Sexual assault at high school in the State of Virginia.

The 5 cases I gave that involved bathrooms were 5 cases of males attacking females in bathrooms they had access to.

I don't claim any "wonderful increase in safety". I claim that safeguarding is important and I'm not prepared to sacrifice it on the altar of hurt feelings.

As you know, having been in these discussions with me before, I am not averse to using "trans woman/women" to describe trans women, but in this instance my post was about the threat that is posed by male-pattern criminal behaviour. I therefore consider it pertinent to emphasise that the people I'm talking about, and the people committing the crimes, are male. Find it as "gross" as you like.

Gosh. Imagine that.

And most of them were gender neutral bathroom. Your actual claim was that people could identify men entering a woman’s bathroom and raise safety concerns. And you very specifically said women’s bathrooms

but this cannot happen when the bathrooms are for both men and women. And this was the case in the majority of your examples. And out of the 2 remaining examples one only makes sense if you are proposing that people should interfere if they see anyone they suspect of being male (including someone who presented as female) entering a women’s bathroom.

this will lead to masculine presenting cis women being humiliated as someone interferes with them trying to use the bathroom. Is this what you want?

I’ve never actually mentioned you as a cis man that’s all in your head but ok.

Can you point to anywhere I called you a cis man?

To be clear, I don't agree with gender-neutral bathrooms and changing rooms either, unless they are very securely self contained with sink/shower inside a lockable, floor-to-ceiling walled room/cubicle. See the article I posted about 50% of sexual assaults in changing rooms taking place in the 10% of them that are gender neutral/mixed sex. Or about "trans" prisoners (of which I have already stated I think at least some—and more likely those committing sexual assaults—are "pretending" to be trans to gain access to women's jails) being five times more likely to carry out sex attacks on inmates in women's jails than other prisoners are.

Emotionally manipulative framing aside, I am very sceptical that this would be the case, but feel free to send me the myriad examples that must exist from the last century-ish of single-sex facilities being in effect.

In any case, I reiterate my point that, while I have sympathy for those whose feelings are hurt, I value hurt feelings less than the physical safety of the women and children using the facilities. I've been mistaken for a man more than once in the past when I've had cropped hair and it's not a big deal. I said "I'm a woman" or "it's Ms." and that was that.

The answer to your question of course is: If you allow males into female spaces or make all spaces mixed sex, it will lead to more women and children being raped and assaulted. Is this what you want?

People are offended by cis because it implies that biological women are merely a subset of women, and that the other part of that subset are biological men. It makes women into a subcategory of “not-men”.

That view of women as “not-men”, ie, not a category in their own right has been offensive to women for centuries now, since the dawning of the concept of women’s rights.

You can keep inventing other versions of your claim but the above is the real problem. For the women I know anyway, including myself.

You’re either unaware of, or you’re misconstruing the original intent of “women’s spaces”, which had nothing to do with safeguarding women and children. They were created specifically for the purpose of limiting women’s equal participation in public life, in much the same way as “third spaces” are now being proposed for people who are transgender with the effect of limiting their equal participation in public life.

Prohibiting men from entering women’s spaces will have no effect whatsoever on the number of sexual assaults committed by sexual predators whether it be in single-sex, gender-neutral, unisex whatever environments. It has had no effect in the past, as has been clearly demonstrated by the number of sexual predators who don’t particularly care for social norms, it would have no effect in the future. All it is in reality is an attempt to limit the equal participation of people who are transgender in public life, and as has been pointed out already - the idea would have a greater impact upon women who do not conform to someone else’s idea of what a woman should look like. I can think of no better example than that of Playboy model Danni Mathers behaviour upon witnessing an elderly woman whom she regarded as aesthetically unpleasant, and invaded her privacy to publicly humiliate her -

Your nonsense about the “clergy abusing people’s trust” also conveniently appears to overlook the fact that women and girls were routinely abused and mistreated in “Mother and Baby Homes”, run by nuns, supported by the State - women and girls who were regarded in polite society as “undesirables” were sent there to keep them out of sight, while men were sent to prisons which were never intended to accommodate women in the first place, and men, women and children were sent to reform schools and institutions where they were routinely subjected to humiliating, degrading physical, mental and sexual abuse.

In discussions on boards it's being used by several posters along with terf and bigotry , despite repeatedly being asked not to ,yet the same people spamming reports to get mod actions whenever the conversation isn't going their way which is pretty much every conversation.

Ahh sure, don’t mind if I do 😏

The claim about unisex facilities comes from data received from a freedom of information request by the Sunday Times in the UK. In the article they do not state either the sex of the complainants, or the alleged perpetrators. It’s simply taken as a given by some people that the complainants were women and girls, and the alleged perpetrators were men and boys -

If it sounds preposterous to suggest that either the complainants could have been men and boys, or the alleged perpetrators could have been women, you might want to hold onto your seat for this next bit.

”Fair Play for Women” in the UK are an advocacy organisation who are well-known for purposely presenting statistics in a misleading way in order to support their own aims. Following a BBC report which found that the number of female perpetrators of sexual abuse of children has doubled in four years, the organisation tried to claim that it was because the perpetrators of sexual abuse of children were actually men who were being recorded by police as female. However, upon reading the article, it is quite clear that it is the victims who reported the sex of their abuser as being female. The police were not responsible for “Fair Play for Women” choosing to misrepresent the data -

So that leans into your idea of “male pattern violence”, and I should point out that the term is completely meaningless without context, so in the context of the number of men there are in society, and the number of those men who commit sexual violence, RAINN, which is the biggest organisation in the US which advocates for victims of sexual violence, is quite adamant to point out that such nebulous terms as “male pattern violence”, are unhelpful, and for very good reason -

Perpetrators of Campus Sexual Assault: What We Know

In the last few years, there has been an unfortunate trend towards blaming “rape culture” for the extensive problem of sexual violence on campuses. While it is helpful to point out the systemic barriers to addressing the problem, it is important to not lose sight of a simple fact: Rape is caused not by cultural factors but by the conscious decisions, of a small percentage of the community, to commit a violent crime.

