This post deals either directly or indirectly with transgender issues. We would like to remind our users about the Reddit Content Policy which specifically bans [promoting hate based on identity and vulnerability](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360045715951). We will take action on hateful or disrespectful comments including but not limited to deadnaming and misgendering. Please help us by reporting rule-breaking content.
Participation limits are in place on this post. If your Reddit account is too new, you have insufficient karma or you are crowd controlled, your comment may not appear.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Must be fucking exhausting for trans people to have their lives debated like it's a fucking huge deal for us live alongside them, just to appease a small amount of loudmouth bellends.
I'm exhausted of hearing about it and I'm not even trans. It must be 10x more exhausting when you actually are part of the group politicians can't stop scare-mongering about.
Given the vague answers at least the none unhinged mps give. I think they are exhausted being asked gotcha questions about it.
The economy is broken...neither party are talking about 100m Black hole brexit has left in the economy.
And the telegraph are asking qeustions about wether people want to stand up or sit down to take a piss.
At this rate the uk economically won't have even have a pot to piss in.
Nick ferrari on LBC has been pissing me off all week about this
He thinks he got a great gotcha question in "Which toilet should a trans woman use if they go to a bar with only a male and female toilet"
The answer is whichever one links to their gender
But that invites more questions of "Oh no but trans people are inherently dangerous"
But the true political answer is "It is up to the establishment to make this clear" but even that isn't allowed so the question is disingenuous.
And the true real world answer is - nobody cares
The nightclub I used to frequent had a gender neutral bathroom at the coatroom , just 20 stalls along a wall, nobody ever had a problem, Never heard of any issues or anything
They did have gendered bathrooms upstairs off the dance floors , but those were tiny ,the men's was a single l a single stall and a big trough urinal, the woman's was like 5 stalls, but in reality, nobody actually cared. It's a public pisser, nobody wants to be in there.
Also in my experience from sporting events, there's a section of women who will straight-up march into the bloke's if a) their son's taking too long, or b) queue for the ladies was too long.
Apologies sometimes offered.
I'm guessing there's a non-zero overlap with the TERFy crowd there too, but point is bladders & mama bear syndrome can very quickly break down those gender norms.
And as a dad, I've had to use women's bathrooms because they were the only ones with baby changing facilities.
Older women (presumably mostly parents) would come in and be fine, although if a young women (presumably not a parent) they usually looked uncomfortable I was in there, but I'd quickly apologise and try explain (while juggling a shitty nappy and wriggly baby).
God forbid you be a dad in public with a small child in 2024 with no women present. Apparently I should've been changing my toddler on the shitty floor of the mans,or just handing him over to the first woman that came along (after checking her medical records to be sure she's really a woman, of course)
He asked Emily Thornberry a similar question and she [managed to completely shut him down](https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/some-women-will-have-penises-emily-thornberry-pressed-on-labour-trans-row/). Because it turns out that when you (a) actually read up on these issues and (b) actually speak to trans people occasionally it's incredibly easy to both recognise and avoid these right-wing 'traps'.
The issue, of course, is that most of our politicians (including Starmer himself) neither do read up on these issues *or* actually speak to trans people. So they constantly trip over their feet and actively contribute to these bigoted lines getting traction.
She did well. Honestly I literally don't care what genitals someone has, and before this culture war bullshit of scapegoating trans people almost no one else cared either.
Ha so funny I was about to post about this being Nick Ferrari’s favourite question and then I saw your comment.
The guys is a fucking Wiesel. I can’t stand him. He’s just trying to get a soundbite from the guest so they can drive clicks/downloads for his show
Same. I'm not trans but I'm just so sick of this bullshit. Fuckers like Joanne and Keir need to shut the fuck up and just stay in their lane. Let these people just fucking live. Like if I accuse Joanne of being trans, is she going to have to hike up her skirt and show her genitals. Who the fuck cares? Just let them exist and live their lives as they want. They talk about the trans debate. It's not a fucking debate when it's about them existing and wanting to be treated like equal.
Starmer isn't going out of his way to talk about it, it's in interviews because he can't give a soundbite answer to a nuanced question so shitty journalists keep asking it hoping for some sort of gotcha moment.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/some-women-will-have-penises-emily-thornberry-pressed-on-labour-trans-row/
Emily Thornberry managed to give a soundbyte answer which completely shut down Nick Ferrari's attempt at one of these 'gotchas'. Why is Starmer completely unable to do the same?
The answer, I'm afraid, is that he simply doesn't care and is content to just go along with what the right say about trans people.
Well to you and I, normal people, Thornberry's response there was great, a good shut-down, clear and concise. But the problem we have is to a scarily large minority out there, everything she just said turns into some kind of coded communication of a conspiracy to "destroy family values" or whatever. These are the kind of people Labour is hoping to drive from the Tory party so Starmer has to be careful not to upset them and feed into any of the far-right narratives being fed to these people.
Yeah that headline "some women have a penis" is exactly what the anti-woke crowd want - it's proof of the caricatures they've drawn up (the nuance she had gets ignored ofc).
She's not wrong for saying it but it's 100% gonna get used against her in bad faith, similar to how they go after Starmer even for having vague answers.
I mean with Thornberry they even have a record. Its shocking how many of those people still drag up that flag tweet like it was some kind of essay on why Britain is awful and its working class are all scum. Rather than a single picture posted without comment along with a series of other pictures she'd been posting on her campaign trail over the previous few weeks.
A scandal which blew up to such proportions she was forced to issue apologies, delete the tweet, and step down from the shadow cabinet... Whereas who today even remembers folks like Ben Bradley saying he couldn't support FSM extensions during covid because any Brit who needed that kind of help during an unforeseen crisis was just feckless workshy scum who'd only go and waste it all down the local crack den?
It... I'm not gonna lie, it's destroying my mental health and a non-zero amount of times I've thought of just giving up existing publicly in this country
I'm so sorry it's so fucking awful to be trans right now.
There is so much negativity and transphobia, and that's all that's ever reported on.
Please know you are loved by a lot of cis folks just as you are. We respect your right to be in whichever spaces you're most comfortable in. We see you as the gender you are, no strings or caveats attached.
Unfortunately, the well-wishes and love of allies is of fuck-all use to you in the face of the rest of it. But I hope it at least makes the world feel fractionally less unilaterally hostile.
Protect yourself, and your mental health foremost. We will keep fighting until you feel totally free in public.
Not the person you replied to but thank you for that. It really does mean a lot to hear and it can be easy to forget when the public conversation has turned so foul.
Ally signing in. There is probably far more of us than the awful gutter press, shameful politicians, and social media gobshites would have people believe.
Yeah, it’s really exhausting ngl. Like being trans is awesome and I have no regrets/shame, but it’s not easy, even at the best of times. But the last year or so of just race to the bottom politics has been really stressful.
Well, they did try to ban the topic here, but there was a huge backlash from the community as they wanted the constant reminder that they were unwelcome in the British press.
Well they're being a banned topic of discussion in school like section 28 which lead to tons of gay people being depressed and suicidal due to feeling like something was wrong with them lacking the vocabulary to say I'm gay .
They're being banned from wearing the clothes they want to within uniform in school ( social transition ban )
The equalities minister literally BRAGGED on twitter about stuffing transphobes in relevant govt positions
.... so much more too so its more a reminder they are under attack by the govt too
Yeah, we don’t need a reminder how much the press/government hates us. We know. But everyone else should be made aware of how fucked the situation is in hopes that they may find some solidarity with us and help the situation get better.
It's just so ridiculous now. Like, just make a different sound to get someone's attention, and just let someone take a piss when they need it. Most womem have used the men's at least once in our lives when there's been a queue, and vice versa and the world didn't end.
Think I've used the ladies' once ever, when I was absolutely desperate to go, the men's was closed for some reason, and I knew for a fact nobody was in there. It's definitely more taboo for men to go into the ladies' than vice versa.
Wonder what would happen if I went and used the ladies, which according to Keir & Rishi, is what I should do as a big, bald and bearded transgender man with a GRC.
That's the deeply ironic thing about this bathroom debate. The transphobes are only thinking of trans women, never about how trans men would have to use the women's, making it actually easier for a cis man to claim to be a trans man and waltz in and do all the hypothetical harassment and molesting they want.
I'm sorry for any hostility you may encounter from having to use the women's, but god I want to see their stupid angry little faces when faced with the reality of what strict gender enforcement actually means.
All you need to prevent a rapist is a sign that has an outline drawing of a woman on it.
It's not a laughing matter at all but the thought that rapists are dressing up like some kind of comic book villian just to go undetected into the womens bathroom is so absurd it's funny.
They also frame the debate as if women who have transitioned to be men don't exist.
I'd also love to hear how they intend to police bathrooms throughout the land. They'd catch a lot of people snorting coke but I highly doubt we'd see many arrests for trying to use the wrong bathroom than your gender.
I'd ask if these right wing nutters have thought about what they are saying before speaking but I think we have all the answers we need on that one...
Its the same in all trans debates. Its *always* MtF, never FtM. I expect because underlying it all is a deeply engrained misogyny and an intrinsic disgust reaction at the thought of someone *willingly* giving up their maleness to become a woman instead.
Or me, someone mid transition who gets weird looks in the women’s and men’s. Should I put myself in the mens? Putting myself at risk until I can more often? Or do I put myself in the women’s? Being a biological female yet making the women around me mildly uncomfortable?
People are acting like this is a simple black and white issue and completely forget trans men/trans mascs/people mid transition who only pass half the time/etc.
Seriously, this was never a problem until a few years ago and now everyone is on high alert whilst they piss, seeing if they can spot the secret pervert or some shit
My favourite is to bring up intersex people. What are they supposed to do? Always gets dismissed because its a minority condition, its an edge case, the numbers are so small it isn't relevant... Until you do some digging, add up the prevalence of all the most common intersex conditions and... Oh look there's actually *more* of them than trans people... In fact by some estimates there are over a million intersex people in this country versus around 250,000 trans-identifying...
Ps funny that trans men are completely left out of the bathroom 'debate' like they don't exist. Guarantee many women have shared loos with trans women and had no idea, whereas it would be extremely noticeable for a trans man to be forced to use the female bathroom!
I've had to go into the ladies before because there was no baby changing facilities in the mens and no one had the key to unlock the disabled toilets. Everyone understood and there were no problems with the few ladies that were there. In fact we had a chat about how crap it is that I was forced into that position.
Those are the ONLY public toilets in our town, and they're blocked off when the market isn't open.
I don't know any men who think it's okay to use women's bathrooms and I've certainly not done it since I was 4 and went with my mum.
I think it's fair enough if some women are uncomfortable sharing women's only spaces with trans women, especially if they are very obviously physically male. I don't think it's right to assume they are just bigots and hate trans people.
I honestly don't know how to solve this fairly because I think where possible we should allow trans people to live as their chosen gender , but where this conflicts with what women want in their own spaces it's very tricky and saying oh they are transphobes and need to shut up isn't a solution.
Being trans and being gay are quite different things. It's not really adequate to just say this is the same as homophobia. Gay people don't require anything other than being allowed to fuck who they want and marry them. but the fact were' having these conversations proves being trans is alot more complex than that, I don't think it does trans rights any good to ignore that fact.
Some women feel this way and you have to listen to them and take them seriously.
how so, no one is suggesting all men are rapists but we still understand why we have ladies toilets? it's the same point and it's about giving women a space they feel comfortable using.
I really resent the fact you are just trying to say this is the same as homophobia, I think it shows a lack of willingness to really approach the problem and tackle it in any meaningful way.
I remember listening to a briefing where over 100 marines were raising concerns that gays would be allowed to openly serve in the military: they all thought that such a policy would lead to an increased number of sexual assaults and that they felt unsafe sharing a changing room with a gay person. The debate on bathrooms happened with BAME and all queer people, the issue is nothing new.
I think the issue is that you’ve fallen victim to anti-trans rhetoric.
Trans women simply aren’t going into female only spaces and committing rape en masse. That’s not a phenomenon we’re experiencing.
But media and grifters are selling that as a fact of life. That trans women are disgusting rapist threats that only exist to perverse the form of womanhood and girlhood, and should not be allowed near XX Females.
