[Vicky.]

I mean, this is how backwards it all is and how little thought has been put into it all. Its down to David ****ing Davies to stand up for the rights of women (and transsexuals)

http://mirandayardley.com/en/how-tra...-october-2017/

https://www.david-davies.org.uk/site...20Concerns.pdf

Its a sad day when a solitary Tory MP is the only one giving a crap about the rights of women Where both Labour and the Tories are willing to disregard actual women and transsexual people in an effort to appear the most 'progressive' (when this legislation is anything but progressive)

[Jamie89]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Generally the problem feminists have with it is the loss of women only spaces. Such as loos, prisons, sport, etc. Stuff that was fought for for hundreds of years.

Men lose their male spaces too. But it does not seem that there are loads of transmen lining up wanting into male areas. So it doesn't really affect men to the same extent at the moment.

The main problem I have with it all is the loss of sex segregation tbh. As I see segregation as very much needed (in certain areas anyway). If I wasn't expected to parrot the lie that you actually can change sex and if men weren't trying to force their way into female areas, I wouldn't have an issue with it at all. Of course there is an added problem of anytime anyone says anything besides 'biology is totally irrelevant and is a social construct' they are hit with rape and death threats too (I have had 3 this week so far, people keep trying to show me how 'womanly' they are by threatening me with their girlcock. Hmm), which doesn't help tensions at all. I also think its important that language continue to actually make sense, so including male people in the meaning of 'woman' is a bit daft. Hence 'transwoman'. Not the same as women, and ridiculous to claim they are the same. I know people mean well when they say 'transwomen are women' and such, but at least think a little bit about what you are saying. Woman has a meaning, if woman includes men, then woman suddenly means 'person' instead, and we already have a word for person

I also think gender identity is such a load of crap. Maybe my opinion is clouded on that because I personally do not have one and am not religious so don't believe in some mysterious inner essence or whatever. But everyone should be able to dress however the hell they like..but I won't pretend that someone putting on a dress makes them an actual woman I think thats just lazy stereotyping. And besides stereotypes, I don't see what 'trans' is at all. I used to think it was people who had sex dysphoria and felt they did not fit in their bodies, similar to BDD. But 'born in the wrong body' is transphopbic these days. thus I cannot understand what makes modern day transwomen (as opposed to transsexuals) any different from any other man...except for what they want to wear :S

I think gender identity is the driving force behind everything trans related, although I don't fully understand it either I can't see how it doesn't exist, if it didn't then there wouldn't be transgender people and none of this would be an issue.
No putting on a dress doesn't make someone a woman, but a man who feels like he is a woman might feel like wearing a dress or makeup etc will make other people more likely to consider them a woman and treat them as one. Yes they are steretypes but they're stereotypes that are imposed by wider society, not trans people, and trans people who conform to them are just trying to fit in and wanting to be viewed and treated as the gender they feel they are, rather than actually believing that it's those actions themselves that make them a woman. Socialisation is important in this, a lot of women feel more feminine wearing makeup or depending what they're wearing, sure not all women, but it's because of gender stereotypes that have been imposed onto them, and this is all part of gender identity, and how it's different in different people.

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Well that depends entirely on if you believe male and female are real distinct categories, and if sex segregation is needed doesn't it..

I went into what rights are being taken away above. There is not that much of a clash with 'trans rights' and 'womens rights', but the areas they do clash, its very important and the activists are just getting more and more violent in trying to silence any woman ( real or trans, transsexuals are being silenced also in the name of 'transgender') who speaks up.

