ideal world, there would be a third changing room / bathroom option.

Would you be happy for Harvey Wienstein to have access to the female changing room, if he decided to transition?

Indeed. I have been saying this for ****ing ages. Where possible, add a unisex option.

Until then, men will have to accept gender non conforming men in their spaces tbh. Who cares if the guy next to you has a skirt on or whatever? Hes still a bloke.

Even if someone is 'planning on transitioning', until they actually transition, they use the correct space for their sex.

Transsexuals should have the option to use the space of the sex have tried to become. But otherwise, nope nope nope. Which is why I say no to 'self ID'.

Good question! There are lots of Weinsteins out there.

Well lesbian sex offenders would be allowed in the bathroom? And gay sex offenders would be allowed in yours? Not much you can do to stop that?

Its people like that who will take advantage of businesses adopting this self ID thing.

what does someones sexuality have to do with it? Lesbians are still women. And as such, are welcome in womens spaces, obviously. not sure what point you are trying to prove here but its coming across slightly homophobic tbh :think:

I'm sure his point was Harvey Weinstein is a pervert and could have access to that bathroom? When theres not much you can do about sex offenders using bathrooms, even without that bizarre example. Heterosexual sex offenders probably wont have much interest in offending in that environment.

I was responding to an odd point with an odd point!

I don't really think the point you replied to was odd at all. There is plenty you could do about it. make womens spaces penis free. Job done.

Fairly sure this hypothetical example was not...he had a sex change, just he decided to 'identify' as a woman, as many sex offenders will actually do. Which is part of the problem tbh, anyone can sere how this will be abused.

Men offend at a much higher rate than women, that cannot be argued against. The average man could overpower the average woman easily. So, if a male sex offender decided he was a woman, would you be happy with him going in womens spaces? Even knowing what he is?

Its nothing to do with lesbians or sexuality. Its about basically, do you prioritize the safety of women, or the feelings of men. Its an either or kind of thing. Which is unfortunate. But its how it is.

If you think lesbian offenders number anywhere near male offenders you need a reality check. Not to mention women have a far better chance of fighting off other women than they do men.

I don’t think you have given the whole issue any real thought other than to blindly defend the ‘principle’ of men having it all.

Some can't have all the procedures done for a variety of reasons. I have a female to male friend who was given the procedure to have his breasts removed, but he isn't allowed 'bottom surgery' for medical reasons.

This is where it sort of complicates the issue. He's a man to look at, to meet him, to hear him speak, if he was seen entering a women's changing room he would probably be considered a pervert, I'd assume that many of the people who don't want men in female areas would not want him there because to look at him they would assume he's a man. However he has a vagina, and although not 'fully transitioned', he is a transsexual man. Under the rule of 'penises here and vaginas there', as simple as it might sound as a solution, it wouldn't leave someone like him with many other options other than to just stay at home, or be forced to show his vagina on entry to a women's private space should he need to use one.

A lot of the leisure centres I use near me have 3 changing rooms, male, female and unisex/family which is better people can choose and its easier for me now as my son is 7 (going on 17) and no longer wants to be in female changing rooms and I don't want him to go into the male changing room on his own (as much because he will dick about rather than getting changed). Adding a third choice would make it easier for anyone transitioning as they will not be classed as being in the "wrong" changing room and for people who want to be comfortable that they are in a single sex environment

Well thats not at all what I said.

Oh right, i thought his point was what if Harvey was a transwoman, a sex offender, and lesbian which wouldnt be much different to woman, sex offender, and lesbian.
I can see why pretending to be trans is a separate issue.

I think its a bit different if people 'pass', as noone would even know.

I would personally feel much more comfortable changing infront of a transman, than a regular man, as a transman is female. But if they pass, they would fit in in the mens anyway. Transmen seem to pass more often than transwomen.

Harvey could not be a lesbian, as a lesbian is a female. This whole 'male lesbian' thing really bloody annoys me :laugh:

What would you call Lauren Harries if she was sexually attracted to women? :suspect: prewarning: if you say heterosexual my head will explode in confusion

Well she is technically. She is male. A male attracted to females is straight. Sexuality is about sex. Not 'gender'.

Lesbians are female people attracted to females.

Having said that, I don't have a problem with fully transitioned transsexual women calling themselves lesbian as such. Its all these 'lesbians' with 'lady dicks' that are my problem. Perverts, and fairly rapey also. Straight men, finding new ways to attack and pressure lesbians into shagging them. Dickheads.

Well no. I guess thats why I couldnt understand your point before.

I'd argue that this counts as transphobia tbh.

Acknowledging someones sex is transphobia?

Transsexual people acknowledge their sex. Generally.

Oh yeah, well it's certainly easy(ish) for him as things currently are (I mean not really easy in every situation but compared to the how I put it across in my post I mean). If it's about how people 'pass' rather than their biology though, does that not contradict the argument that people with penises should be in one area and people with vaginas should be in the other?

