I’m a gender non-conforming woman. For most of the last year, my working from home wardrobe has been a pair of combat trousers.

I don’t have a ‘gender identity’, I don’t ‘feel like a woman’, I just am a woman, an adult female.

I’m also a lesbian and my attraction is to the opposite sex, not someone’s sense of ‘gender identity’.

Growing up in the 70s and 80s, I was allowed to be me. If I was a young person growing up today, I know that wouldn’t be the case. I guess I was (and still am) ‘not like the other girls’ but I didn’t grow up bombarded with the message that wearing the clothes I wanted to wear, having my hair cut short, and doing the activities I wanted, meant that I don’t fit in the ‘woman box’.

I’m not sure what this thread has descending into, but it appears it’s no longer a discussion about men’s violence against women. I guess that shouldn’t surprise anyone because, after all this is a forum of (almost entirely) men chatting (mostly) about bikes.

There’s a been a few comments here on how women being murdered by strangers is ‘rare’ and whilst these exact words haven’t been used, the implication is that women are ‘weaponising their trauma’, a phrase commonly use elsewhere to dismiss womens’ experiences and concerns.

This just popped up on my FB feed. This is what women have to put up with

Did anyone watch BBC Big Question this morning?
One of the studio guests was Michael Conroy, founder of Men At Work
[Who we are. What we do.
Men At Work C.I.C. offers bespoke training & support for those working with Boys and Young Men.
We work with you to enhance your skills in supporting boys and young men to navigate their way towards safe, healthy and respectful adult lives.]
https://menatworkcic.org/

On The Big Questions he raised the issue of porn, and how it’s now something kids of primary school age are exposed to (via smart phones).

I’m sure most of us have seen the news of the officer spared jail after assaulting a woman and part of the argument against community service was something along the lines of ‘he wouldn’t be safe working alongside criminals.’ I mean, apart from the fact that he IS a criminal, how are women going to take any confidence that the system is there to protect them?

For anyone who hasn’t heard, this is case involving PC Oliver Banfield. He received a curfew and his victim got £500 compensation. I’ve just watched her interviewed on C4 news. Police did everything they could to dismiss her report, and it was only taken forward when CCTV footage (with sound) came to light.
His victim will probably carry this with her for the rest of her life She must have been terrified.

You’re playing with words there, and anyway, that would describe a particular kind of murder not the general murder of women which these activists seem to want to privilege.

Genuine question, which ‘activists’ are you referring to?

Has anyone here read much about the SNP hate crime bill (and the controversy surrounding it)?

The bill did not extend the same protections to women as it did to other groups.

There’s another thread where the gist seems to be ‘where have all the women gone on stw?’.

For the record, some of the comments on this thread are unlikely to make women feel welcome on this website.

way too high, and increasing, it’s now one woman every 3 days

this shows a breakdown from a previous year
https://www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/femicide-census-reveals-half-of-uk-women-killed-by-men-die-at-hands-of-partner-or-ex/

some interesting statistics here
https://www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/femicide-census-reveals-half-of-uk-women-killed-by-men-die-at-hands-of-partner-or-ex/

https://outdoorsmagic.com/article/how-can-women-feel-safer-in-bothies/

Good article that, thanks for sharing

I am a ‘leftie, Guardian reader’ but have learned you cannot dismiss stories because you don’t like certain newspapers or websites. I’m quite happy to share this link to Daily Mail. I think STW bans direct links to the Daily Mail but this article includes stories by six teenage girls. If you aren’t prepared to read them because of where there are published then you are part of the problem.

This is an honest look at the frequent and commonplace sexual harassment and assault girls are subjected to by their male peers today. Boys get away with this and they grow into men who also get away with it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9373179/The-toxic-truth-teenage-girl-today.html?fbclid=IwAR1Sww8rmOq2BFMiN2w8wZMhpp8PiPpBglKQ-fImsJ9zJK3fbX7WGe20BPo

Recently, in Oldham, a takeaway worker who pulled a woman to the ground and molested her was given a suspended sentence because he was the family breadwinner. This would’ve been rape had she not got away.

Last week a man was arrested in connection with a a number of sexual assaults along the Bridgwater Canal in Trafford. I have no confidence that the justice system will give him more than a slap on the wrist. I’ve also seen people dismiss what happened as trivial, laughing because he ‘slapped/pinched their arses’.

