The court ruling sounds reasonable. Cis women might not be comfortable around trans women in female only spaces and saying “just get over it” isn’t really progressive. Denial that there is a genuine conflict of interest here is also counterproductive.
We also need to recognize that the median voter is supportive of trans rights in general but tends not to be on specific issues. Trying to brute force it with government policy will likely have the opposite effect.
The concern is if this ends up extending the ability to exclude trans women from women-only spaces to places which are “generally” gender segregated like bathrooms or team sports. If we end up without measures that protect the right of trans women to participate in society then that would be unacceptable.
It’s not bigotry for women to be uncomfortable around men in women only space. While I try my best to treat trans women as women, it’s not right to demand that women feel as comfortable around trans women as they do around cis women.
Tenderizer literally called transwomen men. That’s pretty textbook bigotry. Not sure what you’re complaining about here, apart from the fact that Taleya called it what it was.
I did not. I was referred to cis men in that sentence, to explain why the term bigotry doesn’t apply to matters of privacy. Either way treating that as some kind of gotcha is so very expected.
Oh dear. Please don’t try that martyred crap. There is a very clear line of conversational progression here and you literally said "It’s not bigotry for women to be uncomfortable around men in women only space. "
I understand that you’re coming at this from a reasonable place, but this comment seems unusually hostile in a way your previous comments weren’t. I understand what you’re saying about the role of emotions, but we have to decide as a society that your emotions end where others’ rights begin, otherwise we could go down a very dark path. Racists could easily argue that banning indigenous ppl from white society is valid because they have their own indigenous communities.
My tone was probably a bit harsh because I was getting frustrated with how dogmatic the “trans women are women” crowd is. Yes we should individually treat them as such, the law should also treat them as such, but drawing a legal line that they should be treated as such is a step too far.
The needs to trans people should be accommodated. But the preferences of the more dogmatic trans people should not be respected at any cost, there has to be room for another’s comfort.
My tone was probably a bit harsh because I was getting frustrated
You poor thing. A marginalised, discriminated group at risk of losing even more of their rights keeps arguing with you, instead of just accepting inequality. That must be frustrating for you
My concern isn’t with transgender people, it’s with transgenderism as a religion. The kind that sees anyone who does not share the same beliefs as them to be the devil incarnate, and will go on holy crusades to impose that view on others.
And often the most dogmatic aren’t even trans themselves. They take a radical position, dunk on anyone who disagrees with them, and think that makes them a hero.
I support the right of trans women to exist in society. I also support the right for them to be treated as women, but I don’t support that view being imposed on others especially by force of law. I don’t think it even qualifies transphobia to not see trans women as women, that’s just a social faux pass.
I am a trans woman myself so I understand how they feel. We’re an inherently small part of the population and there’s an extreme sense of vulnerability that comes with that. I think you’d understand if you were part of the demographic. I’m sorry that you feel frustrated though, truly, because I know that you mean well.
Once again I understand what you’re saying and acknowledge that you’re not coming at this from a place of malice (at least that’s how I see it). That being said, I’ve never met anyone who actually had some of kind phobia of people assigned male at birth (AMAB), or trans women specifically, in the context that you’re describing. I think it’s a wedge issue that causes people to feel strongly without there really being much rational basis for it, which I think you acknowledged to an extent? We can’t base laws off feelings or extremely rare cases where the person’s true intentions can be challenged. In my experience, the only people who express any kind of fear of AMAB people are activists involved in groups that claim to focus on women’s issues who have an incentive to advocate for transphobia. Sometimes they have financial connections to American evangelical groups, that sorta thing. Rape survivors don’t tend to have that opinion in my experience, although maybe you’ve met some who thought differently, idk. Either way, I have to say from a personal experience that I don’t want my rights taken away based off such weak arguments, and in the case of the US and UK, they rarely stop at segregated spaces, they usually try to remove us completely from public life in an attempt to force us to detransition.
We’ve seen as a result of this court ruling in favour of trans rights that Minns is calling for changes around prisons and sports. Then again in the UK we’re seeing a court ruling against trans rights do the same (although UK Labour, and especially health secretary Wes Streeting, are particularly vile human beings so that might not be a factor).
Based on these two data points, we see trans rights regress when there is a highly publicized court ruling. Keeping matters of trans rights out of the domain of the courts seems like the best way to prevent this from happening.