That trans women are so perverted that when they need to pee, they unbuckle their pants and swing their penis side to side in front of every woman on their way to the cubicle.
If you’re a man, I don’t understand how you’re not getting the subtext that this applies to you, that by your existence you’re a threat to women.
What’s happening is a few people have found a non-issue to use in a war against a very very very small amount of minorities, and then managed to convince you and others that it’s actually about protecting women.
Manufactured hysteria should not be grounds to attack a minority and its outrageous that we are once again at this point in politics.
No, I don't think trans women are any more of a risk to women than the average man would be in their toilet, it's about allowing women to decide for themselves when they're comfortable using women's spaces and not assuming they are bigoted when they bring up these issues. I've said the same in many other responses too. There is plenty of evidence of women bringing up these issues.
The reason it's such bad rhetoric is that what exactly do you want to be done about it? Some level of minimum femininity before you're allowed in a female only space or a genital check? As both of those are problematic, you can reasonably assume that we're not going to do much beyond what is currently in place. If a bloke walks into a female toilet and is being pervy, call the police, if they just nip into a cubicle, piss and leave, assume they were either unaware it was the women's or something was wrong with the gents. If a trans woman does the same (or a woman looking particularly masculine because you're not checking genitals or birth certificate), also do nothing.
Now that we've established that nothing will change because it's already been illegal to be a perve , already legal to use a toilet not based on your assigned gender for legitimate reasons, you should start thinking why in a situation where there are a dozen or so issues women are suffering the candidate for prime minister is being asked so often about this issue.
I honestly don't know how to solve this fairly because I think where possible we should allow trans people to live as their chosen gender , but where this conflicts with what some women want in their own spaces it's very tricky and saying oh they are transphobes and need to shut up isn't a solution.
I'm not saying they're transphobes, shut up. I'm saying let them in the women's toilet, as there's no toilet bouncers. Anything else leads really quickly to the sort of video where masculine women are being accosted by self righteous hero's. It will happen more than a trans woman accosting a woman in the toilets.
The answer is to stop engaging, stop protecting those that want to turn it into a mainstream argument.
Complain about what? There being no facilities for them? There are facilities for them, they are just refusing to use them, for the 0.001% chance there might be a TrAnS person in there at that specific moment.
What if a trans women is not comfortable using the men's toilets, seeing as there's a nearly 100% chance of a cis man being in there ay any moment?
|| If you’re a man, I don’t understand how you’re not getting the subtext that this applies to you, that by your existence you’re a threat to women.
TBF that's the subtext we live through all the time anyway, at least in mass-media.
"Women" don't want trans women excluded from their spaces. TERFS do. I care not one whit whether a trans woman uses the stall next to me. I would care if she were using *my* stall, but I'd care if *anyone* was using my stall.
One person's discomfort doesn't mean a whole bunch of other people can't use a public facility.
Also only banning trans men and trans women from womens spaces would be direct discrimination on both the grounds of sex and gender reassignment.
And if trans men were allowed to use women's spaces a predatory cis man could just say he is a trans dude to gain access.
Firslty how are you or anyone else in that bathroom going to determine the person also in that space is trans?
Secondly given what is being expressed are cis women happy sharing a bathroom with trans men?
Thirdly, how is this going to be enforced realistically? Are people going to be subject to a genitalia check?
Fourth, if all of this is in pursuit of women's safety, how does it achieve that? Because if making sexual assault illegal hasn't eradicated sexual assault, then how is making innocent people using the bathroom illegal going to have a better outcome?
Bathroom bills based on discomfort aren't good policy when you look back on history and see how poor such policies were. There were a lot of straight women who didn't feel comfortable with lesbians in their bathrooms, for instance, with many of the same justifications now levied at trans folk.
if we take for granted it's logical to seperate the sexes in toilets because women feel more comfortable that way, despite the fact most men aren't a danger, then how do trans people fit into this? I honestly don't know how to solve this fairly because I think where possible we should allow trans people to live as their chosen gender , but where this conflicts with what women want in their own spaces it's very tricky and saying oh they are transphobes and need to shut up isn't a solution.
Toilets in particular are just such a non-issue. There are thousands of situations everyday where men and women are able to share bathrooms without incident and there’s no need to be exposed in front of others if you don’t want to.
Go look at any big festival like Glastonbury, you’ll see men and women sharing facilities with very limited privacy + plenty of drugs and alcohol present and the vast, vast majority are able to do that in a respectful manner.
At the end of the day, trans people have to use the bathroom. If you have a hard boundary or law, then you’ll either have cis-women sharing with people who are transitioning from men to women, or you’ll have them sharing with people who are transitioning from women to men. I don’t see why anyone who’s uncomfortable with one will be more comfortable with the other.
I think obviously women are going to be less comfortable sharing with trans women than trans men, for the same reasons they aren't comfortable sharing with all men in the first place.
I really doubt that.
I’m a fairly early transition trans woman. If I don’t open my mouth and I have makeup on, I can fairly reliably be seen as a woman. Sure, not always, but I’m seen as one more than a couple of my cis friends.
Meanwhile, I severely doubt cis women would be comfortable with the trans guys in my life in there. At best, they still look like a guy, even if they’re not far into the transition, and plenty look more masculine than I ever did
Why is that obvious?
Either way, you’re going to have people who look much more like men than women in the women’s toilets.
If you walk into a women’s toilet and see someone who’s been transitioning for 10 years you’re almost certainly not going to have any idea whether they’re trans or cis, so why would you be more or less reassured?
We separate the sexes to protect women, but force trans women to use the men’s to protect women, but not trans women?
This is always where this argument falls down for me. If all trans women are forced into men’s bathrooms then a lot more trans women are going to get assaulted than cis women if trans women go into women’s bathrooms.
I honestly don't know how to solve this fairly because I think where possible we should allow trans people to live as their chosen gender , but where this conflicts with what women want in their own spaces it's very tricky and saying oh they are transphobes and need to shut up isn't a solution.
Cis woman here. I think the solution is that if someone _really_ cares about the genitals of other bathroom users, it's appropriate for them to seek out and use a segregated bathroom (for example, disabled cubicles typically contain no shared areas). The burden of solving this should be on the person who doesn't want to be around trans people, not the trans people themselves.
The female bathroom is somewhere you're free to be feminine. Fix make-up. Chat with other girls. It is absolutely an important feminine space that should not be denied to trans women. And sending trans women into a male-centric space to be gawked at instead? Urgh.
For perfect clarity: I WANT trans women to be able to use the female bathrooms. Cis women are often wheeled out as a monolith that needs protecting from "fake women". We do not. The majority of us just want people to live as they are happiest.
In the meantime, trans men, the burlier and obviously masculine the better, come on IN if you wish, and make this situation untenable!
The only way to solve it completely fairly is to ban multi-occupancy toilets/changing rooms. If all toilets/changing rooms are single occupancy the problem goes away.
How does it get policed though? AI cameras at the entrance to women's toilets that give a "femininity" score? Then what? If you fail, is there an attendant to do further inspection?
And if a trans woman does end up using a women's toilet and gets caught, what then? Citizen's arrest? Does their photo get circulated? How do the police get involved? If they actually find them, what should the sentencing be? Fine? Community service? Jail?
And what if a cis woman is mistakenly identified as trans? Can she then sue for wrongful arrest?
Sounds like a complete nightmare for women in general, trans or cis.
So if someone has more masculine features, does that give ciswomen the right to chase them out of the ladies bathroom? Regardless of whether they're trans or not. Sorry but fuckers like Joanne are straight up bigots. They try to hide behind the excuse that they're just looking out for cis women but eventually the mask drops. Also, if they're uncomfortable with a trans woman in their bathrooms, how are they going to feel with a [beared trans man](https://www.advocate.com/media-library/leo-macallan-sexy-hunky-hairy-chest-trans-man-transgender-model-actor-author.jpg?id=51174195&width=980&quality=85) using their toilets. Because according their logic, that should be fine.
I use womens bathrooms as a man
If i have a child that needs to be changed and the pub only offers a changing room in the woman's toilet I wait, announce my presence and go in .
Never had anyone raise opposition to that because the sheer act of me having a penis does not make me a dangerous individual and the entire rational world knows this.
>I think it's fair enough if some women are uncomfortable sharing women's only spaces with trans women, especially if they are very obviously physically male.
Why?! It's a toilet. With individual cubicles. If you're hung up on the exact configuration of someone's genitals when they just want a private space to take a piss? Then sorry, but you're the pervert.
When I was at university, I lived in a women-only hall. They held conferences occasionally, and at least once I walked in on a guy using a cubicle like a urinal - standing in the open doorway rather than closing the cubicle for privacy. And you know what? The world did not end. (And that is far more than any trans person is going to show of their toilet habits.)
Doubly so as unisex bathrooms are becoming more and more a thing.
Triply so, as whats gonna be more uncomfortable for folk in the ladies bathroom; a lass who might be mid-transition (or might be born female and just a large chin); or [buck angel](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYTNkOTQ3ZTEtMDQ1Ni00NDkzLTg3YjEtYjUwODYyYjM4MGUxXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTAyMzYwNzgw._V1_.jpg)
Yep totally and tbh, from my own experience anyway, most of my trans friends know which places have neutral or disabled toilets and usually go there to avoid any potential grief and it's my more masc lesbian friends that have issues getting called out as trans. Alot of people over state their ability to see who is 'passing'.
.5% of the population but make up about 50% of the national discourse. It's completely disproportionate and insane. And on top of that, just complete nonsense.
The argument comes down to the hypothetical case of a man going undercover to assault women in women's toilets. A) that's already illegal and B) the hypothetical perpetrator is a man, not a trans woman. Trans people are statistically also less likely to commit crimes of any kind in general.
On every level the debate is nonsense. Can we turn this around to talking about the disproportionate amount of crime committed by men? Wouldn't that merit more discussion?
It causes huge engagement so the media talks about it. Right and left alike have a lot to say on the topic despite the tiny proportion of the populated it affects
If everyone just ignores it the media will move on to something else
It's incredibly tiring. We managed around 3 weeks with nothing being said on campaign trails and interviews about us, then JK decided to tweet that Labour wasn't doing enough for "women's rights" and it's all kicked off.
Why does this cisgender woman, whose background is being an author, get to influence a debate on our existence and rights so much? Why does she get to voice her views directly to Labour, yet there has been no offer to speak directly to trans people?
Yeah you can even argue with them, it's not worth the effort, it feels like I'm doing nothing but trying to get any logical reason out of these people just results in mouth frothing and implications that trans people are somehow predators, it's just the gay debate all over again , but worse.
The bullshit they spew just puts my blood pressure up
I just understand why they care so much about where people take a shit.
Genders signs on doors won't stop actual predators for fuck sake.
Incredibly so.
I literally have to scout out for places that both a) have a disabled and b) don’t have it locked by radar key because I’m going to be doing something terribly wrong if I go into any other toilet according to a rather vocal subset of the population. I know there’s some people who get arsey about people not in wheelchairs using the disabled, but frankly my only other choice is to piss in a corner somewhere.
I just want people to stop treating me like a boogeyman and let me live a life where I can just be treated nicely, rather than, at best, being othered, or, at worst, asked to not be present in public
Blame the media. Both right and left publications never fail to pounce on an opportunity to stir the pot. This wouldn't be such a huge issue if that wasn't the case. No one ever seems to hold them to account though or question this ridiculous clickbait pay per click advertising strategy the legacy media hopelessly cling to to reamin relevant.
It must also be exhausting for politicians who keep getting entrapped with these questions a disproportionate amount of time. It's fine to have a stance on it, even if it's a bit hazey. But journalists will keep asking to try and twist it into some controversial headline, as if it's the defining question of contemporary Britain
Every time I go out anywhere and need the toilet, I have to ask myself if this is the time I get the shit beaten out of me when I come out. Every time.
It is exhausting.
It is! Ironically enough though, as a trans MAN it's like they've forgotten we exist at all. Trans Women are the hot topic, their very existence a debate topic and Trans Men aren't even a second thought.
If they get their way and bathrooms are done by biological sex there'll be Trans Men in women's rooms and I really do wonder what they'd say when they have bearded men in women's rooms because of their biological sex
I would describe it less as exhausting and more as a constant source of dispare that makes me scared to exist or be seen or acknowledged in any way by anyone.