From the Liverpool Echo “A group of male students were allegedly caught taking photographs up the skirts of girls using the transparent glass staircase, in the centre of the sixth form canteen area, at Broughton Hall Catholic High School on Friday”.

Sentences have to be tougher, and boys need educating that certain behaviours are not acceptable.

There are difficult questions that need to had around the use of pornography. I know you all joke about ‘hedge porn’ but I’m sure most of you are aware of what is now considered ‘normal’ and how that leads to boys and young men thinking that spitting, slapping, choking and anal is what sex is all about.

Everyone has a part to play and that means calling out your friends ‘jokes’ and behaviour, and maybe having discussions about porn with your kids that you really don’t want to have.

Aren’t actors allowed to attend a vigil?

Not sure that proves anything…

It doesn’t but it wasn’t a ‘vigil’.

Sisters Uncut gave instructions to bring ‘your rage’, and make sure you don’t bring ID etc etc. They riled up the crowd, giving speeches that could jeopardise the court case. They’ve made Sarah Everard’s murder all about them.

They’re now demanding money from the crowdfunder organised by Reclaim The Streets to pay any fines etc at the money was for ‘the movement’.

The crowdfunder for Reclaim The Streets has raised a phenomenal amount of money, when questioned on Twitter about where it would be going the organisers got very defensive and started getting abusive. They have made it very clear that it will only go to organisation they deem to be sufficiently ‘inclusive’, i.e. they deem any women’s refuge/rape shelter that is strictly women only as allowed by law (Equality act 2010) will not get a penny.

FFS Kelvin, I gave examples of them (SU) aggressively harassing women at multiple events (including an anti rape culture demo). If that doesn’t make you question the narrative I don’t know what will.

For those of you who have decided (based on a few posts) that I’m some kind of bigot ask yourselves this question, what’s more likely: that a load of life-long left-leaning LGBT-supporting (including L+B) women have inexplicably and uncharacteristically all suddenly become bigots or that you might be missing something here?

Saturday’s vigil was hijacked and turned into a protest by a group called Sisters Uncut.

Last year (in Manchester) they instigated a counter-protest (which seemed to comprise mostly men) against a group of women protesting about rape culture. Many of the women at the anti rape culture demo were victims of rape. Representatives from Trafford Rape Crisis were also there. Sisters Uncut justified their behaviour because the some of the organisers were known ‘TERFS’.

Sunday’s protest, again organised by Sisters Uncut was about women they allege were ‘killed by the state’. Two of these ‘women’ are male rapists who brutalised children.

Number 91 in the list is Jade Eatough
https://www.lancs.live/news/local-news/violent-beast-jailed-for-life-1267831

Number 95 is Nicola Cope
https://web.archive.org/web/20150531080143/http://www.tamworthherald.co.uk/Sex-change-man-abused-young-girls-jailed-16-years/story-26584788-detail/story.html

HOW DARE YOU include this VILE person who groomed and raped at least 2 girls starting from the ages of 4-7 on a list alongside these women.

Have you NO shame @SistersUncut?#EVAWAG #CSA https://t.co/VkgrL0bdk8 pic.twitter.com/ziKhnEX07y

— Nasty Smurfette (@NastySmurfette) March 14, 2021

A couple of years ago Sisters Uncut supported Tara Wolf who was found guilty of assaulting Maria McLachlan’s at Speakers corner.

https://www.feministcurrent.com/2018/04/27/trans-identified-male-tara-wolf-charged-assault-hyde-park-attack/

At a meeting organised by @Womans_Place_UK, Sisters Uncut stood outside bashing pots and pans drowning out the voices of survivors of abuse and violence. They were invited to join the packed meeting to present their view but declined.

But none of you want to hear any of this do you.

Vicky Pea, agree 100% with this

I can’t help thinking that gender stereotypes have become more extreme in the past decade or 2. I’ve spent my life resisting suggestions that I ‘should’ be more feminine, that I’m a ‘bloke’, that I should dress a certain way, that I should have a nice handbag, that I shouldn’t swear, that I should find a nice feminine hobby instead of mountain biking….. but I don’t doubt that I’m a woman.
I think gender stereotyping is really unhelpful.

For the last two years I have been commuting via tram (away from the city center but towards all the ‘nice’ schools. School children make up about 90% of the passengers.

I have not seen a single girl with short hair. I yesterday I noticed a girl with a chin length bob cut but ALL the other have long hair down to their shoulder blades.