Enshrining the most important trans rights into law (bathrooms, healthcare, prisons, and general anti-discrimination protections) while leaving issues like gender segregated social activities up to the organizer’s discretion is the best way to protect trans rights.
It’s not so much being invisible as it is avoiding highly publicized debates between “women’s groups” and trans people. There are other, safer, spaces to be visible.
CisWhite women might not be comfortable around trans black women in female only segregated spaces and saying ‘just get over it’ isn’t really progressive.
Also, what “true conflict of interest” exists, other than people with prejudice feeling uncomfortable? Trans people are less likely to commit crime than cis people on the whole, with the main exception being more likely to be charged with crimes realted to sex work due to unemployment.
The racial analogue doesn’t fit. The existence of women-only spaces isn’t meant to discriminate against men because men are provided comparable alternatives, and they’re only discriminatory against trans women because they’re not provided an alternative.
Trans women are women, but forcing women to emotionally react to trans women as if they were cis women is not a decision we can or should make for them. Feelings don’t care about your facts.
I’ll try to come up with some conflicts of interest of the top of my head:
Women generally prefer restrooms to be gender segregated as a matter of privacy. Trans women who don’t have the same eldritch horrors of bodies likely don’t fall under the same privacy grouping. Some places have taken the step of making all restrooms unisex but women often don’t like it when that happens.
Lesbian romantic events exist for women to meet other women, and while generally we should treat trans women as women, in no universe can or should we impose that onto people’s sexuality.
Someone who’s had a traumatic experience with men and goes to a women-only space, only to discover that someone they’ve been talking to has been AMAB all along. It could be a healing or re-traumatizing experience, but it shouldn’t be imposed upon them as a matter of trans inclusion.
While trans women aren’t necessarily better at sports than cis women, when they are it’s reasonable to think their birth sex might play a part (whether right or wrong). That thought alone discourages participation in women’s sports.
The racial analogue fits because we’re another minority group that faces discrimination. Hope that helps.
Seperate but equal, hmm, where have I heard that before?
What do your hypothetical women’s emotions have to do with segregation?
Trans women are women but we shouldn’t be allowed in women’s restrooms because we look different?
Trans women are women but what about lesbians? Because we love different?
Trans women are women but what if a women thinks I might have been a man once and freaks out about it? Because we are different?
Why should these hypothetical women’s feelings excuse discriminating against and segregating an entire demographic of women?
I know no woman who has said trans women in the bathroom make her uncomfortable. I’ve never even seen one.
A lesbians dating preference may be for gold star, should we ban women who have slept with men from lesbian spaces? A lesbian can just choose to not fucking date trans women.
The thought that someone may have been a man once. How horrible. What if she was raped by a woman? Should we ban women from women’s spaces to protect survivors?
Do you have evidence for that claim? I promise there are enough factors discouraging participation in women’s sports, funding, historical norms, cultural expectations, direct sexism, existing power structures, training opportunities, school opportunities, etc, so forth.
If i sign off as a transgender does it invalidate my feelings as a woman?
Trans women are women, but forcing women to emotionally react to trans women as if they were cis women is not a decision we can or should make for them. Feelings don’t care about your facts.
Not to medicalise this this shit but you can make the exact same argument for anyone who’s encountering a high needs neurodivergent, or someone who requires assistive devices, or someone who is heavily scarred, etc. Because the issues here are “I don’t like how they deviate from what I think X people should look like” and “I am making preconceived potential behaviours up to be “frightened” of” aka Bias.
And they can both go square back up the arse they came from. It’s not transwomen’s fault your parents never taught you humanity was diverse
Societal concepts of women certainly come from biology originally, there would be no concept of sex if there was no Y chromosome, but honestly to me: a woman is whoever identifies as woman. Just like sexuality, it’s just an innate part of who you are. Most women are female and birth, but I don’t give slightest fuck that there are women who aren’t female at birth. Just like I don’t give a fuck that there are men who are attracted to other men.
Like who cares. If your birth certificate says your name is Steve, but you go by Paul, who the fuck am I to protest that it’s not your name given to you by your parents?
The question doesn’t stump me, I just think it’s a colossal waste of time.
You can identify however you bloody like, why should I care? As long as you’re understanding if I mix up your pronouns, then it affects me literally not at all
The full answer, which is boring as hell, doesn’t prove your position - and in my opinion - is a waste of time (and I kind already stated above in other words):
Original societal concepts of what a “woman” is come from biology sex. No doubt about that. What what many consider gender now isn’t the same as that.