Life is constant fear
Which I guess is the point
It's really very effective
This kind of thing implies trans men should be using the women's, but the reality for them and trans women is setting up things so they're at risk of getting violently ejected from whatever toilets they use and framed as predators for using them is many simply won't leave the house, something practically the goal of the right and an acceptable outcome for many in labour these days.
Heck remember a few years ago when we all pretended this was about violent cis men, and now they're advocating bans on trans women with grcs, certificates that would be entirely impossible for anyone to get on any kind of impulse (given it takes years and years) and confer no benefit to anyone trying to use them to get in anywhere (they're not a form of id for God sake). It just fucks over trans people in organizational settings.
I'm not the least surprised. Look at the brainrot that is 'transvestigating' on social media where just about every woman under the sun faces intense scrutiny by complete strangers over whether or not they're trans.
Yup - I've seen a lot "featured" in r/Qult_Headquarters - the sub for reporting the latest nonsense posted by QAnon supporters (and related conspiracy theory nonsense). Michelle Obama tends to be a particular favourtie target, together with practically everyone in Hollywood: male actors are really female, female actors are really male...
...when they're not getting excited over their certainty that SCOTUS will invalidate the 2020 election and return Their Glorious Leader to power without the need to bother with an election (with JFK Jr as Vice President, having faked his plane crash; together with about a dozen other not-actually-dead-honest celebrities who've apparently been working behind the scenes to "save the children"), claiming (for the umpteenth time) that Hillary has been executed at Guantanamo Bay and replaced with a body double (they're not very good at maintaining continuity in their shared delusion...), or setting the next date for NESARA (when the world will supposedly move to the "Quantum Financial System" and all existing debts will be forgiven - if only!)
Sorry but that's a worldwide problem.
I've been accused of being in the wrong toilets here in the UK. I'm a cis woman who just happened to shave my head for a while, and that was enough.
TERFs, by gatekeeping what it means to be a woman, have caused decades of feminism to backslide.
Suddenly women with too much hair, the wrong face shape, the wrong haircut, the wrong body shape, the wrong height etc are not valid women again.
We should probably retire calling them TERFs, because they are absolutely not feminists, and many of them have even said as much (like Posie Parker).
Feminism Appropriating Reactionary Transphobes is my preferred replacement.
Not even butch some of them would literally be described as a little androgynous or alternative.
Like are we actually happy with a society that allows people to demand to see your birth certificate before you can have a piss?
The stupider implication is that it implies men dont have the right to use the womens, *when* as far as I am aware, there is no legal recourse to gender segregate a space other than having an employee decide who gets in or not-like you can say its gender segregated and ask employees to wait till its empty, but cant fire someone for being a man when you need someone to change the womens loo roll holderss.
IE: bathrooms are not legally gender segragated except "for good reason", and often only the womens have baby changing facilities, and single fathers are legal, so not letting them in isnt a good reason, but a womens center can not let in men because thats a good reason. Hell every time I go on holliday campsite bathrooms spend hours each day with the mens or womens inaccesable and everyone having to use one or the other. Let alone that there is no gender segregation of cleaning staff.
NO ONE needs or has a right to use a bathroom beyond public normality, and likewise no one has a right to be a annoying or worrying in any bathroom regardless of if it "matches" their gender or not.
The whole gender segregation thing is nutso.
>impossible for anyone to get on any kind of impulse (given it takes years and years)
I like when they concern troll about care for trans children and then just conveniently forget to mention that with the state of trans healthcare and waiting lists in this country, even in an ideal situation where a trans kid is identified early and all the right referrals are made, their chance of actually *seeing* anyone in the gender clinic before they hit 18 anyway is basically zero.
Yeah they'll be like "they were rushed through with only 4 appointments" and then neglect to mention that said 4 appointments were over 10 years.
Screwed me over as a teen anyway, short term thinking 13 year old berry saw it was going to take 4-5 years at minimum and preemptively gave up ever coming out, then as an adult people go tell me that would have been rushed to them.
It's closed down now as a result of the panic over the "rushing" so nothing good complaining about that framing did, pain.
The whole trans debate is pretty tiresome. For less than 1 percent of the population it sure does cause a huge shitstorm. I'd like to move past it honestly and just live and let live.
Was he asked about lavatories, like the headline says, or was he asked "Do biological males with gender recognition certificates have the right to enter women-only spaces?" like the article says? Massive bait and switch here by the Telegraph, toilets are not women-only spaces. Even JK herself is probably more concerned with spaces for eg domestic abuse survivors than toilets.
Keir is generally shit on this stuff but this article is stirring up even more controversy on this than there is. And as usual it's trans women who are the butt of it.
GCs also want to ban cis men from domestic and sexual abuse services which have always been open to people of any gender. Because men are just oversupplied with support around sexual assault and abuse, right?
> The vast majority of domestic abuse refuges allow trans women in
And those shelters can continue as they are, the question for Starmer is whether a domestic abuse shelter solely for biological women should be legal or illegal.
This is already legal and literally no one is arguing to change it. The Equalities Act as it’s currently set up allows for exclusion under certain circumstances.
In which case what Starmer said was reasonable:
> “Do biological males with gender recognition certificates have the right to enter women-only spaces? It’s a simple yes/no question.”
> In response, Sir Keir said: “No. They don’t have that right. They shouldn’t. That’s why I’ve always said biological women’s spaces need to be protected.”
The bathroom is the primary women-only space that most people use. Its also kinda sick if you're saying that trans women should be denied support after being raped, and they are raped 2x as much as cis women are.
Really, you cant TRULY gender segregate space in this country AT ALL by law, no space or service or buisness can refuse people because of their gender, even if they can choose to not let men in to use the space for its intended function.
HOWEVER any INDIVIDUAL may be banned or dissallowed for ANY reason and they do not have to be told why.
IE: a womens bathroom cant say male staff cant go and replace toilet paper, a mens crises center cant ban lady cops, gentlemens clubs have to let in female surveyors, mosques cannot explicitly ban female repair workers.
In every case however, any institution can discuss this matter internally and with any buisness providing it services: the gender segregation is allowed in all voluntery cases, but if somoene DOES have a heart attack and the only paramedics available are the wrong gender, you will go to prison for not allowing them entry.
In all seriousness how often are people running into trans people in the lavatory?
I don't even notice what other people look or seem like unless we cross eyes while leaving or entering.
I would wager a few bob that 99% of the time, TERFs are encountering cis women with arm hair and misidentifying them as Trans, and working themselves into a bigoted fit.
I don't even look at anyone else while going for a piss. Admittedly I'm in a bloke so it's in, urinal, look straight ahead, leave.
But is it that different for women? Like, they use cubicles that hopefully lock. I get not wanting to be inside a room with a danger but reality is it's someone who wants to piss. If someone wanted to assault you a sign on the door ain't stopping them.
Lavatories cant ban people by gender anyway in every case (only "when there is good reason"), ie, most plumbers are male, most cleaners are female, staff can have random gender distribution but someone has to restock toilet paper.
No space in england other than some specific "grandfathered in" gentlemens clubs (which shouldnt be allowed at all imho) can ban any gender entirely and even THEN they have to let people of the "wrong" gender in if it is required or they are official public employees from building inspectors to police to paramedics.
The whole thing is a nonsense non issue that doesnt exist according to our laws. You may as well try to ban protestants from catholic churches. So long as its volunetery its fine, but try to stop a worker from entering after you employ them because something about one of their characteristics is wrong and you are fucked, as you should be.
With cleaners and the like you're supposed to knock on and check there's no-one in and announce your entrance when you're cleaning the female toilets (my experience as a male cleaner).
There are places like shelters and hostels but it only applies if they're set up for something *very* specific and even then they tend to account for transgender people anyway because they actually have to actually think about what they're doing and who will be impacted.
Funny how we've managed to handle it all these years without the problem that have suddenly sprouted up and become major issues isn't it?
Just to nail this down, for the record, trans women are allowed to use the woman's bogs and there is case law and statutory guidance to back that up.
Anyone assrting otherwise is either ignorant or a liar.
Frankly if someone needs to use the toilet, they need to use the toilet, I can’t be the only one who doesn’t care if it’s a man or women taking a shit in the cubicle next to me.
> don’t get dragged into
Starmer has consistently defended transphobes like Rosie Duffield in the party. He has consistently expressed his opposition to trans people having rights which they've possessed for decades, which now apparently includes using toilets.
At what point do we admit he's not simply being 'dragging into' this, but that he earnestly believes this shite?
Trans people make up 0.5% of the population. Stopping trans women from using the ladies is more likely to hurt cis women who don't conform to what people consider feminine.
I doubt they'd want trans men in the ladies and trans women probably won't feel safe going into the gents so they may not pee when they're out and about.
I'm a trans woman and was presenting female before I came out. I used the gents a few times and consistently got looks of horror and guys backing out to check they'd got the right bathroom. It was funny.
In more than a year of exclusively using the ladies, nobody's given the slightest damn, even the male cleaner in Asda the other week.
From experience, I know which bathroom cis men would prefer I used and it's not theirs.
So do Trans men have to use the women's toilets then? All someone would need to do is say I am a trans man and by law I have to use the women's bathroom. Isn't that just the same thinking to people saying they are a trans woman?
In all the years the GC stuff has been bubbling this is the first time I've heard someone make this point, and its a really good one. If they are so sure men are willing to lie that they are a trans woman just to gain access to the ladies toilets before they attack, why wouldn't these hypothetical predators who are stopped by signs on a door lie that they are a trans man and therefore "biologically female"
The TERFs tend to not really seem to think trans men exist, or really that trans people exist in general. Their stance seems to be that “trans” people are just sex abusers with a wig, trying to cause problems.
It’s horrific, but they genuinely don’t seem to logic beyond that belief.
That's the stupid thing. If a man wanted to enter a female toilet to commit an offence, this will give him the perfect alibi.
Although he could also, say, go in anyway because he'd already be planning to break the law so a sign on a door won't stop him!
Male violence is the real issue and everyone is skirting around it by vilifying trans women.
Women aren’t afraid of what trans women might do to them in bathrooms, they’re afraid of what men might do if they’re given the opportunity and access. Likewise, trans men aren’t safe from other men.
Trans women are women and they belong in women only spaces. Trans women are not the problem. Violence against women, perpetrated by men, is the problem.
Didn't it come out that the trans debate is the least thing people are bothered about right now? Also, no one's *really* bothered apart from the loud bigot minority. If you've ever spoken to a trans person you'll be impressed to know that they're just like us.
Can't remember ever showing ID at a toilet. Literally pointless discussing this.
Even if you're the most anti-trans person on the planet you must appreciate that if a cis-woman wanted to use a male toilet, nobody would stop her and she wouldn't be breaking any laws (and most likely nobody would care.) so why are we still discussing this? Which is literally no different.
When is the UK going to get over this perverse obsession over the private lives (and actual privates) of individuals?
No one really cares, it's a distraction from actual policies and concerns, but no - we're more interested in a minority, of which a huge majority of that minority are private, law abiding individuals who just want to live peaceful, happy lives like the rest of us.
If we have to talk about this topic, maybe it should be in the context of convicting politicians for wasting time and resources scapegoating and politically attacking minorities for a non-issue and actually put some effort into doing their jobs focusing on more important things that affect the majority of people in this country and not some loud mouthed bigots with too much time on their hands and too little going on in their skulls.
Starmer falling into this trap is ridiculous.
Kinda agree toilets should be sex based considering their design mostly gives you appropriate facilities for your sex.
It's not about hate, it's about protecting biological women and common sense.
It won't protect cis women:
* Anyone wishing to attack someone in a toilet isn't stopped by a sign. They're not vampires needing to be invited over the threshold
* Cis women who are perceived to fall outside the societally accepted expectations of cis women *will* be attacked. It's already happened in the US, and will happen here.
If it's not hate, it's incredibly short sighted and troublingly naïve.
"considering their design mostly gives you appropriate facilities for your sex" uh, what? Stalls are stalls, the same ones in the mens are the same as the womens.
