Gender again. Sorry!

[AuroraSaab]

I'd say one cannot, but there is no overlap as the transwoman believes that they are a woman whilst the fetishist just gets sexual kicks from it.

As one is not discernible from the other, probably best to stick to the current arrangement of excluding people based on sex.

 

[mickle]

I'd say one cannot, but there is no overlap as the transwoman believes that they are a woman whilst the fetishist just gets sexual kicks from it.

Id say you're wrong.

https://whatisawoman.uk/Anautogynephilewrites/

 

[mickle]

I thought you ''always knew''. Isn't that always the claim?

Those pictures you posted as in the context of a discussion about trans women with a GRC, how did you know that they are all trans women with a GRC? How did you ''discern''?

Lets pretend that we cant always tell, just for a moment. How is one to differentiate, how do you differentiate, between an autogynephile crossdressing pervy bloke and a 'transwoman'? Whats the difference? How do we measure it?

 

[CXRAndy]

Lets pretend that we cant always tell, just for a moment. How is one to differentiate, how do you differentiate, between an autogynephile crossdressing pervy bloke and a 'transwoman'? Whats the difference? How do we measure it?

You can't, that's why men have been segregated from women for hundreds of years.

Women instinctively know men's sexual desires. Society has developed around these inclinations to protect women.

There will be no going back from the supreme court announcement. It clarified the existing laws. Women will not allow any backsliding from now on.

 

[monkers]

As one is not discernible from the other, probably best to stick to the current arrangement of excluding people based on sex.

That's right. Just carry on ignoring the evidence. Being a daffodil is for life not just for Xmas. Blanket bans are never lawful-that will change.

 

[CXRAndy]

That's right. Just carry on ignoring the evidence. Being a daffodil is for life not just for Xmas. Blanket bans are never lawful-that will change.

There are no blanket bans just males from womens spaces.

They are free to use male facilities.

So there is no ban. Trans can push for third place unisex facilities if they can't bring themselves to use the men's

 

[monkers]

Lets pretend that we cant always tell, just for a moment. How is one to differentiate, how do you differentiate, between an autogynephile crossdressing pervy bloke and a 'transwoman'? Whats the difference? How do we measure it?

Well that's dandy isn't it. You want to condemn people on the basis of the hypothetical. Let's ignore knowing that trans people go through a formal state process of recognition, and that the evidence is that they cause no harm; instead let's ''pretend'' that they do. That's where your argument is at.

Let's pretend that apartheid is always a good thing based on how people look. Let's pretend that genocide is always a legitimate option. Let's pretend it's the 1940s and the Germans successfully invaded Britain.

The state can never guarantee against all risks, and it never does. We don't measure anybody going into public spaces. We live with minimal risk against stranger danger each and every time we leave our house. Statistically for women, they encounter less harm going out than staying indoors with a man present.

Let's consider reality instead. In a public toilet setting, the space outside the cubicles is a public space. Behind the closed and locked door is a private space. There is no loss of dignity washing your hands next to a person of the opposite sex.

How about we just let all people use the public space. That way a man can accompany his wife, partner, girlfriend, daughter, and just wash his hands while she uses the loo. The presence of men will help deter wrongdoing. As a woman, I'm more than fine with that.

I've seen wrongdoing in public toilets. Once in London I was mugged at knifepoint, by three young women. I gave them my purse, they assaulted me anyway for the hell of it. Apparently ''dykes are dirty''. Who knew?

Once in a gay pub in Portsmouth while in the cubicle I heard a violent attack in progress. I came out of the cubicle as quick as I could. A lesbian, known to me as being violent, was pounding her then girlfriend with her pinned against the door. There was blood everywhere, and no way out for me, since like all these spaces there is only one available exit. Apparently she'd looked at another woman.

On another occasion in a pub in Emsworth, I was out with my now partner and two male friends. I went to go to the loo on my own. There was a shared lobby that led to ''gendered'' doors. I went in, came out and there was a man calling himself Alan outside the door wanting to give me his phone number on a piece of paper. I declined, so he set about me. I gave him a bit of a kicking in return and he let me go. I returned to our table visibly shaking. One of the men we were with, then went to the loo, and then to the bar. So we asked ''did you find him?'' ''Yes he replied''. ''So what happened''. ''Nothing we didn't speak, but I've just dropped a lump of my poo in his beer, he'll find it soon enough''. When he found it and yelled his disgust, our friend stood up, stared at him with his arms folded across his chest and said nothing. The landlady was then informed, and the police called.

What public spaces need is a second exit with an alarmed door just like a fire door. Opening the door raises the alarm and provides a means of escape.

 

[AuroraSaab]

That's right. Just carry on ignoring the evidence. Being a daffodil is for life not just for Xmas. Blanket bans are never lawful-that will change.

Blanket bans are frequently lawful. I can't go in the ball pit at IKEA because I'm not under 8 years old. Perhaps you could drop them a line to correct them or maybe the Good Law Project will run a £300k Go Fund Me to challenge the decision.

These invented anecdotes are getting increasingly fantastical. When aiming for believability, less is more, frankly.