Same as marriage isn’t some natural phenomena. Society isn’t really “natural” either.
If someone FEELS like they are a woman, then they are to me, what more do we really NEED to define it as? What purpose can it possibly serve?
The concept of a “woman” is still vaguely based on historical ideas of what a woman is - but what a woman is isn’t some fixed concept. Women used to be seen like second class citizens without the right to vote, who should stay at home, and obey their husbands. That was what some cultures defined as being a woman.
No one’s forcing you to be attracted to a woman who was male at birth. Literally how does this affect you or anyone else?
Christ, identity politics is such a waste of time. Why do you give a shit what equipment people have in their pants? It’s weird.
Feels like a what? Define “woman” without using the word woman.
A woman is an adult human female. You can’t “feel” like a woman, you just are or are not one.
Literally how does this affect you or anyone else?
I have daughters. I have a wife. I don’t want them losing opportunities that are meant for women to males. I don’t want them sharing changing rooms or bathrooms, made for women, with males. They don’t want to because it makes them uncomfortable in a place where they should be safe and comfortable. Essentially all sexual assaults are committed by males on females. If there are no males in a female place, the females are safer than if there are.
Essentially all sexual assaults are committed by males on females.
This is the biggest brain-dead take out of all of them. Go ahead, please do find any study that shows trans women commit assaults at anywhere near the rates of cis men. Because if this is the argument you’re trying to make, you had better actually have some evidence for it.
Feels like a what? Define “woman” without using the word woman.
You keep saying this like it’s some gotcha, but clearly you haven’t read my comments. I already told you (twice) definitions do stem originally from biological sex, I’ve already conceded this from the very beginning, but that I still don’t think this matters or is a terribly convincing reason to say “nope you’re not a woman because historically our ideas of what a woman is stem entirely from DNA and your sex organs”. Agree to disagree on this I guess. Again it’s weird how you want to make sure people have vaginas.
This triggers you massively, it seems.
I have daughters. I have a wife. I don’t want them losing opportunities that are meant for women to males. I don’t want them sharing changing rooms or bathrooms, made for women, with males. They don’t want to because it makes them uncomfortable in a place where they should be safe and comfortable. Essentially all sexual assaults are committed by males on females. If there are no males in a female place, the females are safer than if there are.
As above, you’re just asserting something about safety, but I also wanted to add that 1. Changing rooms and bathrooms really should be separate stalls. It’s really weird (to me) that you’re expected to change in a room with other people in it. 2. What opportunities? Vaguely sport is the only one that could make sense to me - but we can create new categories there not based on gender too (there are weight classes in certain sports, wouldn’t be crazy to do something similar there too bases on biology, and not gender)…
Basically. Get a grip mate. This is such a tiny issue.
Identify politics is such a waste of time.
I’d much rather be talking about fighting the ruling class, they’re actually impacting our lives…
This is the biggest brain-dead take out of all of them. Go ahead, please do find any study that shows trans women commit assaults at anywhere near the rates of cis men. Because if this is the argument you’re trying to make, you had better actually have some evidence for it.
Way to miss the point. Trans women are males, therefor are significantly more likely to sexually assault a woman than a female is. Letting trans women have unfettered access to womens safe spaces is like letting a wolf into the hen house.
I already told you (twice) definitions do stem originally from biological sex, I’ve already conceded this from the very beginning, but that I still don’t think this matters or is a terribly convincing reason to say “nope you’re not a woman because historically our ideas of what a woman is stem entirely from DNA and your sex organs”.
You still can’t define what a woman is though. I’m asking you to give me your definition of “woman” without using the word woman. If you can’t it means that woman can’t be defined, and that means it essentially doesn’t exist. It erases women. It’s deeply misogynistic.
This triggers you massively, it seems.
lol good one. Right back at you buddy.
Changing rooms and bathrooms really should be separate stalls.
They are? Women don’t all just stand around peeing on the floor lol. Being separate stalls doesn’t change the fact that if you let men in to the women’s safe space, women are no longer safe. Women have to go in and out of the stalls still.
What opportunities? Vaguely sport is the only one that could make sense to me - but we can create new categories there not based on gender too (there are weight classes in certain sports, wouldn’t be crazy to do something similar there too bases on biology, and not gender)…
Women’s sport was not created because of gender, it was created because of sex. Males and females are biologically different, and women would win literally nothing if they had to compete against men - hence, Women’s sport. Go find a women’s sport world record that is even comparable to the corresponding men’s one. Good luck.