While that may seem an obvious point, it has tended to get lost in recent debates. This has led to an inclination to focus on particular segments of the student population (e.g., athletes), particular aspects of campus culture (e.g., the Greek system), or traits that are common in many millions of law-abiding Americans (e.g., “masculinity”), rather than on the subpopulation at fault: those who choose to commit rape. This trend has the paradoxical effect of making it harder to stop sexual violence, since it removes the focus from the individual at fault, and seemingly mitigates personal responsibility for his or her own actions.

By the time they reach college, most students have been exposed to 18 years of prevention messages, in one form or another. Thanks to repeated messages from parents, religious leaders, teachers, coaches, the media and, yes, the culture at large, the overwhelming majority of these young adults have learned right from wrong, and enter college knowing that rape falls squarely in the latter category.

Research supports the view that to focus solely on certain social groups or “types” of students in the effort to end campus sexual violence is a mistake. Dr. David Lisak estimates that three percent of college men are responsible for more than 90% of rapes.iii Other studies suggest that between 3-7% of college men have committed an act of sexual violence or would consider doing so. It is this relatively small percentage of the population, which has proven itself immune to years of prevention messages, that we must address in other ways. (Unfortunately, we are not aware of reliable research on female college perpetrators.)

Consider, as well, the findings of another studyiv by Dr. Lisak and colleagues, which surveyed 1,882 male college students and determined that 120 of them were rapists. Of those determined to be rapists, the majority — 63% — were repeat offenders who admitted to committing multiple sexual assaults.v Overall, they found that each offender committed an average of 5.8 sexual assaults.vi Again, this research supports the fact that more than 90% of college-age males do not, and are unlikely to ever, rape. In fact, we have found that they’re ready and eager to be engaged on these issues. It’s the other guys (and, sometimes, women) who are the problem.

TL;DR version? Men are more than just a dildo with a meat sack attached to the other end of it, as they are so often characterised in these discussions as though our penises are our defining attribute.

I can’t speak for other men, but I like to think of myself as a bit more useful than just a carry-case for a dildo. In fact, I distinctly remember a discussion on Boards where I was surprised by the number of men who would not offer assistance to a girl or a woman who was in a clear state of distress, for fear that they would be accused by her of improper behaviour towards her (generally the impression was that they were terrified of being accused by her of rape!)

I was reminded of this when you spoke earlier of how it is among your circle of friends that you all look out for each other. I figured that’s what most people do anyway, and then I remembered that conversation. I also remembered the number of times I’d be approached by a girl in the club asking me to pretend to be her boyfriend as she was trying to shake off some weirdo (words to that effect anyways). I didn’t have the heart to tell them they were probably safer with the other guy, because if their intention was to avoid weirdos - they’d just gone from the frying pan into the fire 😂

But you’re right about approaching security staff, they’re generally a safer bet than some randomer you’ve only just met. It’s just that you’re walking into another conundrum when the security staff are also, generally speaking, dildos with meat sacks attached to the other end, more commonly known as men, or males, if you prefer? You didn’t specify in your post the sex of the security staff in question, but in my experience, there aren’t that many security staff in clubs who are women.

I’m open to the idea that your experience differs greatly from mine and you are surrounded by women working security when you and your mates hit the clubs for a night out, then unless one of you is the designated driver, you get a taxi home with a woman driver, just to be reassured of your safety so that you don’t end up in the same position as this woman following her encounter with the man who was a member of security staff who sexually assaulted her -

Millions of people who are not nearly so ‘savvy’ and ‘worldly-wise’ as you and your friends are, are the victims of a tiny minority of people in society who abuse their trust. In reality, you’re not preventing anyone from being the victim of another person who makes the conscious decision to attack them. All you’re doing is perpetuating the misguided notion among victims of sexual violence that they could somehow have prevented something happening that they never could have predicted would happen in the first place. All you’re doing is inducing anxiety among people that requires them to imagine they are somehow responsible for someone else’s actions.

Oh, and as for your “fact that by UK statistics, "transwomen" commit sexual assault in prisons five times more than other inmates in women's prisons”? The Judge in this particular case addressed that -

In a judgement handed down via email, Lord Justice Holroyde accepted the statistical evidence showed the proportion of trans prisoners convicted of sexual offences was "substantially higher" than for non-transgender men and women prisoners

But he said the lawyers' claims about the risk of sexual assault were a "misuse of the statistics, which... are so low in number, and so lacking in detail, that they are an unsafe basis for general conclusions".

The risk is in fact so low, that women who are of the belief that men pose a threat to their safety are having to engineer circumstances where they can make the point that “male violence” is a threat to women and girls. It’s not quite working out as they had expected, in fact it’s proving to be quite the opposite in reality -

In response to their online petition, which only gathered 13,000 of the required 100,000 signatures among a population of 68 million people, the Government made clear the terms of the Equality Acts in the UK -

Yeah that's what I said. They're not really offended by the word they actually don't want the concept expressed at all.

Which is ironic given that it's TRAs that are accused by them of trying to shut down the argument. 🙄

Anyway they're not going to succeed in having the expression of the concept that is core to the debate banned so why bother?