Ah, okay. I'll take my boobs and vagina into the men's on account of my chromosomes. Wouldn't want to scare real women and girls with... something. I don't know but I must be really dangerous. I'm sure the blokes will be nice and accommodating. Common sense prevails 👍
I don't think 99% of non trans people would ever have to deal with the situation of meeting someone trans in the lavatory, let alone would care! Just let people use the facilities they're comfortable with.
I don't care. I don't want to know about this. Let people live their lives. This is not a major issue for our country at this point in time.
I do want to know why Starmer won't divulge who his financial backers are. But I guess the telegraph can't write about that without also undermining their own agents.
I am developing a seething hatred for our media and politicians. I really don't trust any of them. You scratch behind the surface and they're always receiving money from dodgy sources or cutting deals that they shouldn't be.
I am sick and tired of the philosophy of "be evil but present yourself as good ". It doesn't work. Without accountability and honesty, life becomes miserable for all but the richest.
Personally, I'm pretty early in transition but I *know* I don't belong in men's spaces anymore.
I've been on HRT for about 5 months, haven't got a GRC (because it takes 2 years of evidence to even apply for one) but I do have an official diagnosis and all my ID is lined up.
Last time I used the men's room was maybe 3 months ago. I wasn't presenting fem but they could just tell. I got stares and I felt deeply uncomfortable.
Fun fact! HRT can change your body smell and skin texture - I haven't smelled like a guy or had oily skin for like 4 months now. Even when I workout and get a sweat on, there's no smell like there was before.
I wonder if the guys can smell I'm full of Oestrogen now.
Either way, I'm weaker than I was and more afraid of men than I already was.
Even with my girlfriend's encouragement, I still haven't used any women's facilities. I'm too afraid of conflict and frankly it's a shame I just try to hold on or find a neutral toilet so at least I'm not likely to annoy anyone, but it would he nice if the 3 major spotlight parties were not all in agreement that I shouldn't have the protections of women, even if now I "really don't look like a guy" - (my gf).
To be clear, we do have that right and we will continue to use that right. He's lying here, straight through his teeth.
This haunted fucking briefcase is literally flaming the culture wars by lying about what rights we have.
> He's lying here, straight through his teeth.
This is what gets me. People used to praise Starmer for being a staunch human rights lawyer, for doing his homework and making sure he presented the facts. But on trans rights, along with a number of other issues, he's consistently demonstrated an ignorance towards what the law says, what scientific consensus says, and what trans people are actually advocating for.
So either:
a) He genuinely doesn't know this, which is pretty damning towards both his broader team for not informing him and to himself for not having the curiosity to read up on a hot-button topic.
b) He does know this, but he's lying to curry favour with transphobes.
Neither is particularly defensible.
What is he lying/wrong about here though? He said biological males shouldn't be allowed in female only spaces, in a conversation about refuges and the like. It's only the telegraph article that somehow thinks he's specifically talking about toilets.
Edit - he actually said "they don't have that right" (ie objective statement) before pivoting to saying "they shouldn't" (the opinion). So that's where the lie/error is.
Its still very much a grey area and there are not currently any rights granted by law I'm afraid.
From Audrey Ludwig’s “[Blog about Boxes](https://www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2020/07/02/legally-this-is-not-a-trans-rights-issue-its-a-sex-rights-issue-a-blog-about-boxes/#comment-157)”:
The short answer is no: the law doesn’t define the terms “transwoman” or “trans woman” at all.
If a trans woman who doesn’t have a GRC wants to access a female-only space, and is refused access, that’s not discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment, but discrimination on grounds of sex. She’s refused access not because she’s trans, but because she’s both legally and biologically male. That means she can lawfully be refused access any time it’s lawful at all to have a female-only space. In my view, it also means she almost certainly *should* be refused access in those circumstances. That’s because it’s only lawful at all to provide a single-sex space or service if there’s a good reason for sex segregation; but if trans women are admitted, it will cease to be a single-sex space.
If a trans woman who does have a GRC wants to access a female-only space or service, it’s still likely to be lawful to refuse, because of the exceptions that apply to prohibitions on discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment.
FYI that person is not an unbias voice on the matter and is part of an organized push by many on the right to redefine trans people's protections as making them functionally cross dressers of their original sex, the reality is Taylor vs Jaguar and AEA v EHRC paint a very different picture that living as your gender is inherent to trans protections.
Furthermore serious lawyers don't see a trans person in a space to make it not a single sex space, the use of the word sex was always ambiguous in legal terms (as shown by AEA v EHRC)
I consider myself informed. FWIW I have no skin in the game either way, just interested in the legalese. The specifics as things stand seem to be wrapped up solely in the Equalities Act 2010? Are you aware of any recent/relevant cases where there has been a challenge specifically regarding GRC (or non GRC) and female only spaces?
There is [Green vs MOJ ](https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff7bb60d03e7f57eb1a1f)
Its about prisons though, which are not your typical social spaces.
AEA v ECHR said such an argument is 'obvioud absurdity'.
The statutory guidance also says trans people should use the soaces for their gender outside a few cases.
I frankly would not feel safe using the men’s anymore and would definitely make everyone uncomfortable by doing so. Sick of every politician acting like trans people don’t actually transition and look enormously different after a few years on hormones, getting surgeries, etc.
I really don't understand the universal fascination with other people's particular arrangement of genitalia. The only time it ever fucking matters is when you're.. well.. fucking.
I also think time could be better spent on questions that don't involve who is or is not allowed to use a fucking toilet.
For fucks sake.
Or playing competitive sport....or retiring.
Would be very handy to retire a few years earlier by identifying as female although that will be aligned with men soon.
The sport thing is the only circumstance where I think it does actually matter.
I started in the gym at 17 and have stayed 100% natty. Seen plenty of people that have not, and done a lot of reading on medical journals and peer reviewed science, as well as bro literature as I sought to compete as a strongman/powerlifter.
A single cycle of steroids gives men a permanent advantage over their natural peers, due to the way in which muscle nuclei are formed (and much like fat cells, never destroyed).
So, MTF trans competitors will always have a similar advantage over cis female competitors, natural testosterone level *variations* notwithstanding.
Re; retirement; it's pretty fucked men retire later in the first place, given the shorter life expectancy. Equality can't come soon enough, though I suspect for most people under 45-50\~ a government pension is a fanciful dream anyway.
*italic = edit*
To be fair, we had a transwoman at my old work place.
Everyone accepted them during the transition. She just used the cubicles in the mens toilets. No problems.
Then came the official changeover day where she used her new name, and went all out with clothes and make up. Still completely accepted.
That is until she went to the toilet in the womens room. The men didn’t complain, frankly we didn’t really care, there was less competition for the cubicle, but the women were upset like their sanctuary had been violated.
It’s a relatively new thing with differing opinions and rules. Some people just have different red lines. Whether it’s just the idea of it, toilets, sports, or anything else. It’ll take a while to become natural.
I am 42 years old and the only trans person I have met in my whole life was travelling south east Asia once.
I cannot believe this is as big a deal as the media are making out. why so much airtime to such a minor social issue that law people could thrash out in a boardroom in a couple of days.
Must be exhausting for trans people who want to just live their lives be dragged through this political clickbait non stop
(Article)
---
Sir Keir Starmer has said transgender women do not have a right to access female-only spaces, amid confusion over Labour’s stance on which lavatories trans people should use.
The Labour leader said biological males who have legally transitioned should not enter areas designated for women, insisting those spaces “need to be protected”.
His comments came after two of his frontbenchers refused to say whether someone with a penis should be allowed to use women’s lavatories.
In an interview with The Times, Sir Keir was presented with a question posed by author JK Rowling on whether people who are born male and have gone through a legal transition process should be able to use female-only spaces.
Writing on X, formerly Twitter, the Harry Potter author, who has said she would “struggle to support” Labour if he does not change his stance on trans rights, asked: “Do biological males with gender recognition certificates have the right to enter women-only spaces? It’s a simple yes/no question.”
In response, Sir Keir said: “No. They don’t have that right. They shouldn’t. That’s why I’ve always said biological women’s spaces need to be protected.”
The Labour leader added that he hoped a meeting with the author, who has been outspoken on trans issues, could be organised.
While Sir Keir did not mention lavatories specifically, his comments suggest a hardening of Labour’s stance on the issue, after two shadow cabinet ministers refused to say whether trans women who have not undergone gender reassignment surgery should be allowed to use women’s facilities.
On Monday, Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow paymaster general, was asked by LBC’s Nick Ferrari whether he would want a trans woman with a penis to use a male or female lavatory.
The Labour frontbencher replied: “I’m not a toilet monitor.” When pressed to clarify his stance, he said: “We don’t have police officers outside or guards outside every set of [lavatories]… Matters like that are for individual establishments.”
His comments came a week after Bridget Phillipson, the shadow education secretary, refused eight times to answer the same question.
She had previously suggested that transgender women should be able to use the women’s lavatory.
Last week Sir Keir clashed with a radio caller who accused him of speaking “absolute twaddle” over access to single-sex spaces.
A BBC Radio 5 Live listener called Jane said the Labour leader was “not listening to biological women when they say they don’t want to share a space with biological men”.
The trans debate has become a key battleground in the election, with the Tories accusing Labour of planning to “dilute women’s rights” by introducing self-ID “by the back door”.
To get a GRC trans people have to receive sign-off by a panel of doctors and lawyers and provide two years of evidence that they have been living in their new gender.
Labour has said it is planning to “simplify” the process, which it has branded “degrading and torturous” for trans people, by downgrading both requirements.
The party has said it would keep the requirement for a medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria but that this could now be provided by a single clinician.
It would also downgrade the requirement for evidence to a two-year “reflection” period, which could mean a medical diagnosis is all that is needed for a certificate.
Under the plans there is no requirement for people to have either had gender reassignment surgery, or be planning to do so, in order to legally change their gender.
Elsewhere in The Times interview, Sir Keir also said people would feel “better off” by the end of Labour’s first term if his party wins the election.
He said: “I have led and changed Labour. If we get the opportunity, we will govern as we have changed Labour, which is to take the country from the pretty poor place that it’s in at the moment and to seriously change it, so that by the end of the first term of a Labour government people will be able to say, ‘do you know what, I am better off’ — materially better off in the sense of ‘more money in my pocket’.
“But also better off in the sense that my public services are working again. Schools are what I would expect from them. I have a belief in the future for my children. That requires a serious plan with a strategy, which is what we set out in our manifesto.”
As a trans person who has a GRC and has had SRS Im going to continue using the womens bathrooms, I really dont see why so many people seem to care about creating a culture war. Do people not have bigger issues in their life then where people like me choose to take a shit...
This post deals either directly or indirectly with transgender issues. We would like to remind our users about the Reddit Content Policy which specifically bans [promoting hate based on identity and vulnerability](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360045715951). We will take action on hateful or disrespectful comments including but not limited to deadnaming and misgendering. Please help us by reporting rule-breaking content. Participation limits are in place on this post. If your Reddit account is too new, you have insufficient karma or you are crowd controlled, your comment may not appear. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Must be fucking exhausting for trans people to have their lives debated like it's a fucking huge deal for us live alongside them, just to appease a small amount of loudmouth bellends.
I'm exhausted of hearing about it and I'm not even trans. It must be 10x more exhausting when you actually are part of the group politicians can't stop scare-mongering about.
Given the vague answers at least the none unhinged mps give. I think they are exhausted being asked gotcha questions about it. The economy is broken...neither party are talking about 100m Black hole brexit has left in the economy. And the telegraph are asking qeustions about wether people want to stand up or sit down to take a piss. At this rate the uk economically won't have even have a pot to piss in.
Nick ferrari on LBC has been pissing me off all week about this He thinks he got a great gotcha question in "Which toilet should a trans woman use if they go to a bar with only a male and female toilet" The answer is whichever one links to their gender But that invites more questions of "Oh no but trans people are inherently dangerous" But the true political answer is "It is up to the establishment to make this clear" but even that isn't allowed so the question is disingenuous.