It’s not just sports either, it’s everything from scholarships to jobs to awards, and many more. Basically everything that was separated by Sex. They were done so because men and women are fundamentally different.
Basically. Get a grip mate. This is such a tiny issue.
It’s not a tiny issue for women though. If it’s such a tiny issue, why can’t trans women just use the men’s spaces? Trans women are in less danger in a men’s room than women are with a trans woman in a women’s room, factually and statistically.
I’d much rather be talking about fighting the ruling class, they’re actually impacting our lives…
It’s possible to talk about more than 1 issue at a time.
The court ruling sounds reasonable. Cis women might not be comfortable around trans women in female only spaces and saying “just get over it” isn’t really progressive. Denial that there is a genuine conflict of interest here is also counterproductive.
We also need to recognize that the median voter is supportive of trans rights in general but tends not to be on specific issues. Trying to brute force it with government policy will likely have the opposite effect.
The concern is if this ends up extending the ability to exclude trans women from women-only spaces to places which are “generally” gender segregated like bathrooms or team sports. If we end up without measures that protect the right of trans women to participate in society then that would be unacceptable.
The first paragraph here sounds unnervingly like an attempt to rationalise bigotry.
People are uncomfortable with a lot of things and it’s usually their problem, not everyone elses.
It’s not bigotry for women to be uncomfortable around men in women only space. While I try my best to treat trans women as women, it’s not right to demand that women feel as comfortable around trans women as they do around cis women.
#AND THERE IT IS.
Begone, bigot.
If you think this is bigotry then you don’t know what bigotry is.
Tenderizer literally called transwomen men. That’s pretty textbook bigotry. Not sure what you’re complaining about here, apart from the fact that Taleya called it what it was.
I did not. I was referred to cis men in that sentence, to explain why the term bigotry doesn’t apply to matters of privacy. Either way treating that as some kind of gotcha is so very expected.
Oh dear. Please don’t try that martyred crap. There is a very clear line of conversational progression here and you literally said "It’s not bigotry for women to be uncomfortable around men in women only space. "
You must be a lot of fun at parties.
Trans women are male. Saying so isn’t bigotry. Anyway that’s not even what that person said, so it’s definitely not bigotry.
I understand that you’re coming at this from a reasonable place, but this comment seems unusually hostile in a way your previous comments weren’t. I understand what you’re saying about the role of emotions, but we have to decide as a society that your emotions end where others’ rights begin, otherwise we could go down a very dark path. Racists could easily argue that banning indigenous ppl from white society is valid because they have their own indigenous communities.
My tone was probably a bit harsh because I was getting frustrated with how dogmatic the “trans women are women” crowd is. Yes we should individually treat them as such, the law should also treat them as such, but drawing a legal line that they should be treated as such is a step too far.
The needs to trans people should be accommodated. But the preferences of the more dogmatic trans people should not be respected at any cost, there has to be room for another’s comfort.
You poor thing. A marginalised, discriminated group at risk of losing even more of their rights keeps arguing with you, instead of just accepting inequality. That must be frustrating for you
My concern isn’t with transgender people, it’s with transgenderism as a religion. The kind that sees anyone who does not share the same beliefs as them to be the devil incarnate, and will go on holy crusades to impose that view on others.
And often the most dogmatic aren’t even trans themselves. They take a radical position, dunk on anyone who disagrees with them, and think that makes them a hero.
I support the right of trans women to exist in society. I also support the right for them to be treated as women, but I don’t support that view being imposed on others especially by force of law. I don’t think it even qualifies transphobia to not see trans women as women, that’s just a social faux pass.
I am a trans woman myself so I understand how they feel. We’re an inherently small part of the population and there’s an extreme sense of vulnerability that comes with that. I think you’d understand if you were part of the demographic. I’m sorry that you feel frustrated though, truly, because I know that you mean well.
Once again I understand what you’re saying and acknowledge that you’re not coming at this from a place of malice (at least that’s how I see it). That being said, I’ve never met anyone who actually had some of kind phobia of people assigned male at birth (AMAB), or trans women specifically, in the context that you’re describing. I think it’s a wedge issue that causes people to feel strongly without there really being much rational basis for it, which I think you acknowledged to an extent? We can’t base laws off feelings or extremely rare cases where the person’s true intentions can be challenged. In my experience, the only people who express any kind of fear of AMAB people are activists involved in groups that claim to focus on women’s issues who have an incentive to advocate for transphobia. Sometimes they have financial connections to American evangelical groups, that sorta thing. Rape survivors don’t tend to have that opinion in my experience, although maybe you’ve met some who thought differently, idk. Either way, I have to say from a personal experience that I don’t want my rights taken away based off such weak arguments, and in the case of the US and UK, they rarely stop at segregated spaces, they usually try to remove us completely from public life in an attempt to force us to detransition.