So I don't generally believe that sex segregation is all that useful tbh, I certainly don't think that sex segregation is something that maintains the categories of man and woman as being distinct from each other. Man and Woman are distinct from each other naturally and sex segregation is something that results from that. If sex segregation weren't to exist, men and women would still be distinct categories. I do think that there are situations where sex segregation is a good thing, certain sports events for example, but mostly in normal everyday society I think we place way too much emphasis on sex segregation and personally I think it's unnecessary because it's not actually in place to protect women from danger imo, it's there because of social norms and to protect from discomfort. But I don't believe that unisex facilities actually provide a higher risk to anybody. The assumption that they do is actually segregation based on sexuality, more than it is based on sex. The assumption that if men and women share a unisex toilet that men as abusers may try and assault the women (under this logic gay men should be banned from using male public toilets to protect the other men who are using them). And where unisex facilities already exist I don't think there is any evidence that they are more dangerous places? Again it's more discomfort due to social norms than a realistic expectation of danger. The main showers at my swimming pool are unisex and are used by men/women/children, and although I'm sure a woman who has never used a unisex public shower before would certainly feel uncomfortable there at first, there is no actual danger there. Discomfort is legitimate and understandable but social norms can and do change. Situations that are not normal everyday society though, such as prisons and violent criminals, should be dealt with case by case and with common sense in a similar way to how every criminal's sentencing is done on an individual basis. If there is a realistic expectation of danger to women then I'd say that would outweigh an individual persons transgender rights, but it would depend on the case - and I don't think it should be as straightforward as ticking a box or saying they are transgender, there needs to be councelling/assessments etc.

I don't see any of this as taking anything away from cis-women though.
Women who are currently women will still be women, transgender women will also be considered women, men will still be men, and transgender men will be men, I'm sorry I just don't see why there is so much fear around this or what is expected to happen. Yes cis-women may have very different experiences growing up to transgender women but women from different nationalities may have very different experiences also. I think part of the reluctance is the feeling that by classifying transgender women as women, it makes them the same as cis-women, and it therefore nullifies the experiences of cis-women. But I think it's possible to be able to say that transgender women and cis women are women who just have very different life experiences.

Livia's post earlier is interesting...

Originally Posted by Livia

If transgender male to females want to be seen as women, they're going to have to be nicer and more understanding. Currently they're acting like bullyboys. I uphold their right to identify as a woman, to live as a woman and to lead a happy life. But I do not see them as being the same as me.

This is basically what I'm saying (although maybe in a different way to how Livia intended I'm not sure), but I'd say that transgender women and cis gender women can both be called women, but women with very different experiences and who aren't the same. I suppose I think that that's ok. My female to male transexual friend isn't the same as me and had very different experiences growing up and going through puberty to me, he doesn't have a penis, and if I really analyse the differences between our experiences as men then I'd say I don't consider him to be a man in the exact same way that I'm a man and he can't understand certain aspects of masculinity that I understand... but I still consider him to be a man. I don't know if that really makes sense or sounds like a contradiction lol but it makes sense in my head.
I think a comparison can be made with gay marriage and changing the definition of 'marriage'. The experiences of gay people in relationships can be different to straight people in relationships due to the way society treats them differently, but it doesn't really change how they feel within those relationships, and the definition of marriage changing to include gay marriage hasn't changed anything in how straight marriage is viewed or how straight people should consider their own marriages. Nothing was taken away from married straight couples.

Originally Posted by Vicky.

If you are genuinely interested, this is fairly long but goes into near all of the issues

https://notthenewsinbriefs.wordpress...otadebate/amp/

Summary of problems (including problems for transsexual people) here too - http://sages.org.uk/publications/sages-factsheet.html

