Dave
TS Founding Member
I very much morally come from this debate on the side of trans people but I have said in the past that I felt some of the early shutting down of cis woman’s concerns and questions was not really a good idea, I didn’t not ever think it would however become as toxic as it has.
Ironically my concern around the debate has been that Cis woman will ultimately be hit hard by the purist ideology of biology and gender, here are a few reasons why:
Firstly no one has ever really been able to provide any significant evidence that men pretending to be trans to gain entry to single sex spaces has ever been a major risk, as others have said it seems a lot of effort for men so inclined to sexually assault women, there are sadly easier ways for them to commit their crimes.
Next we have the fact if you ban trans women from entering women’s only spaces you have to extrapolate that transmen (people forget they exist) will now have to use women only spaces. So in that reality what’s to stop cis men rapists from claiming to be transmen to gain access to women only spaces?
Next we have the cis gendered woman’s who are not maybe as feminine as society expects being harassed when entering women’s only spaces, we have already seen in America cis women being banned from women’s toilets because people thought they were trans women, how long before the Tommy Robinson types sexually assault a cis woman when “checking” if they are really a woman?
Now let’s be really cold and consider the costs, the head of the EHRC saying trans people should lobby for 3rd spaces (isn’t that their job?). So now every business who chooses to state their toilets and other spaces are based on biology will be required to provide alternatives for trans people (the same equality act that this ruling applies to still requires businesses and services to not discriminate trans people). That’s going to be a hell of a lot of expense for business to build 3rd spaces…. Or they get rid of gender specific toilets completely and make all toilets gender neutral. Which do you think business will do? So gone are gender specific toilets and the risk for women will certainly increase if these TERFs are correct that rapists are eager to get into their toilets…
Next it’s the NHS, based on the same head of the EHRC the NHS will no longer be able to put trans women in women’s wards, but they will also not be able to force trans women into men’s wards due to the other provisions in law. So the only option will be to put them in single occupancy rooms. The NHS has very few single occupancy rooms, and they are mostly used for patients who are an infection risk to other patients. This means either the trans person or the infection risk patient will have to be accommodated singularly in a 2 or 4 person ward bay, meaning beds will be lost for other patients….
And what do we do about intersex people? How do they fall within the letter of the law against this ruling?
The likes of JK Rowling smoking her cigar on her private yacht celebrating this ruling genuinely don’t care about women’s safety, they just want to hate someone and they have chosen trans people.
Ironically my concern around the debate has been that Cis woman will ultimately be hit hard by the purist ideology of biology and gender, here are a few reasons why:
Firstly no one has ever really been able to provide any significant evidence that men pretending to be trans to gain entry to single sex spaces has ever been a major risk, as others have said it seems a lot of effort for men so inclined to sexually assault women, there are sadly easier ways for them to commit their crimes.
Next we have the fact if you ban trans women from entering women’s only spaces you have to extrapolate that transmen (people forget they exist) will now have to use women only spaces. So in that reality what’s to stop cis men rapists from claiming to be transmen to gain access to women only spaces?
Next we have the cis gendered woman’s who are not maybe as feminine as society expects being harassed when entering women’s only spaces, we have already seen in America cis women being banned from women’s toilets because people thought they were trans women, how long before the Tommy Robinson types sexually assault a cis woman when “checking” if they are really a woman?
Now let’s be really cold and consider the costs, the head of the EHRC saying trans people should lobby for 3rd spaces (isn’t that their job?). So now every business who chooses to state their toilets and other spaces are based on biology will be required to provide alternatives for trans people (the same equality act that this ruling applies to still requires businesses and services to not discriminate trans people). That’s going to be a hell of a lot of expense for business to build 3rd spaces…. Or they get rid of gender specific toilets completely and make all toilets gender neutral. Which do you think business will do? So gone are gender specific toilets and the risk for women will certainly increase if these TERFs are correct that rapists are eager to get into their toilets…
Next it’s the NHS, based on the same head of the EHRC the NHS will no longer be able to put trans women in women’s wards, but they will also not be able to force trans women into men’s wards due to the other provisions in law. So the only option will be to put them in single occupancy rooms. The NHS has very few single occupancy rooms, and they are mostly used for patients who are an infection risk to other patients. This means either the trans person or the infection risk patient will have to be accommodated singularly in a 2 or 4 person ward bay, meaning beds will be lost for other patients….
And what do we do about intersex people? How do they fall within the letter of the law against this ruling?
The likes of JK Rowling smoking her cigar on her private yacht celebrating this ruling genuinely don’t care about women’s safety, they just want to hate someone and they have chosen trans people.