When a trans woman who has been languishing for years on waiting lists while maintaining the hormone regime that has been prescribed, then is left with such dramatic atrophy, and accompanying loss of labido, that she is then said to by unsuitable for surgery, you then seek to humiliate her with your nasty insinuations that she has become a predator, pervert, or a groomer.
In one breath you demand that people take account of the science, and in the next you choose to ignore the science in order to facilitate your abuse. That is what post 1000 was about.
Still male, so poses the same risk as every other male. No drugs or surgery changes that fact. Regardless of ability to sexually assault someone, women and girls are entitled to privacy and dignity and to exclude men from single sex spaces.
By your logic, every man in a wheelchair should have access to single sex spaces.
If you want an example of a person who diminishes rape, then look no further than Germaine Greer who appalled me with her assurance to women that (to paraphrase), 'there is no such thing as rape, only bad sex'.
Full article here ...
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/may/30/germaine-greer-calls-for-punishment-for-to-be-reduced
Germain Greer isn't on here minimising oral rape though, is she? You are. Why on earth you think her comments justify your abhorrent post I have no idea.
There you go making stuff up again. The UK doesn't have a system of Self-ID. Theresa May promised it, but was ejected from office before it happened.
At present the so-called two year transition remains, although in practice it is more like 6 years. A trans woman is not recognised as legally female until issued with an amended birth certificate.
It is true that the EqA 2010 affords the same protections from discrimination as trans women, though in itself does not change the legal sex or recognised gender identity of the person.
I, and others, have explained this to you endlessly. Why do you persist with this nonsense?
You have spent this whole thread telling us you don't need a GRC to use single sex spaces so this is quite a u turn for you. So no transwoman should be regarded as a woman without a GRC? Great. Most of them don't have a GRC so that will reduce the conflict of rights quite considerably then.
More nutjobbery from you. As a retired Headteacher, I know what risk assessments and timetables are.
There is this process called 'management'. I've practised it.
Funnily enough I qualified as a teacher nearly 40 years ago too and have been in charge of safeguarding and pastoral care. And I call bullshit on half the stuff you post on here, including this. The first rule of safeguarding for children is that you plan for worse possible scenarios not plan on balance of probabilities.
You manage risk by minimising it as far as is possible not by saying 'Let's see how we get on'.
There is a right to dignity for anyone regardless of who they are, or where they happen to be. Dignity can be preserved in prison settings, but it requires management, and in turn management requires resources. When essential services are lacking resources, you should not blame the service users, but the prevailing government.
I don't blame the service users. What man wouldn't want to be in the women's estate if they had chance? Especially when you can transition after your arrest and go back to being male when you're released.
https://insidetime.org/trans-prisoners-go-back-to-living-as-men-after-release/
https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/anger-trans-inmates-revert-males-25840252
Women's dignity isn't helped by having men in women's prisons. And if the risk assessment can't distinguish the genuinely body dysphoric men from the gaming-the-system chancers, it shows how utterly worthless the risk assessment system is.