I do agree with some of this, mainly that the whole 'NotaDebate' thing is ridiculous. Transpeople should be pushing for the debate and including womens groups in trans debates as much as possible and the ones who are trying to shut down feminist opinions and prevent discussion are harming their cause. Both sides need to listen to each other more and try and understand where the other is coming from. Femnists need to try and understand what it's like for a trangender woman trying to fit in in society and that they aren't trying to take anything away from cis-women, and transgender women need to stop trying to shut people down, labelling people as transphobic and 'terfs'. I do think that a lot of the negative behaviour from trans people comes from a general feeling that they have never really been listened to and that must be pretty frustrating when you're trying to argue about something like gender identity which you can't prove, but yes of course they shouldn't be attacking. I think when it comes to twitter trolls though and things like death and rape threats that as sick as they are they can't really be used as a barometer of what the general thought is or be representative of all or most transgender people. People get death threats over twitter for insulting Justin Bieber like I'm not trying to make light of it I just don't think that these people or their views are representative. And I'm sure transgender people experience a lot of abuse and threats on their twitter accounts too.
I also think that some of what's in that first link is misleading though and problematic to the debate. Assuming perversion in a transgender woman wanting to use a female changing room. Suggesting an agenda with regards to stonewall adding transgender people to their remit. I don't like how it uses lesbians and gay men as examples of groups who may be affected because "new gender-identity laws may make it impossible for them to have single-sex events and organisations", where exactly would my friend who is female to male fit into this? and how would it negatively impact me if he came to a male only event? I also think a lot the language is manipulative and trying to generate fear where there doesn't need to be fear which isn't helpful. But I think I do have a better understanding of feminist opinion than I had before.

Anyway I think i'm pretty alone on here with most of this but my overall feeling is that both sides need to stop attacking and insulting each other because certain things are going to change, that just seems to be the way things are going, and so there needs to be more cooperation between different womens groups and trans groups, but for me I don't believe that the definition of 'woman' as a word being inclusive of transgender women actually disadvantages cisgender women,( I get that's where a lot of people fundamentally disagree and I understand why so fair enough but that's just how I feel about it), but I don't see it as a fusion of trans and cis women into one, an absorption of men into the category of women, I see it as cooperative, something where the differences that exist between the two can still be acknowledged and respected, and for it to be acceptable to point those differences out if it's relevant to do so without fear of losing a job, but at the same time for trans women to feel accepted by society, have a legitimate place in society, and be acknowledged as the gender they feel they are.


https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/...mments-apology

I think this is a great article and explains much of how I feel really well, it's pretty long but the main points that resonate with me are:

This is the basic point that Adichie seemed to be making — that the experience of being “women born female,” as she put it, and the experience of transitioning to a woman just aren’t the same, and that it’s foolish to pretend they are.

But when trans advocates and allies say that “trans women are women,” they’re not actually trying to say that transgender women are the same as cisgender women (women who aren’t transgender). They’re trying to say that these differences shouldn’t disqualify trans women from the broader category of “womanhood.”

Neither gender nor biological sex is quite as simple as what’s on your birth certificate, trans advocates argue. And even if we don’t know what causes gender dysphoria, that doesn’t make it any less real for the people who experience it.

“I think that for people who have been wounded by gendering, it's quite accurate and understandable to say, ‘You don't share the same wound that I share,’” said Susan Stryker, associate professor of gender and women’s issues at the University of Arizona. “Where I start to have a problem with that argument is when it gets used to challenge trans people's access to gendered public space.”

When you get down to it, transgender women are making pretty basic requests of feminism. They want to be heard and included. They want the freedom to be who they are in public and in society, with no exceptions or qualifiers. And they want to stop being forced to defend their womanhood, their basic sense of self, and their humanity, against people who consider those things to be up for debate.

(Laverne Cox's tweets in this article regarding 'male privilege' are also really interesting to read)

[Jamie89]

(There was an article on the BBC website about Lily today btw)...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/articl...transgender-mp

[The Slim Reaper]

It's refreshing to see that women are starting to realise just how much more knowledgeable men are when it comes to life.

I hope the feminazi's don't force out this courageous young 19yr old dude.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

It's refreshing to see that women are starting to realise just how much more knowledgeable men are when it comes to life.

I hope the feminazi's don't force out this courageous young 19yr old dude.

mmhhmm in a nut shell

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

mmhhmm in a nut shell

Probably 2 nut shells if we're being accurate.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Probably 2 nut shells if we're being accurate.

