[BBXX]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Mmhhmm sure you are, you sound like the Patriarchy to me trying to take away women only spaces and then gaslight women who say no, a tale as old as time unfortunately

My opinion has nothing to do with women, it has everything to do with trans people.

You think my opinion is to do with women because you see trans women as men, and I don't.

I'm not gaslighting anyone, I'm disagreeing and pointing out flaws in the latest argument that trans men's identity is valid or not depending on how they look (they can use woman's facilities if they don't pass), but a trans woman's identity is never valid.

It seems completely hypocritical to talk about the importance of the law and what it states, and the importance of it being rooted in bioloigcal sex but then switching and saying "Hey, even though I view you as a woman, despite you identifying as a man, I'm going to have to ask you to use break the law and use the mens because...well you look too butch". I mean it's a win for the trans man because they get to use the facilities they want, but it's hypocritical and inconsistent.

It's a viewpoint that undermines both the law and the importance of biological sex that so many of you have been using as reasoning for trans women to be kept separate from cis women. So I ask, is it important or not?

I would say no, it's not important and everyone should have the same privilege as everyone else to use the facilities for the gender they are living life as. Vicky would say: it depends if they have facial hair. Huh.

Sorry but dictating someone's access to things based on how you perceive them based on how they look is plain wrong, and if pointing that out is gaslighting then so be it.

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by BBXX

My opinion has nothing to do with women, it has everything to do with trans people.



You think my opinion is to do with women because you see trans women as men, and I don't.



I'm not gaslighting anyone, I'm disagreeing and pointing out flaws in the latest argument that trans men's identity is valid or not depending on how they look (they can use woman's facilities if they don't pass), but a trans woman's identity is never valid.



It seems completely hypocritical to talk about the importance of the law and what it states, and the importance of it being rooted in bioloigcal sex but then switching and saying "Hey, even though I view you as a woman, despite you identifying as a man, I'm going to have to ask you to use break the law and use the mens because...well you look too butch". I mean it's a win for the trans man because they get to use the facilities they want, but it's hypocritical and inconsistent.



It's a viewpoint that undermines both the law and the importance of biological sex that so many of you have been using as reasoning for trans women to be kept separate from cis women. So I ask, is it important or not?



I would say no, it's not important and everyone should have the same privilege as everyone else to use the facilities for the gender they are living life as. Vicky would say: it depends if they have facial hair. Huh.



Sorry but dictating someone's access to things based on how you perceive them based on how they look is plain wrong, and if pointing that out is gaslighting then so be it.

It's important that biological women are safe from men in single sex spaces that they are vulnerable in or in a state of undress yes. Public toilets unfortunately are a difficult one as they can't be properly policed like rape centres or DV refuges or prisons can be. Thankfully, those ones can be though as those ones are more important. People arguing the case for biological men to be allowed access these spaces though tend to focus in on public toilets as it's easier to muddy the waters because of course no one is at door checking genitals or birth certs.

I wouldn't like to speak for Vicky but I suppose her point was biological women are not a danger to men the same way biological men are to women so that's probably why it's not as big an issue the other way round.

A solution to the toilet dilemma (as we seem stuck in the toilets) could be to have Women's and unisex or where possible all unisex fully closed cubicles

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

It's important that biological women are safe from men in single sex spaces that they are vulnerable in or in a state of undress yes. Public toilets unfortunately are a difficult one as they can't be properly policed like rape centres or DV refuges or prisons can be. Thankfully, those ones can be though as those ones are more important. People arguing the case for biological men to be allowed access these spaces though tend to focus in on public toilets as it's easier to muddy the waters because of course no one is at door checking genitals or birth certs.

I wouldn't like to speak for Vicky but I suppose her point was biological women are not a danger to men the same way biological men are to women so that's probably why it's not as big an issue the other way round.

A solution to the toilet dilemma (as we seem stuck in the toilets) could be to have Women's and unisex or where possible all unisex fully closed cubicles

I agree about having individuals cubicles but sadly if they are in a unisex complex the guy could wait right outside the door and attack someone or even just force them back into the cubicle


Scary problem


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cherry Christmas]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

It's important that biological women are safe from men in single sex spaces that they are vulnerable in or in a state of undress yes. Public toilets unfortunately are a difficult one as they can't be properly policed like rape centres or DV refuges or prisons can be. Thankfully, those ones can be though as those ones are more important. People arguing the case for biological men to be allowed access these spaces though tend to focus in on public toilets as it's easier to muddy the waters because of course no one is at door checking genitals or birth certs.

I wouldn't like to speak for Vicky but I suppose her point was biological women are not a danger to men the same way biological men are to women so that's probably why it's not as big an issue the other way round.

A solution to the toilet dilemma (as we seem stuck in the toilets) could be to have Women's and unisex or where possible all unisex fully closed cubicles

That is what they had done at the coffee shop I visited in Cambridge, it amused me to seeing men have to queue, and one man came back shaking his head saying there was a queue as there was just one toilet and a disabled option next door

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by Cherie

That is what they had done at the coffee shop I visited in Cambridge, it amused me to seeing men have to queue, and one man came back shaking his head saying there was a queue as there was just one toilet and a disabled option next door

Welcome to our world eh?

[Cherry Christmas]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Welcome to our world eh?

Right It was like a queue of 2 people and most people were using the disabled toilet next door as well, as a pefectly able man emerged while I was waiting so as I dont really think bathrooms are the big issue they are being made out to be when there are so many other issues, like males in female prisons