I’ve read accounts of how girl toddlers were quite happy to play with stereotypically ‘boy’ toys and had short hair (and vice versa for boys) until they mixed with more children and were told ‘that’s for boys’ or ‘you have boys hair’.

Gender stereotypes harm us all.

The 80s is starting to look like some long lost utopia.

Would you tell a homosexual person that they can’t really be gay, men like women and women like men, that’s just biology? Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve?

We are at a point now with gender identity and transsexualism where we were with homosexuality what, 20, 30 years ago? You don’t get it, and that’s fine, but you really should talk to people for whom this affects in rather a big way. Except you can’t because you’ve driven away those people in (girlie) tears by shouting things like “you can’t possibly be a woman, you were born with a penis, hah, QED!”

People this affects, you mean like women and gay people who are fed up with this?

Stonewall:
1. Actively campaigned for the removal of same-sex exemptions in the Equality Act.
2. Are misleading people about protected characteristics in the Equality Act.
3. Are trying to redefine homosexuality as same-gender attraction, not same-sex attraction.
4. They are championing an affirmation-only pathway for children struggling with their gender identity. Historically, 85% of those children desist and would have grown up to be be happy, healthy gays. Once puberty blockers* are involved, hardly any desist.

* off-label cancer drugs also used to treat precocious puberty in girls. There are class action lawsuits by women who were prescribed these drugs to treat precocious puberty, many (only in their early 30s) now suffering osteoporosis.

The GRA was created to help a very small number of people. The numbers of people claiming trans identities has skyrocketed. Most people think the ‘trans’ in ‘trans rights’ means ‘transsexual’. It doesn’t, it is now much broader (see Stonewall’s trans umbrella) and including, for example, transvestites (men who dress as women for a sexual thrill).

Vancouver Rape Relief Shelter has been de-funded for only accepting biological women. The campaign to de-fund the shelter was lead by the politician Morgane Oger (a trans woman).

I understand you are coming from a position of wanted to be kind but there is much, much more to this than you seem to realise.

Check out these people on twitter (all transmen or transwomen) for a different perspective.
Buck Angel, Fionne Orlander, Blaire White, Rose of Dawn, Debbie Hayton, Kristina Harrison

peace out (before I get banned)

No-one suggested they did. This is a discussion about gender, not sperm.

Yes it is, so why do you keep conflating sex with gender. When people keep saying ‘there are two genders’, they mean ‘there are two sexes’. Because sex and gender are used interchangeably, the conversation goes around and around in circles.

No, they can’t. A man is an adult human male, a woman is an adult human female. Pick other words, those are taken.

Yes they can. As the law says.

A legal fiction. They haven’t actually changed sex.

I don’t need to watch it – Men cannot become women, women cannot become men

Yes they can. Note the thread title.

No, they can’t. A man is an adult human male, a woman is an adult human female. Pick other words, those are taken.

How much of this could solved by just treating people like people and not giving a flying cabbage about their gender? Makes no difference if someone identifies as an axolotl, a trans man or he man, as long as they ain’t a pita.

Does anyone give a flying cabbage about gender?

Sex, however? Well, sex is one the protected characteristics defined in the Equality Act. Gender Reassignment (not Gender Identity) is another.

The Equality Act allows for single-sex and separate services for men and women, e.g. Only women can be a mammogram nurse. People with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) can still be excluded from single-sex services.

If they have some kind of abnormality that leaves them neither male nor female then (as far as I can find) they have no gender

The are still either male or female.

Your argument is “sperm = man, egg = woman.” So if someone is surgically altered to be able to produce the opposite then by your own definitions either they’ve changed sex or your definition needs some work.

What? Seriously? I don’t know what you’re reading to come to this conclusion. clarkpm4242 is the only person posting sense on this page.

I’m baffled that people keep confusing sex and gender on here and differences of sexual development do not mean sex is a spectrum. It’s grossly offensive to suggest men and women with DSDs are not men and women.

I’m saying no more on this thread, other than to provide a link to this article on T-Nation.

It’s a comprehensive take on the situation, covering many sports, and includes a break down of the various rules and regulations.

Trans Athletes: The Death Of Women’s Sports Fairness Gone Too Far

She is also an arsehole

That’s putting it mildly!

In the last week McKinnon has:

Accused the woman she beat of ‘unsportsmanlike’ behaviour and reported her to the authorities.

Accused another female cyclist (interviewed by the BBC) of transphobia and reported her.