[Vicky.]

The assumption that they do is actually segregation based on sexuality, more than it is based on sex. The assumption that if men and women share a unisex toilet that men as abusers may try and assault the women (under this logic gay men should be banned from using male public toilets to protect the other men who are using them).

I don't understand this comparison at all to be honest. There is a lot of evidence of men being more violent (and especially more sexually violent) than women. Is there evidence that gay men (or gay women) are more violent than straight ones? I don't really see the need with mixing up sexuality and 'gender'. It actually quite annoys me when talking about this stuff and people are like 'oh but you would change next to a lesbian, whats the difference?!'

However, now that you have said about not agreeing with sex segregation to start with, I now completely understand how you do not see an issue with this. And also understand how you think that taking away womens rights (to areas segregated by sex) is not problematic.

So this will go round and round in circles as I do see need for sex segregation (maybe not in loos, provided the cubicles are full floor to ceiling and such) in certain areas of life Maybe due to having different life experiences tbh.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I don't understand this comparison at all to be honest. There is a lot of evidence of men being more violent (and especially more sexually violent) than women. Is there evidence that gay men (or gay women) are more violent than straight ones? I don't really see the need with mixing up sexuality and 'gender'. It actually quite annoys me when talking about this stuff and people are like 'oh but you would change next to a lesbian, whats the difference?!'

However, now that you have said about not agreeing with sex segregation to start with, I now completely understand how you do not see an issue with this. And also understand how you think that taking away womens rights (to areas segregated by sex) is not problematic.

So this will go round and round in circles as I do see need for sex segregation (maybe not in loos, provided the cubicles are full floor to ceiling and such) in certain areas of life Maybe due to having different life experiences tbh.

This is a huge thing imo.

Also, what are the stats on girl to girl rape/sexual assault? It's not something you hear of regularly ..............or ever

[Vicky.]

As a side note, do you know you are actually a 'terf' for identifying a need for sex segregation in sports?

And may I suggest

and how would it negatively impact me if he came to a male only event?

Maybe it wouldn't. Can you see how it could be problematic for a woman only event to have men there? Especially, for example a lesbian event. Where the women there are already hassled by many men on a regular basis simply for refusing to worship the almighty penis?

[Vicky.]

https://fairplayforwomen.com/james-obrien-topshop

This is an interesting female take on this topic. It may be hard to see, as a male, what its like to go through life as a woman (I know I can't begin to imagine what its like to go through life as a bloke). And why many many women would feel uncomfortable getting rid of sex segregation. Not all women, some would be happy with it as no group will ever agree 100%. But I would bet that more women would be uncomfortable with it, than comfortable.

This part in particular is interesting when discussing how sex segregation is not needed..

In the UK where women have sex segregation, only 10% of sex crime (98% of which is committed by men, 90% of the victims of which are female) is opportunistic. In India, where there is no sex segregation, 90% of sex crime is opportunistic. The women’s liberation movement campaigned for single sex spaces so that women could have a PUBLIC LIFE. Read up on the history of the first women’s public toilet in London. Women were beaten in the streets for wanting that because women’s place was in the home. We are entitled to go about our lawful business without harassment from men, we are allowed to SAY NO TO PENIS in our private spaces. Traumatized women, raped women, religious women, lesbian women, shy women, teenage girls are ALLOWED BOUNDARIES. It’s not about you in the cubicle next to us, it’s about MEN. If you are denying that men are committing epidemic levels of violence and depravity against women and girls, all over the world, you are deluded.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

https://fairplayforwomen.com/james-obrien-topshop

This is an interesting female take on this topic. It may be hard to see, as a male, what its like to go through life as a woman (I know I can't begin to imagine what its like to go through life as a bloke). And why many many women would feel uncomfortable getting rid of sex segregation. Not all women, some would be happy with it as no group will ever agree 100%. But I would bet that more women would be uncomfortable with it, than comfortable.