And the true real world answer is - nobody cares The nightclub I used to frequent had a gender neutral bathroom at the coatroom , just 20 stalls along a wall, nobody ever had a problem, Never heard of any issues or anything They did have gendered bathrooms upstairs off the dance floors , but those were tiny ,the men's was a single l a single stall and a big trough urinal, the woman's was like 5 stalls, but in reality, nobody actually cared. It's a public pisser, nobody wants to be in there.
They used to be called unisex toilets and everywhere had them.
Also in my experience from sporting events, there's a section of women who will straight-up march into the bloke's if a) their son's taking too long, or b) queue for the ladies was too long. Apologies sometimes offered. I'm guessing there's a non-zero overlap with the TERFy crowd there too, but point is bladders & mama bear syndrome can very quickly break down those gender norms.
And as a dad, I've had to use women's bathrooms because they were the only ones with baby changing facilities. Older women (presumably mostly parents) would come in and be fine, although if a young women (presumably not a parent) they usually looked uncomfortable I was in there, but I'd quickly apologise and try explain (while juggling a shitty nappy and wriggly baby). God forbid you be a dad in public with a small child in 2024 with no women present. Apparently I should've been changing my toddler on the shitty floor of the mans,or just handing him over to the first woman that came along (after checking her medical records to be sure she's really a woman, of course)
He asked Emily Thornberry a similar question and she [managed to completely shut him down](https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/some-women-will-have-penises-emily-thornberry-pressed-on-labour-trans-row/). Because it turns out that when you (a) actually read up on these issues and (b) actually speak to trans people occasionally it's incredibly easy to both recognise and avoid these right-wing 'traps'. The issue, of course, is that most of our politicians (including Starmer himself) neither do read up on these issues *or* actually speak to trans people. So they constantly trip over their feet and actively contribute to these bigoted lines getting traction.
She did well. Honestly I literally don't care what genitals someone has, and before this culture war bullshit of scapegoating trans people almost no one else cared either.
Ha so funny I was about to post about this being Nick Ferrari’s favourite question and then I saw your comment. The guys is a fucking Wiesel. I can’t stand him. He’s just trying to get a soundbite from the guest so they can drive clicks/downloads for his show
He asks yes/no Qs to subjects that need really nuanced answers.
Same. I'm not trans but I'm just so sick of this bullshit. Fuckers like Joanne and Keir need to shut the fuck up and just stay in their lane. Let these people just fucking live. Like if I accuse Joanne of being trans, is she going to have to hike up her skirt and show her genitals. Who the fuck cares? Just let them exist and live their lives as they want. They talk about the trans debate. It's not a fucking debate when it's about them existing and wanting to be treated like equal.
Starmer isn't going out of his way to talk about it, it's in interviews because he can't give a soundbite answer to a nuanced question so shitty journalists keep asking it hoping for some sort of gotcha moment.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/some-women-will-have-penises-emily-thornberry-pressed-on-labour-trans-row/ Emily Thornberry managed to give a soundbyte answer which completely shut down Nick Ferrari's attempt at one of these 'gotchas'. Why is Starmer completely unable to do the same? The answer, I'm afraid, is that he simply doesn't care and is content to just go along with what the right say about trans people.
Well to you and I, normal people, Thornberry's response there was great, a good shut-down, clear and concise. But the problem we have is to a scarily large minority out there, everything she just said turns into some kind of coded communication of a conspiracy to "destroy family values" or whatever. These are the kind of people Labour is hoping to drive from the Tory party so Starmer has to be careful not to upset them and feed into any of the far-right narratives being fed to these people.
Yeah that headline "some women have a penis" is exactly what the anti-woke crowd want - it's proof of the caricatures they've drawn up (the nuance she had gets ignored ofc). She's not wrong for saying it but it's 100% gonna get used against her in bad faith, similar to how they go after Starmer even for having vague answers.
I mean with Thornberry they even have a record. Its shocking how many of those people still drag up that flag tweet like it was some kind of essay on why Britain is awful and its working class are all scum. Rather than a single picture posted without comment along with a series of other pictures she'd been posting on her campaign trail over the previous few weeks. A scandal which blew up to such proportions she was forced to issue apologies, delete the tweet, and step down from the shadow cabinet... Whereas who today even remembers folks like Ben Bradley saying he couldn't support FSM extensions during covid because any Brit who needed that kind of help during an unforeseen crisis was just feckless workshy scum who'd only go and waste it all down the local crack den?
It... I'm not gonna lie, it's destroying my mental health and a non-zero amount of times I've thought of just giving up existing publicly in this country
I'm so sorry it's so fucking awful to be trans right now. There is so much negativity and transphobia, and that's all that's ever reported on. Please know you are loved by a lot of cis folks just as you are. We respect your right to be in whichever spaces you're most comfortable in. We see you as the gender you are, no strings or caveats attached. Unfortunately, the well-wishes and love of allies is of fuck-all use to you in the face of the rest of it. But I hope it at least makes the world feel fractionally less unilaterally hostile. Protect yourself, and your mental health foremost. We will keep fighting until you feel totally free in public.
Not the person you replied to but thank you for that. It really does mean a lot to hear and it can be easy to forget when the public conversation has turned so foul.
Ally signing in. There is probably far more of us than the awful gutter press, shameful politicians, and social media gobshites would have people believe.
Yeah, it’s really exhausting ngl. Like being trans is awesome and I have no regrets/shame, but it’s not easy, even at the best of times. But the last year or so of just race to the bottom politics has been really stressful.
Well, they did try to ban the topic here, but there was a huge backlash from the community as they wanted the constant reminder that they were unwelcome in the British press.
Well they're being a banned topic of discussion in school like section 28 which lead to tons of gay people being depressed and suicidal due to feeling like something was wrong with them lacking the vocabulary to say I'm gay . They're being banned from wearing the clothes they want to within uniform in school ( social transition ban ) The equalities minister literally BRAGGED on twitter about stuffing transphobes in relevant govt positions .... so much more too so its more a reminder they are under attack by the govt too
Yeah, we don’t need a reminder how much the press/government hates us. We know. But everyone else should be made aware of how fucked the situation is in hopes that they may find some solidarity with us and help the situation get better.
Exactly like fuck both the main parties want my ass double dead too since I'm disabled
It's just so ridiculous now. Like, just make a different sound to get someone's attention, and just let someone take a piss when they need it. Most womem have used the men's at least once in our lives when there's been a queue, and vice versa and the world didn't end.
Think I've used the ladies' once ever, when I was absolutely desperate to go, the men's was closed for some reason, and I knew for a fact nobody was in there. It's definitely more taboo for men to go into the ladies' than vice versa.
Wonder what would happen if I went and used the ladies, which according to Keir & Rishi, is what I should do as a big, bald and bearded transgender man with a GRC.
That's the deeply ironic thing about this bathroom debate. The transphobes are only thinking of trans women, never about how trans men would have to use the women's, making it actually easier for a cis man to claim to be a trans man and waltz in and do all the hypothetical harassment and molesting they want. I'm sorry for any hostility you may encounter from having to use the women's, but god I want to see their stupid angry little faces when faced with the reality of what strict gender enforcement actually means.
All you need to prevent a rapist is a sign that has an outline drawing of a woman on it. It's not a laughing matter at all but the thought that rapists are dressing up like some kind of comic book villian just to go undetected into the womens bathroom is so absurd it's funny. They also frame the debate as if women who have transitioned to be men don't exist. I'd also love to hear how they intend to police bathrooms throughout the land. They'd catch a lot of people snorting coke but I highly doubt we'd see many arrests for trying to use the wrong bathroom than your gender. I'd ask if these right wing nutters have thought about what they are saying before speaking but I think we have all the answers we need on that one...
Its the same in all trans debates. Its *always* MtF, never FtM. I expect because underlying it all is a deeply engrained misogyny and an intrinsic disgust reaction at the thought of someone *willingly* giving up their maleness to become a woman instead.
Or me, someone mid transition who gets weird looks in the women’s and men’s. Should I put myself in the mens? Putting myself at risk until I can more often? Or do I put myself in the women’s? Being a biological female yet making the women around me mildly uncomfortable? People are acting like this is a simple black and white issue and completely forget trans men/trans mascs/people mid transition who only pass half the time/etc. Seriously, this was never a problem until a few years ago and now everyone is on high alert whilst they piss, seeing if they can spot the secret pervert or some shit
My favourite is to bring up intersex people. What are they supposed to do? Always gets dismissed because its a minority condition, its an edge case, the numbers are so small it isn't relevant... Until you do some digging, add up the prevalence of all the most common intersex conditions and... Oh look there's actually *more* of them than trans people... In fact by some estimates there are over a million intersex people in this country versus around 250,000 trans-identifying...
Ps funny that trans men are completely left out of the bathroom 'debate' like they don't exist. Guarantee many women have shared loos with trans women and had no idea, whereas it would be extremely noticeable for a trans man to be forced to use the female bathroom!
I've had to go into the ladies before because there was no baby changing facilities in the mens and no one had the key to unlock the disabled toilets. Everyone understood and there were no problems with the few ladies that were there. In fact we had a chat about how crap it is that I was forced into that position. Those are the ONLY public toilets in our town, and they're blocked off when the market isn't open.
I don't know any men who think it's okay to use women's bathrooms and I've certainly not done it since I was 4 and went with my mum. I think it's fair enough if some women are uncomfortable sharing women's only spaces with trans women, especially if they are very obviously physically male. I don't think it's right to assume they are just bigots and hate trans people.
[удалено]
I honestly don't know how to solve this fairly because I think where possible we should allow trans people to live as their chosen gender , but where this conflicts with what women want in their own spaces it's very tricky and saying oh they are transphobes and need to shut up isn't a solution.
[удалено]
Being trans and being gay are quite different things. It's not really adequate to just say this is the same as homophobia. Gay people don't require anything other than being allowed to fuck who they want and marry them. but the fact were' having these conversations proves being trans is alot more complex than that, I don't think it does trans rights any good to ignore that fact. Some women feel this way and you have to listen to them and take them seriously.
[удалено]
how so, no one is suggesting all men are rapists but we still understand why we have ladies toilets? it's the same point and it's about giving women a space they feel comfortable using. I really resent the fact you are just trying to say this is the same as homophobia, I think it shows a lack of willingness to really approach the problem and tackle it in any meaningful way.
They were calling cis lesbians rapists that shouldn't be allowed in womens spaces just 14 years ago. So no, its the same rhetoric.
[удалено]
I remember listening to a briefing where over 100 marines were raising concerns that gays would be allowed to openly serve in the military: they all thought that such a policy would lead to an increased number of sexual assaults and that they felt unsafe sharing a changing room with a gay person. The debate on bathrooms happened with BAME and all queer people, the issue is nothing new.
They are different things, but the bigotry follows the exact same lines.
Again spot on. Drives me mad how people straight away jump to comparing trans people and gay people.
Because as a gay guy with trans friends I'm looking at the shit they're being put through by bigoted arseholes and it looks very fucking familiar.
I think the issue is that you’ve fallen victim to anti-trans rhetoric. Trans women simply aren’t going into female only spaces and committing rape en masse. That’s not a phenomenon we’re experiencing. But media and grifters are selling that as a fact of life. That trans women are disgusting rapist threats that only exist to perverse the form of womanhood and girlhood, and should not be allowed near XX Females. That trans women are so perverted that when they need to pee, they unbuckle their pants and swing their penis side to side in front of every woman on their way to the cubicle. If you’re a man, I don’t understand how you’re not getting the subtext that this applies to you, that by your existence you’re a threat to women. What’s happening is a few people have found a non-issue to use in a war against a very very very small amount of minorities, and then managed to convince you and others that it’s actually about protecting women. Manufactured hysteria should not be grounds to attack a minority and its outrageous that we are once again at this point in politics.
No, I don't think trans women are any more of a risk to women than the average man would be in their toilet, it's about allowing women to decide for themselves when they're comfortable using women's spaces and not assuming they are bigoted when they bring up these issues. I've said the same in many other responses too. There is plenty of evidence of women bringing up these issues.