Celebrated the death of journalist of Deborah Orr.

You’re assuming men caused that problem? Look up hovering.

[lighthearted]Are you actually mansplaining (or did you just not notice my earlier post when I said I am a woman)?[/lighthearted]

More often than not, if there’s a bit of wee on the seat in the ladies, it’s because there is no toilet paper. This (the running out of paper) seems to be inevitable in bars/clubs at the end of the night, but it’s all too common earlier in the evening, including in venues that serve food.

Rainper. you clearly have an axe to grind. Have you joined this forum simply to comment on this thread? You don’t seem to have posted on any others, so I’m a little curious…

How exactly is recognising that the removal of existing single-sex toilets has many negative impacts on women an axe to grind?

It’s not acceptable for anyone to put up with. It’s also not been the case in the two recent workplaces I’ve worked in which had single bathroom facilities as I described. They were tidy and seemed better treated by users than more traditional toilet arrangements.

The quoted section was about the state of shared facilities in bar in the evening.

Men also have to sit on seats. The experience really is little different. There are many arguments against multi-gender toilets but this really isn’t one of them.

I think you’ll find this pretty high up the list on women complaints about shared facilities.

Why would you think it is acceptable for blokes to stand in someone else’s piss? I wouldn’t want to use them either maybe the answer to it all is to have some attendants

Nicely missing the point.

This is a negative (and disgusting) impact brought about by removing single-sex toilets.

Standing in piss is also very different to having to sit on a piss covered seat so I’d hope you recognise this is worse for women.

Can anyone describe the layout of the toilets at Manchester Uni that has been mentioned? Is it enclosed cubicles with shared sink areas or cubicles with their own sinks?

We can with thought and effort look after everyone’s needs

Either way, how can anyone view this as acceptable for women to put up with?

the Manc Uni gender neutral toilets were a stinking cesspit on the 2 occasions that I’ve used them after gigs. I would not have wanted to use them if I were female (piss all over seats and floor reasons).

Small extract from an article posted on Women’s Place UK. Note the author is anonymous, ask yourself why?

“Therefore, women always queue for the loo, because of unequal provision. Women also take longer to use the toilet for biological reasons.

Women have more reasons to use the toilet than men, including menstruation, menopause, pregnancy, incontinence, and caring for babies, small children and elderly relatives.

Yet no government has accepted that this is a gross infringement of human rights and equalities legislation; more likely women are blamed for ‘taking too long’ or their plight is seen as a joke.”

Gender neutral toilets don’t work for women

If that’s what making all people feel safe and comfortable – it’s worthwhile.

Are you really saying you value speed of toilet use over peoples feelings of inclusion and safety…?

Are you saying you place the needs of a tiny minority over that of half the population?

Whose safety are you talking about here, who are they at risk from?

Name it and lets tackle that problem.

Single-occupancy unisex bathrooms with both toilet and washbasin – with adequate room for young children are the solution

Aside from cleanliness/hygiene issues, these take up more space. This means less toilets for everyone.

Women have been campaigning for years to have their toilet provision increased.

Copy/paste from Mail on Sunday (don’t hold your breath waiting for The Guardian to report on this issue).

Gender-neutral toilets in schools have left girls feeling unsafe and even put their health at risk, parents and teachers have warned.

Girls who are menstruating are so anxious about sharing facilities with boys that some are staying at home for fear of being made to feel ‘period shame’.

With a growing number of both primary and secondary schools installing unisex toilets, some girls are risking infections by refusing to urinate all day.

Others are so fearful they have stopped drinking liquids at school.
Parents and teaching staff have told The Mail on Sunday that female pupils feel deeply uncomfortable or even unsafe sharing toilets with male students.

The trend for single-sex toilets is driven by the wish to be more inclusive of children who identify as transgender and wish to use the same facilities as the opposite sex.

But last night, doctors and politicians called on schools to halt the move towards unisex toilets to prevent any further harm to female pupils.

GP Tessa Katz said holding in urine for prolonged periods on a regular basis could increase the risk of girls suffering urinary and bladder infections.
‘The psychological effects of girls not feeling safe enough to use mixed-sex toilets is also concerning,’ Dr Katz said.

At the same time, the rise in gender-neutral toilets has sparked a backlash among parents, many of whom say they were not consulted before the change was made at their children’s schools.