This part in particular is interesting when discussing how sex segregation is not needed..

That was a good read Vicky

[Vicky.]

Yeah I know. James Obrien was such a ****ing knobhead on that.

It makes sense that men do not really know what its like, and as such cannot truly understand. As I said, I could not imagine what its like being a man in this world, anymore than I can imagine how it feels to be a donkey rather than a person

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yeah I know. James Obrien was such a ****ing knobhead on that.

It makes sense that men do not really know what its like, and as such cannot truly understand. As I said, I could not imagine what its like being a man in this world, anymore than I can imagine how a donkey feels.

Well exactly, I mean aside from the biological stuff, being a woman is a lifetime of being treated like a woman. All this wearing pink and playing with dolls BS drives me crazy, plenty of girls aren't into things like that, that doesn't make them men and it certainly isn't what makes someone a woman.

How dare that guy make that woman feel like she's some sort of bigot for not being comfortable sharing a place where she's undressing with a man. Would he be happy with his 16 year old daughter undressing in front of men?

[Northern Monkey]

Lot of man hate in here.Men are sexually assaulted by women all the time.The amount of times i had my meat and veg grabbed whilst on nights out by women,and arse grabbed more times than i could count.They’d raid the mens toilet to watch you piss or in some cases touch you.It’s not all women are angels and men are the bad bastards.It’s just that men don’t report it.

I do agree we should have segregated changing rooms and toilets though.Women and men should be able to dress/pee in their own spaces as there are pervs out there.
The only real answer is probably a third trans changing room or toilet or prison wing.No way should womens rights be degraded in favour of a small minorities demands.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

Lot of man hate in here.Men are sexually assaulted by women all the time.The amount of times i had my meat and veg grabbed whilst on nights out by women,and arse grabbed more times than i could count.They’d raid the mens toilet to watch you piss or in some cases touch you.It’s not all women are angels and men are the bad bastards.It’s just that men don’t report it.

I do agree we should have segregated changing rooms and toilets though.Women and men should be able to dress/pee in their own spaces as there are pervs out there.
The only real answer is probably a third trans changing room or toilet or prison wing.No way should womens rights be degraded in favour of a small minorities demands.

Do you think my posts are man hating? If so which ones and why? Other than that I agree with your post

[DemolitionRed]

I think more like Jamie89 because there was so much I agreed with in his post. I can see why its a problem for lesbians, especially at lesbian only events and I honestly don't know what the solution is, other than what Jamie suggested. Otherwise, is this really a problem? this link says otherwise https://www.huffingtonpost.com/brynn...b_8670438.html

In France we are brought up with shared sex changing rooms (a bit like Center Parc) and although there's often a ladies and a mans toilet, nobody bats an eyelid if men use the ladies or ladies use the mens. When my children reached an age where they could use the loo alone, I was much happier for my eight, nine year old sons to use the mens, where I could go in and look for them if I was worried and it was more comfortable for me to do that in France than it was in the UK. If my husband was out with our young daughter in France, he'd simply take her into the ladies but in the UK he had to walk her past the urinals. As far as I'm concerned, 'not worried about your sex toilets' for children are safer because parents can go with them or go in and check on they are okay.

It sounds to me like some of these female activists are under the impression that all men, especially trans men, are potential rapists or sexual deviants. I think that's wrong. If a rapist is on the prowl for a woman to rape he's going to find one, regardless of segregated toilets. In fact he can watch a woman walk into a Womens toilets and just follow her in. He doesn't have to pretend he's anything other than a man.

[DemolitionRed]

Double post. Having trouble with the site atm.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Do you think my posts are man hating? If so which ones and why? Other than that I agree with your post

No,Not really from any members i don’t think,More the feminist articles screaming in caps MEN are the problem etc.Blanket statements like this don’t encourage male support.Men are not the problem,Pervs are the problem.
Women aren’t all angels either.Some women are just as pervy but that seems to be either accepted or ignored.
I’m all for womens rights but angry third and fourth wave feminists don’t help their cause(Whatever that is).They dont exactly encourage support.