We’ve seen as a result of this court ruling in favour of trans rights that Minns is calling for changes around prisons and sports. Then again in the UK we’re seeing a court ruling against trans rights do the same (although UK Labour, and especially health secretary Wes Streeting, are particularly vile human beings so that might not be a factor).
Based on these two data points, we see trans rights regress when there is a highly publicized court ruling. Keeping matters of trans rights out of the domain of the courts seems like the best way to prevent this from happening.
Enshrining the most important trans rights into law (bathrooms, healthcare, prisons, and general anti-discrimination protections) while leaving issues like gender segregated social activities up to the organizer’s discretion is the best way to protect trans rights.
Fair enough, I agree with that. It’s disillusioning that the only way to be safe is to be invisible.
It’s not so much being invisible as it is avoiding highly publicized debates between “women’s groups” and trans people. There are other, safer, spaces to be visible.
It’s irrational to fear people identified as male at birth whose testosterone is suppressed
CisWhite women might not be comfortable aroundtransblack women infemale onlysegregated spaces and saying ‘just get over it’ isn’t really progressive.Also, what “true conflict of interest” exists, other than people with prejudice feeling uncomfortable? Trans people are less likely to commit crime than cis people on the whole, with the main exception being more likely to be charged with crimes realted to sex work due to unemployment.
The racial analogue doesn’t fit. The existence of women-only spaces isn’t meant to discriminate against men because men are provided comparable alternatives, and they’re only discriminatory against trans women because they’re not provided an alternative.
Trans women are women, but forcing women to emotionally react to trans women as if they were cis women is not a decision we can or should make for them. Feelings don’t care about your facts.
I’ll try to come up with some conflicts of interest of the top of my head:
The racial analogue fits because we’re another minority group that faces discrimination. Hope that helps.
Seperate but equal, hmm, where have I heard that before?
What do your hypothetical women’s emotions have to do with segregation?
Trans women are women but we shouldn’t be allowed in women’s restrooms because we look different?
Trans women are women but what about lesbians? Because we love different?
Trans women are women but what if a women thinks I might have been a man once and freaks out about it? Because we are different?
Why should these hypothetical women’s feelings excuse discriminating against and segregating an entire demographic of women?
I know no woman who has said trans women in the bathroom make her uncomfortable. I’ve never even seen one.
A lesbians dating preference may be for gold star, should we ban women who have slept with men from lesbian spaces? A lesbian can just choose to not fucking date trans women.
The thought that someone may have been a man once. How horrible. What if she was raped by a woman? Should we ban women from women’s spaces to protect survivors?
Do you have evidence for that claim? I promise there are enough factors discouraging participation in women’s sports, funding, historical norms, cultural expectations, direct sexism, existing power structures, training opportunities, school opportunities, etc, so forth.
If i sign off as a transgender does it invalidate my feelings as a woman?
Not to medicalise this this shit but you can make the exact same argument for anyone who’s encountering a high needs neurodivergent, or someone who requires assistive devices, or someone who is heavily scarred, etc. Because the issues here are “I don’t like how they deviate from what I think X people should look like” and “I am making preconceived potential behaviours up to be “frightened” of” aka Bias.
And they can both go square back up the arse they came from. It’s not transwomen’s fault your parents never taught you humanity was diverse
Two sides of lemmy:
Trans women are women
And this kind of “I swear I’m not a republican but trans women aren’t real women so it’s different” opinion…
TRANS WOMEN ARE WOMEN
What is a woman? Can you answer that without using circular definitions?
Edit: once again, the simple question has everyone stumped.
Hormones are a reasonable line to draw it on, as it is testosterone that makes men strong and which makes some men dangerous
Hormones? No lol. That’s not a reasonable line at all. That’s one of the least reasonable lines to draw it on.
Societal concepts of women certainly come from biology originally, there would be no concept of sex if there was no Y chromosome, but honestly to me: a woman is whoever identifies as woman. Just like sexuality, it’s just an innate part of who you are. Most women are female and birth, but I don’t give slightest fuck that there are women who aren’t female at birth. Just like I don’t give a fuck that there are men who are attracted to other men.
