 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The really bizarre bit is that a trans man who looks TOO masculine can also be prohibited from entering the women's loos. Same goes for a trans woman that looks too feminine, they can be prohibited from entering the men's loos. Have they really thought this through?" Increase the number of disabled toilets allocate them a dual use. Everyone wins. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don’t think k it’s anything to do with what you look like. The guidance says you can’t use single sex spaces of the sex other than the one you were born into. Nothing about how convincing you are. " Oh, but it is. The guidance says if you are TOO convincing as the opposite sex, you can also be prohibited from your birth-sex toilet on the grounds other users will feel uncomfortable! Its bonkers! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I would not want to be the service provider who has to train their staff in the new do's and don'ts of toilet regulation." It’s very simple Men to the left, because Women are always right. If you are not sure, go for the middle. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don’t think k it’s anything to do with what you look like. The guidance says you can’t use single sex spaces of the sex other than the one you were born into. Nothing about how convincing you are. Oh, but it is. Hence single cubicles. The guidance says if you are TOO convincing as the opposite sex, you can also be prohibited from your birth-sex toilet on the grounds other users will feel uncomfortable! Its bonkers!" . Hence single cubicles. Has to be the way forward | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Oh, and the guidance also says trans men are to be barred from entering men-only or gay-only premises - presumably saunas and the like " Would a sauna know if a man was trans? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don’t think k it’s anything to do with what you look like. The guidance says you can’t use single sex spaces of the sex other than the one you were born into. Nothing about how convincing you are. Oh, but it is. Hence single cubicles. The guidance says if you are TOO convincing as the opposite sex, you can also be prohibited from your birth-sex toilet on the grounds other users will feel uncomfortable! Its bonkers!. Hence single cubicles. Has to be the way forward" Most public toilet cubicles have spaces under the walls. Which can be abused by some pervs. Most young guys, use the cubicals for a piss. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don’t think k it’s anything to do with what you look like. The guidance says you can’t use single sex spaces of the sex other than the one you were born into. Nothing about how convincing you are. Oh, but it is. The guidance says if you are TOO convincing as the opposite sex, you can also be prohibited from your birth-sex toilet on the grounds other users will feel uncomfortable! Its bonkers!" . So who decides your to convincing lol. The old loo attendant?? Think it's just some people trying to complicate a simple law. Men to mens. Woman to womans | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"And then there is the person of the male sex who can wander into the women's loos by asserting they are a trans man. No need for the predator to wear a frock, just look like a guy." That’s clearly not allowed and you know it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"And then there is the person of the male sex who can wander into the women's loos by asserting they are a trans man. No need for the predator to wear a frock, just look like a guy. That’s clearly not allowed and you know it." Neither is preying on women, but how do you prevent it when trans men are expected to show up in the women's loos? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"And then there is the person of the male sex who can wander into the women's loos by asserting they are a trans man. No need for the predator to wear a frock, just look like a guy." In those cases either the husband or father of one of the real ladies using that loo identifies as a tooth fairy and knocks his teeth out. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"And then there is the person of the male sex who can wander into the women's loos by asserting they are a trans man. No need for the predator to wear a frock, just look like a guy. That’s clearly not allowed and you know it. Neither is preying on women, but how do you prevent it when trans men are expected to show up in the women's loos? " Allocate the disabled toilets for the very few people in this country that would be better suited using a single use private cubical. The MAJORITY of people in this country are MALE or FEMALE. and their space is rightly protected by law. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Difficult one and anything but black and white. I cannot see a problem with post op trans women using women's toilets though natural born women [hate that stupid and unnecessary prefix 'cis'] might well disagree with me. A man in a frock is a different matter. Perhaps if genuinely transitioning then yes. Transvestite/crossdresser no. Transman on men's toilet less of a problem. Chances are they are going to use a cubicle rather than the urinal. Tvs/cds in gents toilets? Well they could be putting themselves at risk. Real women in gents toilets a massive no. There should be safe men's places and safe women's places." The prefix CIS was made Redundant last week in the Supreme Court. A Man is a Biological Man A Woman is a Biological Woman. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I doesn't matter what I think. My consent is not transferable. Feel bad for all the genuine trans people that were simply trying to get on with their lives. Unfortunately the widening or removal of definitions and gate-keeping has opened the category of trans to include men with autogynephilia or a cross-dressing fetish. If I, as a big burly bloke, find them terrifying, I can totally sympathise with women that wouldn't want them in their loos and locker-rooms. " Big burly blokes have been keeping us TVs and themselves very happy for years so I wouldn't worry about it. We should have three toilets, Male, Female and unisex or the simple unisex toilet cubicles used currently. Mx | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A man walks into a toilet my granddaughter or daughters in please expect some pain " So a mam goes in to just use the toilet, nothing else, no ulterior motive and you want to assault him? Some people are really fucked in the head. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I doesn't matter what I think. My consent is not transferable. Feel bad for all the genuine trans people that were simply trying to get on with their lives. Unfortunately the widening or removal of definitions and gate-keeping has opened the category of trans to include men with autogynephilia or a cross-dressing fetish. If I, as a big burly bloke, find them terrifying, I can totally sympathise with women that wouldn't want them in their loos and locker-rooms. Big burly blokes have been keeping us TVs and themselves very happy for years so I wouldn't worry about it. We should have three toilets, Male, Female and unisex or the simple unisex toilet cubicles used currently. Mx " Of course we are awash with spare cash. Installing a fourth toilet in every building in the land is but a trifle. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This legislation was designed to define what exactly constitutes a 'man' and a 'woman'. It's impossible to create a law that will please everyone in this instance and there will always be those that don't quite fit. Ultimately this legislation was designed to keep men out of women's personal spaces and it does that. In my book that's a big win." To answer your question, if a trans woman or indeed a cis woman wants to use the gents i couldn't care less. I've seen the queues outside the ladies. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A man walks into a toilet my granddaughter or daughters in please expect some pain " This guidance requires people who LOOK like men to enter the women's loos | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This legislation was designed to define what exactly constitutes a 'man' and a 'woman'. It's impossible to create a law that will please everyone in this instance and there will always be those that don't quite fit. Ultimately this legislation was designed to keep men out of women's personal spaces and it does that. In my book that's a big win. To answer your question, if a trans woman or indeed a cis woman wants to use the gents i couldn't care less. I've seen the queues outside the ladies." Oh yeah great apply Double Standards Men means Men | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I doesn't matter what I think. My consent is not transferable. Feel bad for all the genuine trans people that were simply trying to get on with their lives. Unfortunately the widening or removal of definitions and gate-keeping has opened the category of trans to include men with autogynephilia or a cross-dressing fetish. If I, as a big burly bloke, find them terrifying, I can totally sympathise with women that wouldn't want them in their loos and locker-rooms. Big burly blokes have been keeping us TVs and themselves very happy for years so I wouldn't worry about it. We should have three toilets, Male, Female and unisex or the simple unisex toilet cubicles used currently. Mx Of course we are awash with spare cash. Installing a fourth toilet in every building in the land is but a trifle. " Oh I am pretty sure it's not that difficult to do by using the existing ones and modifying them, money is found for far more expensive little projects from all parties. Mx  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"How does the cleaner who also lives as a trans woman go on about cleaning the toilets , which is their job?" Toilet closed for cleaning sign | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I doesn't matter what I think. My consent is not transferable. Feel bad for all the genuine trans people that were simply trying to get on with their lives. Unfortunately the widening or removal of definitions and gate-keeping has opened the category of trans to include men with autogynephilia or a cross-dressing fetish. If I, as a big burly bloke, find them terrifying, I can totally sympathise with women that wouldn't want them in their loos and locker-rooms. Big burly blokes have been keeping us TVs and themselves very happy for years so I wouldn't worry about it. We should have three toilets, Male, Female and unisex or the simple unisex toilet cubicles used currently. Mx Of course we are awash with spare cash. Installing a fourth toilet in every building in the land is but a trifle. Oh I am pretty sure it's not that difficult to do by using the existing ones and modifying them, money is found for far more expensive little projects from all parties. Mx "If all the Trans people can have a whip round and pay for it, that would be awesome. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This legislation was designed to define what exactly constitutes a 'man' and a 'woman'. It's impossible to create a law that will please everyone in this instance and there will always be those that don't quite fit. Ultimately this legislation was designed to keep men out of women's personal spaces and it does that. In my book that's a big win. To answer your question, if a trans woman or indeed a cis woman wants to use the gents i couldn't care less. I've seen the queues outside the ladies. Oh yeah great apply Double Standards Men means Men " I don't view or treat women in the same way as i view or treat men. I make no apologies for that. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The really bizarre bit is that a trans man who looks TOO masculine can also be prohibited from entering the women's loos. Same goes for a trans woman that looks too feminine, they can be prohibited from entering the men's loos. Have they really thought this through?" of course they haven’t it’s a goddam mess and attacking the wrong demographic regarding attacks on women…. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The really bizarre bit is that a trans man who looks TOO masculine can also be prohibited from entering the women's loos. Same goes for a trans woman that looks too feminine, they can be prohibited from entering the men's loos. Have they really thought this through? Increase the number of disabled toilets allocate them a dual use. Everyone wins." ... Sounds logical.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If all the Trans people can have a whip round and pay for it, that would be awesome." By bank TRANSfer?  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Don't forget there was a huge surge in young girls being referred to gender identity clinics from about 2005 onwards. There numbers greatly outweighed the boys. They were placed on the conveyor belt of puberty-blockers, hormones and surgery (now all suspended by the NHS). There is a whole new generation of FtM coming through. My friend's erstwhile daughter is now her 18-year-old son. Full facial hair, tattoos up the neck, masculinised. He will be expected to walk into women's loos looking like a young man - and then you get people on here promising to smash his face in. This really is a solution to a problem that does not exist. " Hopefully we will have the support networks ready for all those young women that were mislead by this social contagion, when they eventually realise what a terrible mistake they have made. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Don't forget there was a huge surge in young girls being referred to gender identity clinics from about 2005 onwards. There numbers greatly outweighed the boys. They were placed on the conveyor belt of puberty-blockers, hormones and surgery (now all suspended by the NHS). There is a whole new generation of FtM coming through. My friend's erstwhile daughter is now her 18-year-old son. Full facial hair, tattoos up the neck, masculinised. He will be expected to walk into women's loos looking like a young man - and then you get people on here promising to smash his face in. This really is a solution to a problem that does not exist. " It's the solution to men believing that they can invade women's personal spaces just because they're wearing a frock. That was a very real problem. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Don't forget there was a huge surge in young girls being referred to gender identity clinics from about 2005 onwards. There numbers greatly outweighed the boys. They were placed on the conveyor belt of puberty-blockers, hormones and surgery (now all suspended by the NHS). There is a whole new generation of FtM coming through. My friend's erstwhile daughter is now her 18-year-old son. Full facial hair, tattoos up the neck, masculinised. He will be expected to walk into women's loos looking like a young man - and then you get people on here promising to smash his face in. This really is a solution to a problem that does not exist. " The solution is already in place. It’s just a sign change on the Disabled Toilets. Then increase the disabled toilets and everyone wins. Gay men and Women have fought for equality and are more accepted than ever before, some would say there’s still a way to go. When a guy comes out as gay now in 2025, the response is mostly, so what. Trans people are undoing all the efforts and equality that gay men and women have fought for. Trans will be accepted more if they blend in and not continually strive for special treatment. Look at me I’m trans, so what. Get on with it and accept that biological men are men and biological women are women. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A man walks into a toilet my granddaughter or daughters in please expect some pain " And then expect to end up with a hefty fine, possibly the loss of your job and a spell in prison. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Hopefully we will have the support networks ready for all those young women that were mislead by this social contagion, when they eventually realise what a terrible mistake they have made. " You sound like a heterosexual from the 1960s talking about gay people | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Hopefully we will have the support networks ready for all those young women that were mislead by this social contagion, when they eventually realise what a terrible mistake they have made. You sound like a heterosexual from the 1960s talking about gay people" I'm a homosexual that is living through a new attempt at gay conversion therapy, more horrific this time, as it attempts to medically and surgically "correct" young lesbians by calling it gender affirming care. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Hopefully we will have the support networks ready for all those young women that were mislead by this social contagion, when they eventually realise what a terrible mistake they have made. You sound like a heterosexual from the 1960s talking about gay people I'm a homosexual that is living through a new attempt at gay conversion therapy, more horrific this time, as it attempts to medically and surgically "correct" young lesbians by calling it gender affirming care. " That may be true in some cases but it is quite a presumption to assert as fact that every FtM now coming through was diverted from the path of being a lesbian woman. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Hopefully we will have the support networks ready for all those young women that were mislead by this social contagion, when they eventually realise what a terrible mistake they have made. You sound like a heterosexual from the 1960s talking about gay people I'm a homosexual that is living through a new attempt at gay conversion therapy, more horrific this time, as it attempts to medically and surgically "correct" young lesbians by calling it gender affirming care. That may be true in some cases but it is quite a presumption to assert as fact that every FtM now coming through was diverted from the path of being a lesbian woman." Go read the Cass review. The massive spike in referrals and numbers that were same-sex attracted is conclusive. No presumption. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have read it. And it is huge presumption on your part that every one was developing lesbian tendencies. " Nowhere did I say "every" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have read it. And it is huge presumption on your part that every one was developing lesbian tendencies. " Fair enough though i do believe that, were gender realignment to not exist, the vast majority would be lesbian women. Ironically this legislation denotes ftms to still be lesbian women (assumimg that they sleep with other women). | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" It's the solution to men believing that they can invade women's personal spaces just because they're wearing a frock. That was a very real problem." Can you kindly give us some specific examples of legal cases arising from this? We keep getting told there is a major problem of cross dressing men assaulting women in female spaces but I've never seen any evidence. So far, as Sara points out, this seems like a solution to a non-problem. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" It's the solution to men believing that they can invade women's personal spaces just because they're wearing a frock. That was a very real problem. Can you kindly give us some specific examples of legal cases arising from this? We keep getting told there is a major problem of cross dressing men assaulting women in female spaces but I've never seen any evidence. So far, as Sara points out, this seems like a solution to a non-problem. " You didn't look very hard. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" It's the solution to men believing that they can invade women's personal spaces just because they're wearing a frock. That was a very real problem. Can you kindly give us some specific examples of legal cases arising from this? We keep getting told there is a major problem of cross dressing men assaulting women in female spaces but I've never seen any evidence. So far, as Sara points out, this seems like a solution to a non-problem. " Why should it have to result in assaults leading to criminal prosecution? By then it's already too late. I wasn't even referring to that. The mere fact that most women are uncomfortable sharing their personal spaces with men should be sufficient reason to pass this legislation. Or are you of the opinion that they're rights fall below those of the trans community? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have read it. And it is huge presumption on your part that every one was developing lesbian tendencies. Fair enough though i do believe that, were gender realignment to not exist, the vast majority would be lesbian women. Ironically this legislation denotes ftms to still be lesbian women (assumimg that they sleep with other women)." I do agree the GIC gave too little consideration to other factors that might have been causing distress in the child, not least autism, trauma and homophobic bullying. Anyone who suggested a cause other than gender dysphoria was cancelled as a transphobe. The lack of clinical governance was shocking. But it does not follow that every child was being offered a way out of their sexuality by being placed on a medical pathway for the rest of their life. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A man walks into a toilet my granddaughter or daughters in please expect some pain So a mam goes in to just use the toilet, nothing else, no ulterior motive and you want to assault him? Some people are really fucked in the head." Don't think that is what he meant at all. Guess he meant that if a man goes into a Ladies toilet, despite a Gents toilet being readily available, then he could expect 'consequences'. A genuine mistake fair enough [remember a club years ago with a cowboy theme and the toilet doors said Steers or Heifers which confused non-country folk] but if he goes in there for 'predatory' reasons then that might be another matter. NOT that I am condoning violence. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" It's the solution to men believing that they can invade women's personal spaces just because they're wearing a frock. That was a very real problem. Can you kindly give us some specific examples of legal cases arising from this? We keep getting told there is a major problem of cross dressing men assaulting women in female spaces but I've never seen any evidence. So far, as Sara points out, this seems like a solution to a non-problem. Why should it have to result in assaults leading to criminal prosecution? By then it's already too late. I wasn't even referring to that. The mere fact that most women are uncomfortable sharing their personal spaces with men should be sufficient reason to pass this legislation. Or are you of the opinion that their rights fall below those of the trans community?" is discomfort about a minority more important the the rights of a genuine trans person? Historically we have been uncomfortable with many different minorities - I’d like to think we are better than that - like it or not the legislation makes genuine trans women who have lived as women for years, are no threat to anyone more at risk - the actual threat to women (.rather than just feeling uncomfortable) is vanishingly small - men are the biggest threat - now they can come in women’s toilets and say that they are trans men with no challenge…. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The Equality and Human Rights Commission has issued guidance to all workplaces and service providers, e.g. pubs, restaurants, etc about what the Supreme Court ruling means to the use of their toilets: "In workplaces and services that are open to the public:as a frequent traveler I’ve visited countries where it’s normal for men and women to share the same toilets and shower facilities - trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use the women’s facilities and trans men (biological women) should not be permitted to use the men’s facilities, as this will mean that they are no longer single-sex facilities and must be open to all users of the opposite sex - in some circumstances the law also allows trans women (biological men) not to be permitted to use the men’s facilities, and trans men (biological woman) not to be permitted to use the women’s facilities - however where facilities are available to both men and women, trans people should not be put in a position where there are no facilities for them to use So, trans men enter the loos designated for women, and trans women enter the loos designated for men. What could possibly go wrong?" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keep womens toilets for women, and make men's toilets unisex or gender neutral. I've enjoyed watching a few women using the urinals. "Nah Double Standards are never good | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The law is an ass! Sometimes there needs to be some common sense shown but the law makes no sense. Do we need to have 'Gents', 'Ladies' and 'Others' now?" We already do..." Disabled." These 3rd facilities already exist. Surely easy enough to relabel then available for Trans as well. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The law is an ass! Sometimes there needs to be some common sense shown but the law makes no sense. Do we need to have 'Gents', 'Ladies' and 'Others' now? We already do..." Disabled." These 3rd facilities already exist. Surely easy enough to relabel then available for Trans as well." Modern commercial premises are required by planning law to have a disabled-friendly (unisex) loo but older premises are not | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The simple fix, I thought, was to leave it to the provide to designate their toilets by gender (inclusive) or sex (exclusive)" Yes,exactly.All a load of shyte I've used the ladies loo for over 20 years..never had a problem. If,whatever premises I'm in I sist I use the disabled I hope I won't be causing an inconvenience to any actually disabled. I'm sure there will be some TERFS volunteering as toilet police/ genital Inspectors lol | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The law is an ass! Sometimes there needs to be some common sense shown but the law makes no sense. Do we need to have 'Gents', 'Ladies' and 'Others' now? We already do..." Disabled." These 3rd facilities already exist. Surely easy enough to relabel then available for Trans as well." I was out dressed in a restaurant some months back, and disabled was locked. In the future I will check that disabled is open when I arrive. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The law is an ass! Sometimes there needs to be some common sense shown but the law makes no sense. Do we need to have 'Gents', 'Ladies' and 'Others' now? We already do..." Disabled." These 3rd facilities already exist. Surely easy enough to relabel then available for Trans as well. I was out dressed in a restaurant some months back, and disabled was locked. In the future I will check that disabled is open when I arrive. " The disabled loos are great - so much space. But often you need a key that is restricted to blue badge holders | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The law is an ass! Sometimes there needs to be some common sense shown but the law makes no sense. Do we need to have 'Gents', 'Ladies' and 'Others' now? We already do..." Disabled." These 3rd facilities already exist. Surely easy enough to relabel then available for Trans as well. I was out dressed in a restaurant some months back, and disabled was locked. In the future I will check that disabled is open when I arrive. The disabled loos are great - so much space. But often you need a key that is restricted to blue badge holders" What does a trans badge look like ... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The law is an ass! Sometimes there needs to be some common sense shown but the law makes no sense. Do we need to have 'Gents', 'Ladies' and 'Others' now? We already do..." Disabled." These 3rd facilities already exist. Surely easy enough to relabel then available for Trans as well. I was out dressed in a restaurant some months back, and disabled was locked. In the future I will check that disabled is open when I arrive. The disabled loos are great - so much space. But often you need a key that is restricted to blue badge holders What does a trans badge look like ..." It’s blue but identifies as Pink | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A man walks into a toilet my granddaughter or daughters in please expect some pain So a mam goes in to just use the toilet, nothing else, no ulterior motive and you want to assault him? Some people are really fucked in the head. Don't think that is what he meant at all. Guess he meant that if a man goes into a Ladies toilet, despite a Gents toilet being readily available, then he could expect 'consequences'. A genuine mistake fair enough [remember a club years ago with a cowboy theme and the toilet doors said Steers or Heifers which confused non-country folk] but if he goes in there for 'predatory' reasons then that might be another matter. NOT that I am condoning violence." Oh it clearly is what he meant and no denying it. And your excuses for what was said are laughable. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" The prefix CIS was made Redundant last week in the Supreme Court. A Man is a Biological Man A Woman is a Biological Woman. " I absolutely hate the prefix "CIS". I find it offensive to be referred to as such. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why would it bother me? She is hardly going to stand at the urinal trough with me is she? " If she did I’d be impressed more than anything | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Keep womens toilets for women, and make men's toilets unisex or gender neutral. I've enjoyed watching a few women using the urinals. "You are obviously joking or pervy. Most men, and especially gay men, value their men only spaces and do not want women invading them. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why would it bother me? She is hardly going to stand at the urinal trough with me is she? If she did I’d be impressed more than anything " Lol.. Me too, very impressed. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"No But she might be " I hope the police are keeping an eye on you. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"No man has the right to decide this on behalf of all women. " No, it's the owner of the service who decides what the rules are on their premises | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"There are going to be stories about cis women who people misread as trans getting attacked in toilets as well." There is no such thing as a CIS woman. There are women & There are men The whole Trans rights debate was lost by the militant, bearded crossdresser brigade. Genuine trans-men & women, have had their worlds blown apart by a ruling that was never needed. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Oh, and the guidance also says trans men are to be barred from entering men-only or gay-only premises - presumably saunas and the like " Utter nonsense, entry to a members only premises is entirely at the discretion of the proprietor. As for a Gay/Bi sauna it is anyone who is 'obviously' a female that they would not wish to enter. There are a small number of FTM who go to my local sauna, they are very welome and will remain so. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"No man has the right to decide this on behalf of all women. No, it's the owner of the service who decides what the rules are on their premises " The law of the land decides the provision of services on publicly accessible business premises and facilities for employees. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Oh, and the guidance also says trans men are to be barred from entering men-only or gay-only premises - presumably saunas and the like Utter nonsense, entry to a members only premises is entirely at the discretion of the proprietor. As for a Gay/Bi sauna it is anyone who is 'obviously' a female that they would not wish to enter. There are a small number of FTM who go to my local sauna, they are very welome and will remain so. " I understand that. I do get the impression the EHRC is over-reaching now in the opposite direction, to offset the over-reach of the equality industry in the other direction. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Oh, and the guidance also says trans men are to be barred from entering men-only or gay-only premises - presumably saunas and the like Utter nonsense, entry to a members only premises is entirely at the discretion of the proprietor. As for a Gay/Bi sauna it is anyone who is 'obviously' a female that they would not wish to enter. There are a small number of FTM who go to my local sauna, they are very welome and will remain so. I understand that. I do get the impression the EHRC is over-reaching now in the opposite direction, to offset the over-reach of the equality industry in the other direction." The pendulum swings, hopefully it will come to a stop at a sensible place. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"No man has the right to decide this on behalf of all women. No, it's the owner of the service who decides what the rules are on their premises " Correct. Years ago I was running a pub. There were complaints about some of the younger clientele using the wrong toilets i.e. girls going into the Gents and lads going into the Ladies. I clamped down on it big time. Barred a couple of lads and issued a warning that anyone else abusing the toilet regulations would be barred. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"No man has the right to decide this on behalf of all women. No, it's the owner of the service who decides what the rules are on their premises Correct. Years ago I was running a pub. There were complaints about some of the younger clientele using the wrong toilets i.e. girls going into the Gents and lads going into the Ladies. I clamped down on it big time. Barred a couple of lads and issued a warning that anyone else abusing the toilet regulations would be barred." As the proprietor, had you chosen not to enforce sex segregation in the toilets you would have left yourself open to losing your license or a prosecution under sex discrimination law. Watch, as there is likely to be some cases to test the enforcement, following this recent clarification from the supreme court. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"No man has the right to decide this on behalf of all women. No, it's the owner of the service who decides what the rules are on their premises Correct. Years ago I was running a pub. There were complaints about some of the younger clientele using the wrong toilets i.e. girls going into the Gents and lads going into the Ladies. I clamped down on it big time. Barred a couple of lads and issued a warning that anyone else abusing the toilet regulations would be barred. As the proprietor, had you chosen not to enforce sex segregation in the toilets you would have left yourself open to losing your license or a prosecution under sex discrimination law. Watch, as there is likely to be some cases to test the enforcement, following this recent clarification from the supreme court. " The Equality Act 2010, which consolidated all the previous acts, include the Sex Discrimination Act, is a civil act, not criminal law. The requirement in planning law on service providers is to ensure adequate provision of toilet facilities for customers. Beyond that, it is down to the proprietor to set their own rules. The Act becomes relevant where a customer decides to seek compensation - in a civil claim - because their protected characteristic was discriminated against. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"There are going to be stories about cis women who people misread as trans getting attacked in toilets as well. There is no such thing as a CIS woman. There are women & There are men The whole Trans rights debate was lost by the militant, bearded crossdresser brigade. Genuine trans-men & women, have had their worlds blown apart by a ruling that was never needed." If there's no such thing as the word cis, there no trans people. Just admit you don't want them to exist. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"There are going to be stories about cis women who people misread as trans getting attacked in toilets as well. There is no such thing as a CIS woman. There are women & There are men The whole Trans rights debate was lost by the militant, bearded crossdresser brigade. Genuine trans-men & women, have had their worlds blown apart by a ruling that was never needed. If there's no such thing as the word cis, there no trans people. Just admit you don't want them to exist." The idea we should end useful descriptive language in some conversations is so insanely stupid to me. It is useful in a conversation about trans people to sometimes use the word cis. It's a clarification of meaning | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"No man has the right to decide this on behalf of all women. No, it's the owner of the service who decides what the rules are on their premises Correct. Years ago I was running a pub. There were complaints about some of the younger clientele using the wrong toilets i.e. girls going into the Gents and lads going into the Ladies. I clamped down on it big time. Barred a couple of lads and issued a warning that anyone else abusing the toilet regulations would be barred. As the proprietor, had you chosen not to enforce sex segregation in the toilets you would have left yourself open to losing your license or a prosecution under sex discrimination law. Watch, as there is likely to be some cases to test the enforcement, following this recent clarification from the supreme court. The Equality Act 2010, which consolidated all the previous acts, include the Sex Discrimination Act, is a civil act, not criminal law. The requirement in planning law on service providers is to ensure adequate provision of toilet facilities for customers. Beyond that, it is down to the proprietor to set their own rules. The Act becomes relevant where a customer decides to seek compensation - in a civil claim - because their protected characteristic was discriminated against." Yes, you won't go to jail but good luck being allowed to run a pub again and paying the six figure settlement. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I've been visiting straight venues dressed for 20 years or so ....toilets have never been an issue,womens toilets are cubicles and the only thing we share ...and fight over lol is the mirrors! If I'm expected to use the gents,stand at the urinals in strappy heels and have the guy next to me pissing all over my feet....then they're sadly mistaken ! " Yes,....many of men on here seem to equate toilets with something sexual...the possibility of some sexual contact taking place.Redolent of the 'cottaging' days? All I do is have a wee,check my hair and makeup,in the privacy of the private cubicle,wash my hands and leave. Here's a weird one for you.There used to be some place down Watchet way...Somerset...a bit hi di hi...camp site...static caravans etc.Week long event...was ok ish. The ladies loos were about 9 or 10 cubicles...but only the first 3 were designated for use by trans?. Maybe they were worried that we might piss on the seat . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A couple of grand is the going rate for a compensation claim - the value of the harm to someone’s feelings" Let's see. This is a hot topic (likely to incur some "setting an example" judgements) and wouldn't want to be the one defying the supreme court. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"No man has the right to decide this on behalf of all women. No, it's the owner of the service who decides what the rules are on their premises Correct. Years ago I was running a pub. There were complaints about some of the younger clientele using the wrong toilets i.e. girls going into the Gents and lads going into the Ladies. I clamped down on it big time. Barred a couple of lads and issued a warning that anyone else abusing the toilet regulations would be barred. As the proprietor, had you chosen not to enforce sex segregation in the toilets you would have left yourself open to losing your license or a prosecution under sex discrimination law. Watch, as there is likely to be some cases to test the enforcement, following this recent clarification from the supreme court. The Equality Act 2010, which consolidated all the previous acts, include the Sex Discrimination Act, is a civil act, not criminal law. The requirement in planning law on service providers is to ensure adequate provision of toilet facilities for customers. Beyond that, it is down to the proprietor to set their own rules. The Act becomes relevant where a customer decides to seek compensation - in a civil claim - because their protected characteristic was discriminated against." At the time I am talking about, pub licences were still being granted by magistrates after the prospective licensee had been interviewed and vetted by the police. Complaints about misuse of the premises could be made to the police--no doubt still can--and if the police thought you were running a disorderly premises or house of 'ill-repute' they could apply to the magistrates to suspend or revoke your licence. Things changed a bit when licencing was transferred from the courts to the council but infringements can still be complained about, investigated and, if serious enough, lead to licence revocation. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’d just show her my cock and see if she wants to blow me." Found the predator and it’s a cis man | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"No as not too many cases of women sexual assulting men so wouldn't feel threatened, but can see why a women wouldn't want a man in a women's toilet And only time I see it is a busy bar when not enough women's cubicles " Are there many examples of trans women assaulting women? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’d just show her my cock and see if she wants to blow me. Found the predator and it’s a cis man "And all he would need to become magically safe is a nice frock.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"No as not too many cases of women sexual assulting men so wouldn't feel threatened, but can see why a women wouldn't want a man in a women's toilet And only time I see it is a busy bar when not enough women's cubicles Are there many examples of trans women assaulting women?" I've worked in bars and been sexually assaulted by Women, on many occasions. And no, I didn't enjoy getting grabbed by a dr unk pig. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A sex offender is already breaking the law and risking a lengthy prison sentence as well as their life generally being ruined. They do it anyway. They don’t need an outfit to do it. If they did use an outfit, it’d be a cleaner’s uniform and a mop, or just become a copper." Yes, however the dress gives unencumbered access to a space, without security cameras, that women get naked/are more vulnerable. And a legal opportunity to participate in voyeurism and exhibitionism. Or at least it used to, until the Supreme Court clarified the reasoning behind providing single biological sex segregated spaces. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A sex offender is already breaking the law and risking a lengthy prison sentence as well as their life generally being ruined. They do it anyway. They don’t need an outfit to do it. If they did use an outfit, it’d be a cleaner’s uniform and a mop, or just become a copper. Yes, however the dress gives unencumbered access to a space, without security cameras, that women get naked/are more vulnerable. And a legal opportunity to participate in voyeurism and exhibitionism. Or at least it used to, until the Supreme Court clarified the reasoning behind providing single biological sex segregated spaces. " Well, now they don’t need a dress. Just identify as a trans man and the guidance you support means they can pop into the ladies. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A sex offender is already breaking the law and risking a lengthy prison sentence as well as their life generally being ruined. They do it anyway. They don’t need an outfit to do it. If they did use an outfit, it’d be a cleaner’s uniform and a mop, or just become a copper. Yes, however the dress gives unencumbered access to a space, without security cameras, that women get naked/are more vulnerable. And a legal opportunity to participate in voyeurism and exhibitionism. Or at least it used to, until the Supreme Court clarified the reasoning behind providing single biological sex segregated spaces. Well, now they don’t need a dress. Just identify as a trans man and the guidance you support means they can pop into the ladies. " No, that would be illegal. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The really bizarre bit is that a trans man who looks TOO masculine can also be prohibited from entering the women's loos. Same goes for a trans woman that looks too feminine, they can be prohibited from entering the men's loos. Have they really thought this through? Increase the number of disabled toilets allocate them a dual use. Everyone wins." Except the disabled | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If I'm in a mood to attack women. I know what I'll do! Dress up so I stand out as a tv and go in the ladies, in a pub where I could easily be set upon when I come out. That's the previous risk. Or... Look like a man with feminine ISH features and go into the ladies as a trans man. That's the new risk. I don't see how safety has been advanced tbh. " Women now have the Law on their side if they see someone suspicious. They won't be convicted of phobic hate crimes. Unfortunately, yes, there will be some mis-identification. Unfortunately a pendulum swing was inevitable. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A sex offender is already breaking the law and risking a lengthy prison sentence as well as their life generally being ruined. They do it anyway. They don’t need an outfit to do it. If they did use an outfit, it’d be a cleaner’s uniform and a mop, or just become a copper. Yes, however the dress gives unencumbered access to a space, without security cameras, that women get naked/are more vulnerable. And a legal opportunity to participate in voyeurism and exhibitionism. Or at least it used to, until the Supreme Court clarified the reasoning behind providing single biological sex segregated spaces. Well, now they don’t need a dress. Just identify as a trans man and the guidance you support means they can pop into the ladies. No, that would be illegal. " These new rules you like require people who LOOK like men to use the women’s loos. Now you appear to be saying someone who LOOKs like a man cannot enter the women’s loos. Please make up your mind. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, however the dress gives unencumbered access to a space, without security cameras, that women get naked/are more vulnerable. And a legal opportunity to participate in voyeurism and exhibitionism. Or at least it used to, until the Supreme Court clarified the reasoning behind providing single biological sex segregated spaces. " A dress never gave anyone access to anything. People can just walk in, there’s literally nothing to stop that. It’s then up to the people inside the space to object if they feel the need to (and can). That might be based on looks and it might be based on behaviour. If an obviously cis man walks into a women’s toilet, the women will object. If a lesbian or bisexual woman was to walk into a women’s toilet and do something inappropriate, the other women will object. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"A sex offender is already breaking the law and risking a lengthy prison sentence as well as their life generally being ruined. They do it anyway. They don’t need an outfit to do it. If they did use an outfit, it’d be a cleaner’s uniform and a mop, or just become a copper. Yes, however the dress gives unencumbered access to a space, without security cameras, that women get naked/are more vulnerable. And a legal opportunity to participate in voyeurism and exhibitionism. Or at least it used to, until the Supreme Court clarified the reasoning behind providing single biological sex segregated spaces. Well, now they don’t need a dress. Just identify as a trans man and the guidance you support means they can pop into the ladies. No, that would be illegal. These new rules you like require people who LOOK like men to use the women’s loos. Now you appear to be saying someone who LOOKs like a man cannot enter the women’s loos. Please make up your mind. " You always assume the worst in people. It's not my law, it's not my mess. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, however the dress gives unencumbered access to a space, without security cameras, that women get naked/are more vulnerable. And a legal opportunity to participate in voyeurism and exhibitionism. Or at least it used to, until the Supreme Court clarified the reasoning behind providing single biological sex segregated spaces. A dress never gave anyone access to anything. People can just walk in, there’s literally nothing to stop that. It’s then up to the people inside the space to object if they feel the need to (and can). That might be based on looks and it might be based on behaviour. If an obviously cis man walks into a women’s toilet, the women will object. If a lesbian or bisexual woman was to walk into a women’s toilet and do something inappropriate, the other women will object. " The clarification of the law now empowers women to challenge anyone regardless of how they dress. That clarity had been deliberately obfuscated, by trans-rights activist organisations before now. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Law it is NOT. It is guidance. Service providers can choose to ignore it, and plenty already are. I imagine self-confident trans people will also ignore it. Tits out, shoulders back, chin up ".... .... ... Knees Up Mother Brown 🥳 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Law it is NOT. It is guidance. Service providers can choose to ignore it, and plenty already are. I imagine self-confident trans people will also ignore it. Tits out, shoulders back, chin up "The problem has never been genuine trans people the problem has been the widening of the definition of trans to include fetishist cross-dressing straight men, and the attempt to redefine woman. That's where the push-back originated and was justified. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, however the dress gives unencumbered access to a space, without security cameras, that women get naked/are more vulnerable. And a legal opportunity to participate in voyeurism and exhibitionism. Or at least it used to, until the Supreme Court clarified the reasoning behind providing single biological sex segregated spaces. A dress never gave anyone access to anything. People can just walk in, there’s literally nothing to stop that. It’s then up to the people inside the space to object if they feel the need to (and can). That might be based on looks and it might be based on behaviour. If an obviously cis man walks into a women’s toilet, the women will object. If a lesbian or bisexual woman was to walk into a women’s toilet and do something inappropriate, the other women will object. The clarification of the law now empowers women to challenge anyone regardless of how they dress. That clarity had been deliberately obfuscated, by trans-rights activist organisations before now. " Which is my point exactly. The trans man will want to stay at home rather than be beaten up for doing what the EHRC wants now. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" The clarification of the law now empowers women to challenge anyone regardless of how they dress. That clarity had been deliberately obfuscated, by trans-rights activist organisations before now. Which is my point exactly. The trans man will want to stay at home rather than be beaten up for doing what the EHRC wants now. " The mess was created by the expansion of the definition of trans. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Oh, I agree with that. I argued years ago with activists they were pushing water up a hill bringing transvestites and cross dressers under the umbrella of “trans woman” and beating up anyone who dared point out the flaw with their “trans women are women” mantra. The water is flooding back down now, and catching in its torrent ordinary decent trans people who wanted nothing to do with their activism." And we still need to keep very vigilant and sceptical about what is included within the Q+ that was appended to LGBT. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"No man has the right to decide this on behalf of all women. No, it's the owner of the service who decides what the rules are on their premises Correct. Years ago I was running a pub. There were complaints about some of the younger clientele using the wrong toilets i.e. girls going into the Gents and lads going into the Ladies. I clamped down on it big time. Barred a couple of lads and issued a warning that anyone else abusing the toilet regulations would be barred. As the proprietor, had you chosen not to enforce sex segregation in the toilets you would have left yourself open to losing your license or a prosecution under sex discrimination law. Watch, as there is likely to be some cases to test the enforcement, following this recent clarification from the supreme court. The Equality Act 2010, which consolidated all the previous acts, include the Sex Discrimination Act, is a civil act, not criminal law. The requirement in planning law on service providers is to ensure adequate provision of toilet facilities for customers. Beyond that, it is down to the proprietor to set their own rules. The Act becomes relevant where a customer decides to seek compensation - in a civil claim - because their protected characteristic was discriminated against. Yes, you won't go to jail but good luck being allowed to run a pub again and paying the six figure settlement. " Just stick a unisex label on the door. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Oh, I agree with that. I argued years ago with activists they were pushing water up a hill bringing transvestites and cross dressers under the umbrella of “trans woman” and beating up anyone who dared point out the flaw with their “trans women are women” mantra. The water is flooding back down now, and catching in its torrent ordinary decent trans people who wanted nothing to do with their activism."
Totally agree. Years ago I too foresaw the inevitable backlash coming against the militant activists. It was only a matter of time before their rhetoric and bullying would be tolerated no more.
Like you, I only hope the hard-won reasonable everyday rights, for the average LGBT individual just wanting to quietly live their life, are now not swept aside by the upcoming reset. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