[Jamie89]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I don't understand this comparison at all to be honest. There is a lot of evidence of men being more violent (and especially more sexually violent) than women. Is there evidence that gay men (or gay women) are more violent than straight ones? I don't really see the need with mixing up sexuality and 'gender'. It actually quite annoys me when talking about this stuff and people are like 'oh but you would change next to a lesbian, whats the difference?!'

Maybe I didn't explain it well but I wasn't trying to mix up gender and sexuality. I'll try again lol. First of all yes when it comes to sexual violence the vast majority of abusers are men, straight/bi/gay doesn't make a difference as far as I'm aware. My point was that the argument itself of women being in danger if men are present in an area such as public toilets, suggests that it is sexuality, or sexual attraction, that is the point of focus there. So my comparison was to say that if the problem is men being in an area where they may be sexually attracted to somebody, and the likelihood of them being an abuser is great because they are male, would also be applicable to gay men in a mens public toilet, and the danger they would present to other men. Not that gay men ar emore likely to abuse than straight men or anything along those lines. My actual distinction is that sexuality doesn't make a difference and that I don't believe sexual attraction whichever way it is directed causes women or anyone else to be in danger in an area such as a public toilet that happens to be inhabited by someone who may be sexually attracted to them. And I'm basing this on there currently being many gender neutral spaces where risk of abuse isn't heightened, and also by the fact that many men use public toilets and aren't considered to be at risk from male abusers who may be sexually attracted to them.

Originally Posted by Vicky.

However, now that you have said about not agreeing with sex segregation to start with, I now completely understand how you do not see an issue with this. And also understand how you think that taking away womens rights (to areas segregated by sex) is not problematic.

So this will go round and round in circles as I do see need for sex segregation (maybe not in loos, provided the cubicles are full floor to ceiling and such) in certain areas of life Maybe due to having different life experiences tbh.

I'm not saying that though Vicky, again maybe I didn't explain myself well but I'm saying that sex segration is necessary in some areas and not in others and you've said a similar thing yourself with regards to toilets. One of the distinctions for me is danger, I mentioned prisons and violent criminals. Another is sports, where I'd consider it to be common sense that where you have a sport that is meant to test biological strength for example, that men and women have biological differences so segregation on biological sex makes sense to me. But areas where it comes down to a feeling of discomfort rather than actual danger I don't see as being necessary because that's to do with social norms and those can change. It's not an all or nothing thing for me and I'd like to think that although I have different life experiences I'm still able to acknowledge if a situation presents a danger to women. I may not know the feelings associated with those situations but I'm talking about real threat of danger rather than feelings. If you believe sex segregation should be based on feelings and social norms though then I completely understand that, I'm just coming from a different perspective and I don't believe that what I'm saying infringes on womens rights in general as I'm taking into account womens safety in all of this.

Originally Posted by Vicky.

As a side note, do you know you are actually a 'terf' for identifying a need for sex segregation in sports?

Yes I suppose I am Good thing I'm not on twitter. But like I said I don't think throwing terms like terf around to shut people down is helpful anyway and I'm not trying to agree with all aspects of what the general transactivist line of thinking is, my own personal views just tend to be the same as a lot of theirs, but yes not all my views are, I'm trying to look at all sides of it and form my own views and as much as you and I still disagree on most of it you've been a massive help on that and I have changed some of my views based on things I've read during these discussions. For example I was firmly against Germaine Greer when the controversy surrounding her comments came out and I considered her transphobic but now I have a much better understanding of where she was coming from (even if I do still disagree with her) and I feel I have a better understanding of how feminists feel on these issues even if my views don't line up with a lot of theirs, I wouldn't like to be called anti-feminist as a result of that or anti-womens rights, or a terf for not agreeing completely with the other side.