 

[monkers]

Blanket bans are frequently lawful. I can't go in the ball pit at IKEA because I'm not under 8 years old. Perhaps you could drop them a line to correct them or maybe the Good Law Project will run a £300k Go Fund Me to challenge the decision.

These invented anecdotes are getting increasingly fantastical. When aiming for believability, less is more, frankly.

There is no convention right for adults to enter a ball pit in IKEA.

Every time you post, there is something about it that makes it glow with stupidity. In this case there is obvious false equivalence.

Provide examples of where blanket bans that prevent exclusion of an entire group in violation of a convention right are lawful.

And while we are being frank, you are utterly ridiculous.

 

[AuroraSaab]

There's no convention right that ensures men have access to women's spaces.

You know very well that UK law permits exclusion in limited circumstances for several reasons. That is not overriden by nebulous UN rights about privacy, living your life, or whatever other straw you are grasping at this morning.

 

[monkers]

There's no convention right that ensures men have access to women's spaces.

You know very well that UK law permits exclusion in limited circumstances for several reasons. That is not overriden by nebulous UN rights about privacy, living your life, or whatever other straw you are grasping at this morning.

All people have convention rights to privacy and dignity. You can not simply blanket ban one group to achieve the aim of protecting the other group. Infrastructure can be improved. Otherwise all of us have accept that no all others are required to be like us.

Infrastructure can be improved by risk analysis. The state can not guarantee that every person is safe from every other person - how could it?

The problem is fast becoming a non-problem with regards to safety as public authorities are fast reducing the number of public toilets.

As this argument develops, rather than be part of the argument, service providers will simply withdraw the facilities. And who can blame them?

 

[icowden]

There are no blanket bans just males from womens spaces.
They are free to use male facilities.
So there is no ban. Trans can push for third place unisex facilities if they can't bring themselves to use the men's

Do you actually read what you write? None of that makes any sense.

What you said was:

There are no blanket bans, just blanket bans. So there is no ban.

Can you make your mind up?

I can help you by pointing out that there is no ban, and has never been a ban. Men and women are free to enter each other's WCs. There is no law preventing this.

 

[mickle]

Well that's dandy isn't it. You want to condemn people on the basis of the hypothetical. Let's ignore knowing that trans people go through a formal state process of recognition, and that the evidence is that they cause no harm; instead let's ''pretend'' that they do. That's where your argument is at.

Let's pretend that apartheid is always a good thing based on how people look. Let's pretend that genocide is always a legitimate option. Let's pretend it's the 1940s and the Germans successfully invaded Britain.

The state can never guarantee against all risks, and it never does. We don't measure anybody going into public spaces. We live with minimal risk against stranger danger each and every time we leave our house. Statistically for women, they encounter less harm going out than staying indoors with a man present.

Let's consider reality instead. In a public toilet setting, the space outside the cubicles is a public space. Behind the closed and locked door is a private space. There is no loss of dignity washing your hands next to a person of the opposite sex.

How about we just let all people use the public space. That way a man can accompany his wife, partner, girlfriend, daughter, and just wash his hands while she uses the loo. The presence of men will help deter wrongdoing. As a woman, I'm more than fine with that.

I've seen wrongdoing in public toilets. Once in London I was mugged at knifepoint, by three young women. I gave them my purse, they assaulted me anyway for the hell of it. Apparently ''dykes are dirty''. Who knew?

Once in a gay pub in Portsmouth while in the cubicle I heard a violent attack in progress. I came out of the cubicle as quick as I could. A lesbian, known to me as being violent, was pounding her then girlfriend with her pinned against the door. There was blood everywhere, and no way out for me, since like all these spaces there is only one available exit. Apparently she'd looked at another woman.

On another occasion in a pub in Emsworth, I was out with my now partner and two male friends. I went to go to the loo on my own. There was a shared lobby that led to ''gendered'' doors. I went in, came out and there was a man calling himself Alan outside the door wanting to give me his phone number on a piece of paper. I declined, so he set about me. I gave him a bit of a kicking in return and he let me go. I returned to our table visibly shaking. One of the men we were with, then went to the loo, and then to the bar. So we asked ''did you find him?'' ''Yes he replied''. ''So what happened''. ''Nothing we didn't speak, but I've just dropped a lump of my poo in his beer, he'll find it soon enough''. When he found it and yelled his disgust, our friend stood up, stared at him with his arms folded across his chest and said nothing. The landlady was then informed, and the police called.

What public spaces need is a second exit with an alarmed door just like a fire door. Opening the door raises the alarm and provides a means of escape.

How is one to differentiate, how do *you* differentiate, between an autogynephile crossdressing pervy bloke and a 'transwoman'? Whats the difference? How do we measure it?

 

[CXRAndy]

The state can never guarantee against all risks, and it never does

So why put them with women, mitigate the issue by providing a third space or use the men's

 

[CXRAndy]

Do you actually read what you write? None of that makes any sense.

What you said was:

There are no blanket bans, just blanket bans. So there is no ban.

Can you make your mind up?

I can help you by pointing out that there is no ban, and has never been a ban. Men and women are free to enter each other's WCs. There is no law preventing this.

A blanket ban is for everywhere. There is the mens facilities available

Womens facilities are now out of bounds for males whether red blooded or trans