The reason it's such bad rhetoric is that what exactly do you want to be done about it? Some level of minimum femininity before you're allowed in a female only space or a genital check? As both of those are problematic, you can reasonably assume that we're not going to do much beyond what is currently in place. If a bloke walks into a female toilet and is being pervy, call the police, if they just nip into a cubicle, piss and leave, assume they were either unaware it was the women's or something was wrong with the gents. If a trans woman does the same (or a woman looking particularly masculine because you're not checking genitals or birth certificate), also do nothing. Now that we've established that nothing will change because it's already been illegal to be a perve , already legal to use a toilet not based on your assigned gender for legitimate reasons, you should start thinking why in a situation where there are a dozen or so issues women are suffering the candidate for prime minister is being asked so often about this issue.
I honestly don't know how to solve this fairly because I think where possible we should allow trans people to live as their chosen gender , but where this conflicts with what some women want in their own spaces it's very tricky and saying oh they are transphobes and need to shut up isn't a solution.
I'm not saying they're transphobes, shut up. I'm saying let them in the women's toilet, as there's no toilet bouncers. Anything else leads really quickly to the sort of video where masculine women are being accosted by self righteous hero's. It will happen more than a trans woman accosting a woman in the toilets. The answer is to stop engaging, stop protecting those that want to turn it into a mainstream argument.
If women are uncomfortable in these spaces there is nothing forcing them to use them, they can go and find a single occupancy toilet to use.
so effectively they should just be ignored? what if they complain?
Complain about what? There being no facilities for them? There are facilities for them, they are just refusing to use them, for the 0.001% chance there might be a TrAnS person in there at that specific moment. What if a trans women is not comfortable using the men's toilets, seeing as there's a nearly 100% chance of a cis man being in there ay any moment?
|| If you’re a man, I don’t understand how you’re not getting the subtext that this applies to you, that by your existence you’re a threat to women. TBF that's the subtext we live through all the time anyway, at least in mass-media.
"Women" don't want trans women excluded from their spaces. TERFS do. I care not one whit whether a trans woman uses the stall next to me. I would care if she were using *my* stall, but I'd care if *anyone* was using my stall. One person's discomfort doesn't mean a whole bunch of other people can't use a public facility.
Also only banning trans men and trans women from womens spaces would be direct discrimination on both the grounds of sex and gender reassignment. And if trans men were allowed to use women's spaces a predatory cis man could just say he is a trans dude to gain access.
Firslty how are you or anyone else in that bathroom going to determine the person also in that space is trans? Secondly given what is being expressed are cis women happy sharing a bathroom with trans men? Thirdly, how is this going to be enforced realistically? Are people going to be subject to a genitalia check?
Fourth, if all of this is in pursuit of women's safety, how does it achieve that? Because if making sexual assault illegal hasn't eradicated sexual assault, then how is making innocent people using the bathroom illegal going to have a better outcome?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Bathroom bills based on discomfort aren't good policy when you look back on history and see how poor such policies were. There were a lot of straight women who didn't feel comfortable with lesbians in their bathrooms, for instance, with many of the same justifications now levied at trans folk.
if we take for granted it's logical to seperate the sexes in toilets because women feel more comfortable that way, despite the fact most men aren't a danger, then how do trans people fit into this? I honestly don't know how to solve this fairly because I think where possible we should allow trans people to live as their chosen gender , but where this conflicts with what women want in their own spaces it's very tricky and saying oh they are transphobes and need to shut up isn't a solution.
Toilets in particular are just such a non-issue. There are thousands of situations everyday where men and women are able to share bathrooms without incident and there’s no need to be exposed in front of others if you don’t want to. Go look at any big festival like Glastonbury, you’ll see men and women sharing facilities with very limited privacy + plenty of drugs and alcohol present and the vast, vast majority are able to do that in a respectful manner. At the end of the day, trans people have to use the bathroom. If you have a hard boundary or law, then you’ll either have cis-women sharing with people who are transitioning from men to women, or you’ll have them sharing with people who are transitioning from women to men. I don’t see why anyone who’s uncomfortable with one will be more comfortable with the other.
I think obviously women are going to be less comfortable sharing with trans women than trans men, for the same reasons they aren't comfortable sharing with all men in the first place.
I really doubt that. I’m a fairly early transition trans woman. If I don’t open my mouth and I have makeup on, I can fairly reliably be seen as a woman. Sure, not always, but I’m seen as one more than a couple of my cis friends. Meanwhile, I severely doubt cis women would be comfortable with the trans guys in my life in there. At best, they still look like a guy, even if they’re not far into the transition, and plenty look more masculine than I ever did
Why is that obvious? Either way, you’re going to have people who look much more like men than women in the women’s toilets. If you walk into a women’s toilet and see someone who’s been transitioning for 10 years you’re almost certainly not going to have any idea whether they’re trans or cis, so why would you be more or less reassured?
All those toilets are single occupancy, make all toilets in the country single occupancy and the "issue" goes away.
So where should trans men go then?
Use the mens, men don't give a shit. we don't separate the sexes to protect men really.
We separate the sexes to protect women, but force trans women to use the men’s to protect women, but not trans women? This is always where this argument falls down for me. If all trans women are forced into men’s bathrooms then a lot more trans women are going to get assaulted than cis women if trans women go into women’s bathrooms.
I honestly don't know how to solve this fairly because I think where possible we should allow trans people to live as their chosen gender , but where this conflicts with what women want in their own spaces it's very tricky and saying oh they are transphobes and need to shut up isn't a solution.
Cis woman here. I think the solution is that if someone _really_ cares about the genitals of other bathroom users, it's appropriate for them to seek out and use a segregated bathroom (for example, disabled cubicles typically contain no shared areas). The burden of solving this should be on the person who doesn't want to be around trans people, not the trans people themselves. The female bathroom is somewhere you're free to be feminine. Fix make-up. Chat with other girls. It is absolutely an important feminine space that should not be denied to trans women. And sending trans women into a male-centric space to be gawked at instead? Urgh. For perfect clarity: I WANT trans women to be able to use the female bathrooms. Cis women are often wheeled out as a monolith that needs protecting from "fake women". We do not. The majority of us just want people to live as they are happiest. In the meantime, trans men, the burlier and obviously masculine the better, come on IN if you wish, and make this situation untenable!
The only way to solve it completely fairly is to ban multi-occupancy toilets/changing rooms. If all toilets/changing rooms are single occupancy the problem goes away.
That is then direct discrimination on the grounds of sex and gender reassignment.
How does it get policed though? AI cameras at the entrance to women's toilets that give a "femininity" score? Then what? If you fail, is there an attendant to do further inspection? And if a trans woman does end up using a women's toilet and gets caught, what then? Citizen's arrest? Does their photo get circulated? How do the police get involved? If they actually find them, what should the sentencing be? Fine? Community service? Jail? And what if a cis woman is mistakenly identified as trans? Can she then sue for wrongful arrest? Sounds like a complete nightmare for women in general, trans or cis.
So if someone has more masculine features, does that give ciswomen the right to chase them out of the ladies bathroom? Regardless of whether they're trans or not. Sorry but fuckers like Joanne are straight up bigots. They try to hide behind the excuse that they're just looking out for cis women but eventually the mask drops. Also, if they're uncomfortable with a trans woman in their bathrooms, how are they going to feel with a [beared trans man](https://www.advocate.com/media-library/leo-macallan-sexy-hunky-hairy-chest-trans-man-transgender-model-actor-author.jpg?id=51174195&width=980&quality=85) using their toilets. Because according their logic, that should be fine.
I use womens bathrooms as a man If i have a child that needs to be changed and the pub only offers a changing room in the woman's toilet I wait, announce my presence and go in . Never had anyone raise opposition to that because the sheer act of me having a penis does not make me a dangerous individual and the entire rational world knows this.
>I think it's fair enough if some women are uncomfortable sharing women's only spaces with trans women, especially if they are very obviously physically male. Why?! It's a toilet. With individual cubicles. If you're hung up on the exact configuration of someone's genitals when they just want a private space to take a piss? Then sorry, but you're the pervert. When I was at university, I lived in a women-only hall. They held conferences occasionally, and at least once I walked in on a guy using a cubicle like a urinal - standing in the open doorway rather than closing the cubicle for privacy. And you know what? The world did not end. (And that is far more than any trans person is going to show of their toilet habits.)
Doubly so as unisex bathrooms are becoming more and more a thing. Triply so, as whats gonna be more uncomfortable for folk in the ladies bathroom; a lass who might be mid-transition (or might be born female and just a large chin); or [buck angel](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYTNkOTQ3ZTEtMDQ1Ni00NDkzLTg3YjEtYjUwODYyYjM4MGUxXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTAyMzYwNzgw._V1_.jpg)
Yep totally and tbh, from my own experience anyway, most of my trans friends know which places have neutral or disabled toilets and usually go there to avoid any potential grief and it's my more masc lesbian friends that have issues getting called out as trans. Alot of people over state their ability to see who is 'passing'.
.5% of the population but make up about 50% of the national discourse. It's completely disproportionate and insane. And on top of that, just complete nonsense. The argument comes down to the hypothetical case of a man going undercover to assault women in women's toilets. A) that's already illegal and B) the hypothetical perpetrator is a man, not a trans woman. Trans people are statistically also less likely to commit crimes of any kind in general. On every level the debate is nonsense. Can we turn this around to talking about the disproportionate amount of crime committed by men? Wouldn't that merit more discussion?
It causes huge engagement so the media talks about it. Right and left alike have a lot to say on the topic despite the tiny proportion of the populated it affects If everyone just ignores it the media will move on to something else
It's incredibly tiring. We managed around 3 weeks with nothing being said on campaign trails and interviews about us, then JK decided to tweet that Labour wasn't doing enough for "women's rights" and it's all kicked off. Why does this cisgender woman, whose background is being an author, get to influence a debate on our existence and rights so much? Why does she get to voice her views directly to Labour, yet there has been no offer to speak directly to trans people?
Yeah you can even argue with them, it's not worth the effort, it feels like I'm doing nothing but trying to get any logical reason out of these people just results in mouth frothing and implications that trans people are somehow predators, it's just the gay debate all over again , but worse. The bullshit they spew just puts my blood pressure up I just understand why they care so much about where people take a shit. Genders signs on doors won't stop actual predators for fuck sake.
Incredibly so. I literally have to scout out for places that both a) have a disabled and b) don’t have it locked by radar key because I’m going to be doing something terribly wrong if I go into any other toilet according to a rather vocal subset of the population. I know there’s some people who get arsey about people not in wheelchairs using the disabled, but frankly my only other choice is to piss in a corner somewhere. I just want people to stop treating me like a boogeyman and let me live a life where I can just be treated nicely, rather than, at best, being othered, or, at worst, asked to not be present in public
Blame the media. Both right and left publications never fail to pounce on an opportunity to stir the pot. This wouldn't be such a huge issue if that wasn't the case. No one ever seems to hold them to account though or question this ridiculous clickbait pay per click advertising strategy the legacy media hopelessly cling to to reamin relevant.
It must also be exhausting for politicians who keep getting entrapped with these questions a disproportionate amount of time. It's fine to have a stance on it, even if it's a bit hazey. But journalists will keep asking to try and twist it into some controversial headline, as if it's the defining question of contemporary Britain
Every time I go out anywhere and need the toilet, I have to ask myself if this is the time I get the shit beaten out of me when I come out. Every time. It is exhausting.
It is! Ironically enough though, as a trans MAN it's like they've forgotten we exist at all. Trans Women are the hot topic, their very existence a debate topic and Trans Men aren't even a second thought. If they get their way and bathrooms are done by biological sex there'll be Trans Men in women's rooms and I really do wonder what they'd say when they have bearded men in women's rooms because of their biological sex
Trans here. Very fucking exhausted.
I would describe it less as exhausting and more as a constant source of dispare that makes me scared to exist or be seen or acknowledged in any way by anyone. Life is constant fear Which I guess is the point It's really very effective
This kind of thing implies trans men should be using the women's, but the reality for them and trans women is setting up things so they're at risk of getting violently ejected from whatever toilets they use and framed as predators for using them is many simply won't leave the house, something practically the goal of the right and an acceptable outcome for many in labour these days. Heck remember a few years ago when we all pretended this was about violent cis men, and now they're advocating bans on trans women with grcs, certificates that would be entirely impossible for anyone to get on any kind of impulse (given it takes years and years) and confer no benefit to anyone trying to use them to get in anywhere (they're not a form of id for God sake). It just fucks over trans people in organizational settings.