Originally Posted by Vicky.

And may I suggest



Maybe it wouldn't. Can you see how it could be problematic for a woman only event to have men there? Especially, for example a lesbian event. Where the women there are already hassled by many men on a regular basis simply for refusing to worship the almighty penis?

It depends on the event I suppose but generally I can't see why a transgender woman being at a womans event (lesbian or otherwise) would be a problem. The suggestion in the article was that the event would be to do with dating and whilst I'm firmly against the idea that a lesbian should have to be attracted to a transgender woman with a penis (I've seen your posts regarding that and I agree with all of what you're saying), I don't see the harm in allowing a transgender woman to attend an event such as that. There may be lesbians there who wouldn't mind dating a transgender woman with a penis, there's all sorts of people out there. You get gay men who only date trans women, I've got a straight female friend who's husband underwent sex reasignment surgery, so there's all sorts of different people out there and I'm not talking about anyone being forced to be attracted to someone, or harassed to worship their penises, but allowing someone who may not fit the 'usual' to be included in an event such as that and not being disallowed because there are other people who harass and bully and abuse. Edit to add: if there is a transgender woman who is also a lesbian and wants to meet a woman, should they not be allowed to look for that? As long as they aren't harassing or bullying anyone at the event.

[DemolitionRed]

Can a heterosexual woman attend a lesbian event? Can a bi woman attend a lesbian event?

[Vicky.]

If you believe sex segregation should be based on feelings and social norms though then I completely understand that, I'm just coming from a different perspective and I don't believe that what I'm saying infringes on womens rights in general as I'm taking into account womens safety in all of this.

I definitely do not agree that sex segregation should be based on feelings and social norms Though some do seem to think changing rooms and such are separated by 'gender' rather than sex. For some odd reason.

But personally I think women and men should have areas where they can be changed and such free from the opposite sex. Both for safety and privacy reasons. I genuinely do not see how this is classed as such a radical view these days. But it is.

And I still do not think a 19year old man who is (from near every interview he has done) entirely focused on transgender women should be a womans officer

[Vicky.]

And for some reason every ****ing post I make is going through twice or 2 times

DR, how on earth would you police that? Given you cannot see sexuality and it is down to the persons say so?

[Jamie89]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I definitely do not agree that sex segregation should be based on feelings and social norms Though some do seem to think changing rooms and such are separated by 'gender' rather than sex. For some odd reason.

But personally I think women and men should have areas where they can be changed and such free from the opposite sex. Both for safety and privacy reasons. I genuinely do not see how this is classed as such a radical view these days. But it is.

And I still do not think a 19year old man who is (from near every interview he has done) entirely focused on transgender women should be a womans officer

I didn't mean the decision of how to split the sexes being dependant on feelings or social norms (I'm guessing that's what you thought I meant), I meant the actual decision as to whether or not they should be segregated in the first place (which you've already answered I'm just clarifying what I meant by that bit you quoted).

I've read a couple of Lily's interviews and they do focus heavily on her being transgender, but that's the story, it's not really her fault that that's what the interviews focus on. She does also talk about non transgender issues and discusses her womens forums etc, those things aren't going to be the focus of the articles though.

[jaxie]

This is a very interesting thread. I more or less agree with everything Vicky has said so don't have a lot to add. I simply don't understand why anyone but a man would feel comfortable having unisex changing rooms or toilets. While a man might be comfortable getting changed in front of a group of strange women, I would not feel comfortable in front of a group of strange men who are not related to me. This would be very intimidating and uncomfortable. A lesbian or bi woman is a woman and I would not be at all bothered sharing a changing room with either. Most men's toilets smell a lot worse than women's, men are welcome to those too, and to any chance a phone might come under the door when you have a wee, (don't tell it would never happen, filming up girls skirts without permission is already a thing) or coming out of a cubicle into a crowd of tipsy blokes. No thanks.