The latest row involves Deanesfield Primary School in South Ruislip, West London, where parents launched a petition last month against the introduction of unisex toilets.
One angry mother, who has daughters aged four and eight at the school, said: ‘The cubicles were open at the bottom and top so older pupils can easily climb up the toilets and peer over.’

Stephanie Davies-Arai, from the parent campaign group Transgender Trend, said schools were being misinformed by ‘trans activist’ organisations that they were breaking equality laws if they did not make toilets unisex.

She said there were clear exemptions under the current equality laws that meant it was perfectly legal to have single-sex toilets.

A spokesman for Deanesfield said: ‘We will continue to support parents with any individual worries or concerns they have.’

Tory MP David Davies, who has backed feminist claims that transgender rights are overriding those of women, said: ‘If girls are not comfortable sharing toilets with boys then schools should make provision for them, rather than saying girls have got a problem.’

I think your problem is mixed use facilities with no thought given to provision for the needs of women rather than the concept as a whole (from a practical perspective rather than presumption). If the concerns you raise were addressed would you still be against them?

I’m not against the existence of mixed-sex facilities. I am against replacing women’s toilets with mixed-sex facilities.

Women (who are aware) are complaining, loudly. Their concerns are being dismissed.

There’s an article on the toilet issue in today’s Sunday Times (written by Caroline Criado Perez).

The share token will expire so – if your’re interested – read it sooner rather than later

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/women-cant-win-when-it-comes-to-loo-queues-l3szkbxhx?shareToken=69dbb1523800df913fe80e8ffb8a666a&wgu=270525_54264_15703499600263_0beeb937f0&wgexpiry=1578125960&utm_source=planit&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_content=22278

Don’t use them. There are other people in the world that they are life changing for.

So when single-sex toilets are replaced with mixed-sex only facilities, women who don’t feel comfortable with them should stay at home?

If you have women only toilets then you must have men only toilets – equality doesn’t run in just one direction.
Just do away with urinals and only have traps everywhere – so all toilets are ‘gender-neutral’ – what’s the problem?

It the first sentence a response to some posters saying ‘make the gents bogs gender neutral’?

As for your second comment. That’s exactly why there aren’t many women on the forum.

I am a women. I’m also 47 old. Hand on heart, in my years on this earth, I’ve never yet seen shit of blood smeared on the walls of a women’s toilet. I’ve seen plenty blocked up with too much paper (due to crappy flush mechanisms), plus overflowing sanitary bins.

Any time I’ve used a public toilet that is shared with men, at best it smells pissy, frequently there’s piss on the seat and floor, and skid marks in the pan.

It’s quite common for women with children (say a toddler and a baby) to have to wee with the cubicle door open, simply because they can’t all fit inside and there are no more suitable facilities. Religious women may need to remove and adjust a head covering.

It’s common for women in perimenopause have unpredictable, very bloody periods. I’d heard (secondhand) accounts of sufferers have to wash out bloodied clothing.

We don’t want mixed sex toilets.

Historic Scotland have done something similar (making all toilets ‘gender neural’ aka mixed-sex.
They did actually carry out an EqIA (Equality Impact Assessment) before doing so. What is an EqIA? An Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) is a way of systematically taking equal opportunities into consideration when making a decision.

The Historic Scotland one found that the proposed changes would have a NEGATIVE impact on the protected characteristics of SEX, PREGNANCY/MATERNITY, and ETHNICITY. But they went ahead and made the changes anyway.

Whilst a good point,

a) Has that ever happened in the history of ever? And,

b) If that looked likely to occur then surely that’s what you should be protesting against, rather than being against their existence at all, no?

a) This is exactly what is happening
b) No one is protesting against the creation of additional gender neutral (mixed sex) toilets

I opened this thread assuming it would be about the toilets at the Old Vic Theatre.

Last year, the theatre crowd-funded £100,000 towards refurbishment of the toilets. Front and centre was a pledge to “double the number of ladies’ toilets.

Following nine months of renovation, the new toilets have been proudly unveiled AND THEY ARE ALL GENDER NEUTRAL.

Quote from @oldvictheatre twitter
“Our loos now offer ‘self-selection’ rather than being labelled male or female. This takes a descriptive, rather than prescriptive, approach following advice from surveys conducted with focus groups.”

Our loos now offer ‘self-selection’ rather than being labelled male or female. This takes a descriptive, rather than prescriptive, approach following advice from surveys conducted with focus groups.

— The Old Vic (@oldvictheatre) October 2, 2019

I wonder what ‘focus groups’ they consulted with?