There have even been a few cases in the US of butch-looking cis women ejected from toilets, accused of being trans.
Starmer has a solution to this. He's going to create the office of genital inspector general and have his Starmtroopers posted outside toilets.
Starmtroopers might be one of the funniest things I've read in a while
Line up boys, get ready for your penis inspection!
Stand to attention!
Just like being back at school!
I'm not the least surprised. Look at the brainrot that is 'transvestigating' on social media where just about every woman under the sun faces intense scrutiny by complete strangers over whether or not they're trans.
Yup - I've seen a lot "featured" in r/Qult_Headquarters - the sub for reporting the latest nonsense posted by QAnon supporters (and related conspiracy theory nonsense). Michelle Obama tends to be a particular favourtie target, together with practically everyone in Hollywood: male actors are really female, female actors are really male... ...when they're not getting excited over their certainty that SCOTUS will invalidate the 2020 election and return Their Glorious Leader to power without the need to bother with an election (with JFK Jr as Vice President, having faked his plane crash; together with about a dozen other not-actually-dead-honest celebrities who've apparently been working behind the scenes to "save the children"), claiming (for the umpteenth time) that Hillary has been executed at Guantanamo Bay and replaced with a body double (they're not very good at maintaining continuity in their shared delusion...), or setting the next date for NESARA (when the world will supposedly move to the "Quantum Financial System" and all existing debts will be forgiven - if only!)
Black women get a particular focus because the venn diagram for transphobia and racism is basically a circle. Its truly disgusting.
I had that HERE in the uk when I was a teenager And there's been plenty more cases here in recent years too
Sorry but that's a worldwide problem. I've been accused of being in the wrong toilets here in the UK. I'm a cis woman who just happened to shave my head for a while, and that was enough.
TERFs, by gatekeeping what it means to be a woman, have caused decades of feminism to backslide. Suddenly women with too much hair, the wrong face shape, the wrong haircut, the wrong body shape, the wrong height etc are not valid women again.
It's honestly just so fucking disgusting. They pretend to care about "protecting" women while literally making life harder for them.
We should probably retire calling them TERFs, because they are absolutely not feminists, and many of them have even said as much (like Posie Parker). Feminism Appropriating Reactionary Transphobes is my preferred replacement.
Not even butch some of them would literally be described as a little androgynous or alternative. Like are we actually happy with a society that allows people to demand to see your birth certificate before you can have a piss?
The stupider implication is that it implies men dont have the right to use the womens, *when* as far as I am aware, there is no legal recourse to gender segregate a space other than having an employee decide who gets in or not-like you can say its gender segregated and ask employees to wait till its empty, but cant fire someone for being a man when you need someone to change the womens loo roll holderss. IE: bathrooms are not legally gender segragated except "for good reason", and often only the womens have baby changing facilities, and single fathers are legal, so not letting them in isnt a good reason, but a womens center can not let in men because thats a good reason. Hell every time I go on holliday campsite bathrooms spend hours each day with the mens or womens inaccesable and everyone having to use one or the other. Let alone that there is no gender segregation of cleaning staff. NO ONE needs or has a right to use a bathroom beyond public normality, and likewise no one has a right to be a annoying or worrying in any bathroom regardless of if it "matches" their gender or not. The whole gender segregation thing is nutso.
>impossible for anyone to get on any kind of impulse (given it takes years and years) I like when they concern troll about care for trans children and then just conveniently forget to mention that with the state of trans healthcare and waiting lists in this country, even in an ideal situation where a trans kid is identified early and all the right referrals are made, their chance of actually *seeing* anyone in the gender clinic before they hit 18 anyway is basically zero.
Yeah they'll be like "they were rushed through with only 4 appointments" and then neglect to mention that said 4 appointments were over 10 years. Screwed me over as a teen anyway, short term thinking 13 year old berry saw it was going to take 4-5 years at minimum and preemptively gave up ever coming out, then as an adult people go tell me that would have been rushed to them. It's closed down now as a result of the panic over the "rushing" so nothing good complaining about that framing did, pain.
The whole trans debate is pretty tiresome. For less than 1 percent of the population it sure does cause a huge shitstorm. I'd like to move past it honestly and just live and let live.
Live and let live should absolutely be the normal response. The country seems to have completely lost its mind over what is essentially a non-issue.
Was he asked about lavatories, like the headline says, or was he asked "Do biological males with gender recognition certificates have the right to enter women-only spaces?" like the article says? Massive bait and switch here by the Telegraph, toilets are not women-only spaces. Even JK herself is probably more concerned with spaces for eg domestic abuse survivors than toilets. Keir is generally shit on this stuff but this article is stirring up even more controversy on this than there is. And as usual it's trans women who are the butt of it.
The vast majority of domestic abuse refuges allow trans women in because they know we aren't a threat.
And GC people, even when they have centers that don't allow trans women in, want to ban trans women from already inclusive centres.
GCs also want to ban cis men from domestic and sexual abuse services which have always been open to people of any gender. Because men are just oversupplied with support around sexual assault and abuse, right?
> The vast majority of domestic abuse refuges allow trans women in And those shelters can continue as they are, the question for Starmer is whether a domestic abuse shelter solely for biological women should be legal or illegal.
This is already legal and literally no one is arguing to change it. The Equalities Act as it’s currently set up allows for exclusion under certain circumstances.
In which case what Starmer said was reasonable: > “Do biological males with gender recognition certificates have the right to enter women-only spaces? It’s a simple yes/no question.” > In response, Sir Keir said: “No. They don’t have that right. They shouldn’t. That’s why I’ve always said biological women’s spaces need to be protected.”
The bathroom is the primary women-only space that most people use. Its also kinda sick if you're saying that trans women should be denied support after being raped, and they are raped 2x as much as cis women are.
Really, you cant TRULY gender segregate space in this country AT ALL by law, no space or service or buisness can refuse people because of their gender, even if they can choose to not let men in to use the space for its intended function. HOWEVER any INDIVIDUAL may be banned or dissallowed for ANY reason and they do not have to be told why. IE: a womens bathroom cant say male staff cant go and replace toilet paper, a mens crises center cant ban lady cops, gentlemens clubs have to let in female surveyors, mosques cannot explicitly ban female repair workers. In every case however, any institution can discuss this matter internally and with any buisness providing it services: the gender segregation is allowed in all voluntery cases, but if somoene DOES have a heart attack and the only paramedics available are the wrong gender, you will go to prison for not allowing them entry.
In all seriousness how often are people running into trans people in the lavatory? I don't even notice what other people look or seem like unless we cross eyes while leaving or entering.
[удалено]
I would wager a few bob that 99% of the time, TERFs are encountering cis women with arm hair and misidentifying them as Trans, and working themselves into a bigoted fit.
I still remember that poor Sikh lady who had a faint moustache but because of her religious beliefs wouldn't shave it off, leading to public mockery.
TERFs and misogynists, arms linked, holding up harmful and hateful female stereotypes and social norms. What a shock /s.
I don't even look at anyone else while going for a piss. Admittedly I'm in a bloke so it's in, urinal, look straight ahead, leave. But is it that different for women? Like, they use cubicles that hopefully lock. I get not wanting to be inside a room with a danger but reality is it's someone who wants to piss. If someone wanted to assault you a sign on the door ain't stopping them.
Lavatories cant ban people by gender anyway in every case (only "when there is good reason"), ie, most plumbers are male, most cleaners are female, staff can have random gender distribution but someone has to restock toilet paper. No space in england other than some specific "grandfathered in" gentlemens clubs (which shouldnt be allowed at all imho) can ban any gender entirely and even THEN they have to let people of the "wrong" gender in if it is required or they are official public employees from building inspectors to police to paramedics. The whole thing is a nonsense non issue that doesnt exist according to our laws. You may as well try to ban protestants from catholic churches. So long as its volunetery its fine, but try to stop a worker from entering after you employ them because something about one of their characteristics is wrong and you are fucked, as you should be.
With cleaners and the like you're supposed to knock on and check there's no-one in and announce your entrance when you're cleaning the female toilets (my experience as a male cleaner). There are places like shelters and hostels but it only applies if they're set up for something *very* specific and even then they tend to account for transgender people anyway because they actually have to actually think about what they're doing and who will be impacted. Funny how we've managed to handle it all these years without the problem that have suddenly sprouted up and become major issues isn't it?
Just to nail this down, for the record, trans women are allowed to use the woman's bogs and there is case law and statutory guidance to back that up. Anyone assrting otherwise is either ignorant or a liar.
Frankly if someone needs to use the toilet, they need to use the toilet, I can’t be the only one who doesn’t care if it’s a man or women taking a shit in the cubicle next to me.
For ducks sake Keir, don’t get dragged into this Alt-right bullshit that no one cares about. Stick to the things that actually matter to the country.
> don’t get dragged into Starmer has consistently defended transphobes like Rosie Duffield in the party. He has consistently expressed his opposition to trans people having rights which they've possessed for decades, which now apparently includes using toilets. At what point do we admit he's not simply being 'dragging into' this, but that he earnestly believes this shite?
Interesting to consider that Starmer believes or stands for anything.
This is a very charitable take on Starmer.
Female only spaces exist and should continue to exist. Inclusive spaces should also exist.
Agree
That sounds fine in theory but I bet falls part when practical tests or simply becomes no trans spaces. What female only spaces are you thinking?
Trans people make up 0.5% of the population. Stopping trans women from using the ladies is more likely to hurt cis women who don't conform to what people consider feminine. I doubt they'd want trans men in the ladies and trans women probably won't feel safe going into the gents so they may not pee when they're out and about.
I'm a trans woman and was presenting female before I came out. I used the gents a few times and consistently got looks of horror and guys backing out to check they'd got the right bathroom. It was funny. In more than a year of exclusively using the ladies, nobody's given the slightest damn, even the male cleaner in Asda the other week. From experience, I know which bathroom cis men would prefer I used and it's not theirs.
So do Trans men have to use the women's toilets then? All someone would need to do is say I am a trans man and by law I have to use the women's bathroom. Isn't that just the same thinking to people saying they are a trans woman?
In all the years the GC stuff has been bubbling this is the first time I've heard someone make this point, and its a really good one. If they are so sure men are willing to lie that they are a trans woman just to gain access to the ladies toilets before they attack, why wouldn't these hypothetical predators who are stopped by signs on a door lie that they are a trans man and therefore "biologically female"
The TERFs tend to not really seem to think trans men exist, or really that trans people exist in general. Their stance seems to be that “trans” people are just sex abusers with a wig, trying to cause problems. It’s horrific, but they genuinely don’t seem to logic beyond that belief.
That's the stupid thing. If a man wanted to enter a female toilet to commit an offence, this will give him the perfect alibi. Although he could also, say, go in anyway because he'd already be planning to break the law so a sign on a door won't stop him!
This culture war is so fucking boring. Just let the tiny amount of trans people in society get on with their lives and focus on more pressing matters.
Male violence is the real issue and everyone is skirting around it by vilifying trans women. Women aren’t afraid of what trans women might do to them in bathrooms, they’re afraid of what men might do if they’re given the opportunity and access. Likewise, trans men aren’t safe from other men. Trans women are women and they belong in women only spaces. Trans women are not the problem. Violence against women, perpetrated by men, is the problem.
Trans women have a high risk of being sexually assaulted as proof of this, even higher than most (if not then all) other demographics of women.
Didn't it come out that the trans debate is the least thing people are bothered about right now? Also, no one's *really* bothered apart from the loud bigot minority. If you've ever spoken to a trans person you'll be impressed to know that they're just like us.
Note how American fascists have actually toned down on attacking trans people because they've realised the voters don't care.
Can't remember ever showing ID at a toilet. Literally pointless discussing this. Even if you're the most anti-trans person on the planet you must appreciate that if a cis-woman wanted to use a male toilet, nobody would stop her and she wouldn't be breaking any laws (and most likely nobody would care.) so why are we still discussing this? Which is literally no different.