Like who cares. If your birth certificate says your name is Steve, but you go by Paul, who the fuck am I to protest that it’s not your name given to you by your parents?
The question doesn’t stump me, I just think it’s a colossal waste of time.
You can identify however you bloody like, why should I care? As long as you’re understanding if I mix up your pronouns, then it affects me literally not at all
I said without circular definitions. You can’t define the word “woman” using the word “woman”.
The full answer, which is boring as hell, doesn’t prove your position - and in my opinion - is a waste of time (and I kind already stated above in other words):
Original societal concepts of what a “woman” is come from biology sex. No doubt about that. What what many consider gender now isn’t the same as that.
Same as marriage isn’t some natural phenomena. Society isn’t really “natural” either.
If someone FEELS like they are a woman, then they are to me, what more do we really NEED to define it as? What purpose can it possibly serve?
The concept of a “woman” is still vaguely based on historical ideas of what a woman is - but what a woman is isn’t some fixed concept. Women used to be seen like second class citizens without the right to vote, who should stay at home, and obey their husbands. That was what some cultures defined as being a woman.
No one’s forcing you to be attracted to a woman who was male at birth. Literally how does this affect you or anyone else?
Christ, identity politics is such a waste of time. Why do you give a shit what equipment people have in their pants? It’s weird.
Feels like a what? Define “woman” without using the word woman.
A woman is an adult human female. You can’t “feel” like a woman, you just are or are not one.
I have daughters. I have a wife. I don’t want them losing opportunities that are meant for women to males. I don’t want them sharing changing rooms or bathrooms, made for women, with males. They don’t want to because it makes them uncomfortable in a place where they should be safe and comfortable. Essentially all sexual assaults are committed by males on females. If there are no males in a female place, the females are safer than if there are.
This is the biggest brain-dead take out of all of them. Go ahead, please do find any study that shows trans women commit assaults at anywhere near the rates of cis men. Because if this is the argument you’re trying to make, you had better actually have some evidence for it.
You keep saying this like it’s some gotcha, but clearly you haven’t read my comments. I already told you (twice) definitions do stem originally from biological sex, I’ve already conceded this from the very beginning, but that I still don’t think this matters or is a terribly convincing reason to say “nope you’re not a woman because historically our ideas of what a woman is stem entirely from DNA and your sex organs”. Agree to disagree on this I guess. Again it’s weird how you want to make sure people have vaginas.
This triggers you massively, it seems.
As above, you’re just asserting something about safety, but I also wanted to add that 1. Changing rooms and bathrooms really should be separate stalls. It’s really weird (to me) that you’re expected to change in a room with other people in it. 2. What opportunities? Vaguely sport is the only one that could make sense to me - but we can create new categories there not based on gender too (there are weight classes in certain sports, wouldn’t be crazy to do something similar there too bases on biology, and not gender)…
Basically. Get a grip mate. This is such a tiny issue.
Identify politics is such a waste of time.
I’d much rather be talking about fighting the ruling class, they’re actually impacting our lives…
Way to miss the point. Trans women are males, therefor are significantly more likely to sexually assault a woman than a female is. Letting trans women have unfettered access to womens safe spaces is like letting a wolf into the hen house.
You still can’t define what a woman is though. I’m asking you to give me your definition of “woman” without using the word woman. If you can’t it means that woman can’t be defined, and that means it essentially doesn’t exist. It erases women. It’s deeply misogynistic.
lol good one. Right back at you buddy.
They are? Women don’t all just stand around peeing on the floor lol. Being separate stalls doesn’t change the fact that if you let men in to the women’s safe space, women are no longer safe. Women have to go in and out of the stalls still.
Women’s sport was not created because of gender, it was created because of sex. Males and females are biologically different, and women would win literally nothing if they had to compete against men - hence, Women’s sport. Go find a women’s sport world record that is even comparable to the corresponding men’s one. Good luck.
It’s not just sports either, it’s everything from scholarships to jobs to awards, and many more. Basically everything that was separated by Sex. They were done so because men and women are fundamentally different.
It’s not a tiny issue for women though. If it’s such a tiny issue, why can’t trans women just use the men’s spaces? Trans women are in less danger in a men’s room than women are with a trans woman in a women’s room, factually and statistically.
It’s possible to talk about more than 1 issue at a time.