Well yeah it does in a way. I would be happy with partially transitioned transmen in the ladies. Would be very happy keeping things penises+non penis. But I reckon they would prefer not to be in the womens, and if they pass, who cares?

I also think its a bit different when its transmen wanting into the mens. Women, on the whole are not a danger to men. Stats tell us that men are a danger to women. So a woman going in the mens is technically putting herself in danger, but not the people around her..her choice. A guy wanting into the ladies is a big problem for most of the women (I mean a regular guy, not a transsexual btw) Not sure if this is making sense, it does in my head :laugh:

Calling someone like Lauren Harries a man? Yes.. This is the sort of stuff that sparked the head****-debatey-argumenty-two-tier-system-with-mods-on-top thing yesterday.

I know youre not transphobic, youve explained your stance incredibly clearly to me before.. but that just is a transphobic comment, and several people have explicitly stated how they hate that sort of stuff on the site. You'd infract a racist or homophobic comment, but transphobic comments just slides through the net, probably cos you use them yourself, its gross really.

I genuinely do not think that acknowledging that a male person is male is transphobic. Lauren acknowledges her sex. She had operations to ease the dysphoria, but an actual sex change is not possible, and everyone knows this.

I don't 'see her' as a man. But I do acknowledge she is male.

I cannot think of a racist analogy here, but saying, a black person is black, is not racist. Saying a gay person is gay is not homophobic.

She didn’t call Lauren Harries a man.She said male.Which is true.

Perfect sense. Basically any man would be given access to female bathrooms and changing rooms with a few simple words - and anyone who cannot see the potential risk to women and girls is either a liar or completely refusing to acknowledge it due to an agenda.

What sort of comments do you think people were thinking about when they mentioned yours (and other peoples) transphobia.

Its stuff like that above "acknowledging a male person is a male". Clearly she is not a male, does not want to be seen as one, and does not want to live as one. Calling her one is transphobic. Its refusing to accept her as a her, and it is ignorant.

She is male. Male is her sex.

I use 'her' and 'she' for lauren. But I do not see her as a woman. I see her as a transwoman. As thats what she is.

Stop jumping on bandwagons. Many have expressed the opposite view so your comments are just stirring yet again.

No it does make sense, and that first part, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't want to use the female areas (we don't actually talk a lot about these issues believe it or not :laugh: but he does use the male facilities where he can - depending on the place, not everywhere has suitable facilities for people like him who pass as male but doesn't have a penis) I would imagine that having to use female facilities would exacerbate his dysphoria. But yeah I get what you mean with all of that from previous conversations, I suppose I'm just trying to highlight a nuance as I saw it as I don't think it's all that straight forward as was being suggested.

Yeah its a complicated topic.

I think transmen have it easier too, as they do tend to pass better. On average they look smaller than men, but the testosterone seems to work very well and very fast.

Her birth sex was male. And then she had a sex change. Her sex is now, and her gender always was female. Unless your specifically discussing her birthsex, which would be evident under the term 'transowman' alone, theres no reason to call her a male or a man, unless youre being transphobic.

Perhaps its just a bad habit as yours, but many see this as transphobia, and for the sake of consistency in the rules, and avoiding more of those angry threads from yesterday, i think you should be more tactful tbh.

Her sex is still male. A sex change is not possible. I only brought up her sex as we were talking about the many heterosexual males who claim they (and their penises) are lesbian.

Are Lesbians the whipping post of LGBT or something? People keep bringing them up in a negative way and suggesting them as sex offenders. The fact is there aren't huge numbers of Lesbian sex offenders anyway. But a Lesbian is a woman and not a man and it fully entitled to be in a woman's space.

That remind me I much catch up on orange is the new black :hehe:

Why the need to control so much how others writes and speak? It's their words, in their personal manner of speech. Anyone can speak however they'd like... if you mean, that that people should shift their words away from what may cause offense. Well, that's pretty much how life works isn't it... we live and breath and sometimes that may cause offense to others. We have to all make compromises with each other on a daily basis to coexist. This is how we get on in a multicultural society...

I think, tolerance is a two way street. Vicky's been giving folk her time and ample respect to answer these questions, some of them quite personal and offensive at various points, and to continue to have patient dialogue... that's quite a bit of patience if I may say... I think the best way to encourage non-superficial tolerance actually is to show it back when it is given to you.

Forcing people to agree with us or speak the way we'd like is not a way to go on carrying about our existence. If we carry on this way, then our intents would lose their original meaning, because then what is honesty if we can't even use the words the way we feel suits our feelings the best...

I don't know what to say about the moderation, because I don't really see deletions being handled (I'm in a different time zone), so maybe there are things there to be improved... but I think bringing in Vicky's personal writings, not just how she carries on about her moderating... that's too far. She is a human being and I think entitled to not only her beliefs, but her own method of speech.