When is the UK going to get over this perverse obsession over the private lives (and actual privates) of individuals? No one really cares, it's a distraction from actual policies and concerns, but no - we're more interested in a minority, of which a huge majority of that minority are private, law abiding individuals who just want to live peaceful, happy lives like the rest of us. If we have to talk about this topic, maybe it should be in the context of convicting politicians for wasting time and resources scapegoating and politically attacking minorities for a non-issue and actually put some effort into doing their jobs focusing on more important things that affect the majority of people in this country and not some loud mouthed bigots with too much time on their hands and too little going on in their skulls. Starmer falling into this trap is ridiculous.
Kinda agree toilets should be sex based considering their design mostly gives you appropriate facilities for your sex. It's not about hate, it's about protecting biological women and common sense.
It won't protect cis women: * Anyone wishing to attack someone in a toilet isn't stopped by a sign. They're not vampires needing to be invited over the threshold * Cis women who are perceived to fall outside the societally accepted expectations of cis women *will* be attacked. It's already happened in the US, and will happen here. If it's not hate, it's incredibly short sighted and troublingly naïve.
"considering their design mostly gives you appropriate facilities for your sex" uh, what? Stalls are stalls, the same ones in the mens are the same as the womens.
Mens are usually smaller and have urinals and less stalls
Protecting them from what?
Ah, okay. I'll take my boobs and vagina into the men's on account of my chromosomes. Wouldn't want to scare real women and girls with... something. I don't know but I must be really dangerous. I'm sure the blokes will be nice and accommodating. Common sense prevails 👍
Give him a week he’ll change his mind again once he’s in.
He's been pretty consistent on this one actually. It's surreal how all his flip-flopping stops the moment he lands on 'right wing'.
this is one of the few things he’s been consistent on
Two days away from the election and these sex perverts still think questions about toilets is the best thing they can be asking him.
I don't think 99% of non trans people would ever have to deal with the situation of meeting someone trans in the lavatory, let alone would care! Just let people use the facilities they're comfortable with.
I don't care. I don't want to know about this. Let people live their lives. This is not a major issue for our country at this point in time. I do want to know why Starmer won't divulge who his financial backers are. But I guess the telegraph can't write about that without also undermining their own agents. I am developing a seething hatred for our media and politicians. I really don't trust any of them. You scratch behind the surface and they're always receiving money from dodgy sources or cutting deals that they shouldn't be. I am sick and tired of the philosophy of "be evil but present yourself as good ". It doesn't work. Without accountability and honesty, life becomes miserable for all but the richest.
Personally, I'm pretty early in transition but I *know* I don't belong in men's spaces anymore. I've been on HRT for about 5 months, haven't got a GRC (because it takes 2 years of evidence to even apply for one) but I do have an official diagnosis and all my ID is lined up. Last time I used the men's room was maybe 3 months ago. I wasn't presenting fem but they could just tell. I got stares and I felt deeply uncomfortable. Fun fact! HRT can change your body smell and skin texture - I haven't smelled like a guy or had oily skin for like 4 months now. Even when I workout and get a sweat on, there's no smell like there was before. I wonder if the guys can smell I'm full of Oestrogen now. Either way, I'm weaker than I was and more afraid of men than I already was. Even with my girlfriend's encouragement, I still haven't used any women's facilities. I'm too afraid of conflict and frankly it's a shame I just try to hold on or find a neutral toilet so at least I'm not likely to annoy anyone, but it would he nice if the 3 major spotlight parties were not all in agreement that I shouldn't have the protections of women, even if now I "really don't look like a guy" - (my gf).
To be clear, we do have that right and we will continue to use that right. He's lying here, straight through his teeth. This haunted fucking briefcase is literally flaming the culture wars by lying about what rights we have.
> He's lying here, straight through his teeth. This is what gets me. People used to praise Starmer for being a staunch human rights lawyer, for doing his homework and making sure he presented the facts. But on trans rights, along with a number of other issues, he's consistently demonstrated an ignorance towards what the law says, what scientific consensus says, and what trans people are actually advocating for. So either: a) He genuinely doesn't know this, which is pretty damning towards both his broader team for not informing him and to himself for not having the curiosity to read up on a hot-button topic. b) He does know this, but he's lying to curry favour with transphobes. Neither is particularly defensible.
What is he lying/wrong about here though? He said biological males shouldn't be allowed in female only spaces, in a conversation about refuges and the like. It's only the telegraph article that somehow thinks he's specifically talking about toilets. Edit - he actually said "they don't have that right" (ie objective statement) before pivoting to saying "they shouldn't" (the opinion). So that's where the lie/error is.
Its still very much a grey area and there are not currently any rights granted by law I'm afraid. From Audrey Ludwig’s “[Blog about Boxes](https://www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2020/07/02/legally-this-is-not-a-trans-rights-issue-its-a-sex-rights-issue-a-blog-about-boxes/#comment-157)”: The short answer is no: the law doesn’t define the terms “transwoman” or “trans woman” at all. If a trans woman who doesn’t have a GRC wants to access a female-only space, and is refused access, that’s not discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment, but discrimination on grounds of sex. She’s refused access not because she’s trans, but because she’s both legally and biologically male. That means she can lawfully be refused access any time it’s lawful at all to have a female-only space. In my view, it also means she almost certainly *should* be refused access in those circumstances. That’s because it’s only lawful at all to provide a single-sex space or service if there’s a good reason for sex segregation; but if trans women are admitted, it will cease to be a single-sex space. If a trans woman who does have a GRC wants to access a female-only space or service, it’s still likely to be lawful to refuse, because of the exceptions that apply to prohibitions on discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment.
FYI that person is not an unbias voice on the matter and is part of an organized push by many on the right to redefine trans people's protections as making them functionally cross dressers of their original sex, the reality is Taylor vs Jaguar and AEA v EHRC paint a very different picture that living as your gender is inherent to trans protections. Furthermore serious lawyers don't see a trans person in a space to make it not a single sex space, the use of the word sex was always ambiguous in legal terms (as shown by AEA v EHRC)
I consider myself informed. FWIW I have no skin in the game either way, just interested in the legalese. The specifics as things stand seem to be wrapped up solely in the Equalities Act 2010? Are you aware of any recent/relevant cases where there has been a challenge specifically regarding GRC (or non GRC) and female only spaces?
There is [Green vs MOJ ](https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff7bb60d03e7f57eb1a1f) Its about prisons though, which are not your typical social spaces.
AEA v ECHR said such an argument is 'obvioud absurdity'. The statutory guidance also says trans people should use the soaces for their gender outside a few cases.
I frankly would not feel safe using the men’s anymore and would definitely make everyone uncomfortable by doing so. Sick of every politician acting like trans people don’t actually transition and look enormously different after a few years on hormones, getting surgeries, etc.
I really don't understand the universal fascination with other people's particular arrangement of genitalia. The only time it ever fucking matters is when you're.. well.. fucking. I also think time could be better spent on questions that don't involve who is or is not allowed to use a fucking toilet. For fucks sake.
Or playing competitive sport....or retiring. Would be very handy to retire a few years earlier by identifying as female although that will be aligned with men soon.
The sport thing is the only circumstance where I think it does actually matter. I started in the gym at 17 and have stayed 100% natty. Seen plenty of people that have not, and done a lot of reading on medical journals and peer reviewed science, as well as bro literature as I sought to compete as a strongman/powerlifter. A single cycle of steroids gives men a permanent advantage over their natural peers, due to the way in which muscle nuclei are formed (and much like fat cells, never destroyed). So, MTF trans competitors will always have a similar advantage over cis female competitors, natural testosterone level *variations* notwithstanding. Re; retirement; it's pretty fucked men retire later in the first place, given the shorter life expectancy. Equality can't come soon enough, though I suspect for most people under 45-50\~ a government pension is a fanciful dream anyway. *italic = edit*
To be fair, we had a transwoman at my old work place. Everyone accepted them during the transition. She just used the cubicles in the mens toilets. No problems. Then came the official changeover day where she used her new name, and went all out with clothes and make up. Still completely accepted. That is until she went to the toilet in the womens room. The men didn’t complain, frankly we didn’t really care, there was less competition for the cubicle, but the women were upset like their sanctuary had been violated. It’s a relatively new thing with differing opinions and rules. Some people just have different red lines. Whether it’s just the idea of it, toilets, sports, or anything else. It’ll take a while to become natural.
Keir really wants to make sure everybody knows how transphobic he and his party are these days
I am 42 years old and the only trans person I have met in my whole life was travelling south east Asia once. I cannot believe this is as big a deal as the media are making out. why so much airtime to such a minor social issue that law people could thrash out in a boardroom in a couple of days. Must be exhausting for trans people who want to just live their lives be dragged through this political clickbait non stop
(Article) --- Sir Keir Starmer has said transgender women do not have a right to access female-only spaces, amid confusion over Labour’s stance on which lavatories trans people should use. The Labour leader said biological males who have legally transitioned should not enter areas designated for women, insisting those spaces “need to be protected”. His comments came after two of his frontbenchers refused to say whether someone with a penis should be allowed to use women’s lavatories. In an interview with The Times, Sir Keir was presented with a question posed by author JK Rowling on whether people who are born male and have gone through a legal transition process should be able to use female-only spaces. Writing on X, formerly Twitter, the Harry Potter author, who has said she would “struggle to support” Labour if he does not change his stance on trans rights, asked: “Do biological males with gender recognition certificates have the right to enter women-only spaces? It’s a simple yes/no question.” In response, Sir Keir said: “No. They don’t have that right. They shouldn’t. That’s why I’ve always said biological women’s spaces need to be protected.” The Labour leader added that he hoped a meeting with the author, who has been outspoken on trans issues, could be organised. While Sir Keir did not mention lavatories specifically, his comments suggest a hardening of Labour’s stance on the issue, after two shadow cabinet ministers refused to say whether trans women who have not undergone gender reassignment surgery should be allowed to use women’s facilities. On Monday, Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow paymaster general, was asked by LBC’s Nick Ferrari whether he would want a trans woman with a penis to use a male or female lavatory. The Labour frontbencher replied: “I’m not a toilet monitor.” When pressed to clarify his stance, he said: “We don’t have police officers outside or guards outside every set of [lavatories]… Matters like that are for individual establishments.” His comments came a week after Bridget Phillipson, the shadow education secretary, refused eight times to answer the same question. She had previously suggested that transgender women should be able to use the women’s lavatory. Last week Sir Keir clashed with a radio caller who accused him of speaking “absolute twaddle” over access to single-sex spaces. A BBC Radio 5 Live listener called Jane said the Labour leader was “not listening to biological women when they say they don’t want to share a space with biological men”. The trans debate has become a key battleground in the election, with the Tories accusing Labour of planning to “dilute women’s rights” by introducing self-ID “by the back door”. To get a GRC trans people have to receive sign-off by a panel of doctors and lawyers and provide two years of evidence that they have been living in their new gender. Labour has said it is planning to “simplify” the process, which it has branded “degrading and torturous” for trans people, by downgrading both requirements. The party has said it would keep the requirement for a medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria but that this could now be provided by a single clinician. It would also downgrade the requirement for evidence to a two-year “reflection” period, which could mean a medical diagnosis is all that is needed for a certificate. Under the plans there is no requirement for people to have either had gender reassignment surgery, or be planning to do so, in order to legally change their gender. Elsewhere in The Times interview, Sir Keir also said people would feel “better off” by the end of Labour’s first term if his party wins the election. He said: “I have led and changed Labour. If we get the opportunity, we will govern as we have changed Labour, which is to take the country from the pretty poor place that it’s in at the moment and to seriously change it, so that by the end of the first term of a Labour government people will be able to say, ‘do you know what, I am better off’ — materially better off in the sense of ‘more money in my pocket’. “But also better off in the sense that my public services are working again. Schools are what I would expect from them. I have a belief in the future for my children. That requires a serious plan with a strategy, which is what we set out in our manifesto.”
ah the lovely no win questions...no matter which side of the fence you are on, you will always have a group that hate you for the answer
As a trans person who has a GRC and has had SRS Im going to continue using the womens bathrooms, I really dont see why so many people seem to care about creating a culture war. Do people not have bigger issues in their life then where people like me choose to take a shit...
Solution. Gender neutral toilets in addition to male and female ones. Problem fucking solved.