****The All In One LGBTQ+ & Related Issues Mega Thread****

[doctor jambo]

2 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

An inconvenient truth 

if they were women. like actually women, why are they 400 times more likely to be sex offenders.

and why are trans women 3 time more likely to be sex offenders than mere men?

Those are shocking statistics

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

35 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

if they were women. like actually women, why are they 400 times more likely to be sex offenders.

and why are trans women 3 time more likely to be sex offenders than mere men?

Those are shocking statistics

 

Fairly obvious answer . 

[doctor jambo]

It needs looked into.

Something is not right.

really not right .

[Taffin]

3 hours ago, Hmfc1965 said:

It would depend on whether the perceived mental instability affected their ability to do the job.

In truth the real problematic opinion there is the person who believes everyone with religious views is mentally unstable.

There's also the question of where you draw that line.

What about not hiring Unionists or Nationalists because by definition they're mentally deluded?

 

Not really comparable. If someone believes the earth is a few thousand years old, I'm pretty sure they probably won't be great at processing information given to them in the workplace. As I say, would you hire someone you knew thought the earth was flat for a role where rational thinking was required?

 

Surely people can't just have irrational beliefs and expect that other beliefs more founded in scientific rationale do not discriminate against them? 

Edited April 11 by Taffin

[Ked]

5 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

I note with some interest that the debate as it was has now vanished.

The TRA have melted away in the face of insurmountable evidence.

It was always coming.

That so many merely fell into line is appalling 

Those who have allowed their children to be experimented on have no excuse .

You abrogated parental responsibility and passed it to charlatans.

your children, your responsibility .

If you had looked you would have seen.

 

Top posting today from you.

[cazzyy]

3 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

Three times more likely than men, 

nowhere near the levels of the sex they identify with

 

And 4 times more likely to be on the recieving end of violent crime.

While we're at it, gay men are more likely to molest children than straight men, an inconvenient truth.

An estimated 12,000 men are raped every year and 76,000 are sexually abused or assaulted, guess who by? Another inconvenient truth.

Stop trying to point score guys, it's poor patter and I wish you hadn't dragged me down to doing it.

[doctor jambo]

47 minutes ago, cazzyy said:

 

And 4 times more likely to be on the recieving end of violent crime.

While we're at it, gay men are more likely to molest children than straight men, an inconvenient truth.

An estimated 12,000 men are raped every year and 76,000 are sexually abused or assaulted, guess who by? Another inconvenient truth.

Stop trying to point score guys, it's poor patter and I wish you hadn't dragged me down to doing it.

No dragging.

merely pointing out the truth of it.

transwomen want into female only spaces, yet appears that they are more of a risk than just allowing all men in.

Women would be safer if all men were allowed to shower and change with them than transwomen .

thems the facts

[doctor jambo]

54 minutes ago, cazzyy said:

 

And 4 times more likely to be on the recieving end of violent crime.

While we're at it, gay men are more likely to molest children than straight men, an inconvenient truth.

An estimated 12,000 men are raped every year and 76,000 are sexually abused or assaulted, guess who by? Another inconvenient truth.

Stop trying to point score guys, it's poor patter and I wish you hadn't dragged me down to doing it.

In fact let’s get the cards on the table.

Men are banned from women’s only spaces because of the threat they pose…yet you want to allow an even more dangerous subset of the male sex in with no caveats ?

that right?

if that is so, that is dangerous idiocy

[doctor jambo]

1 hour ago, Ked said:

Top posting today from you.

Indeed.

for ages have been citing studies , reviews , evidence and concerns.

 

And acccused of transphobia and bigotry .

People have lost jobs, marriages and careers over this.

The TRA gave no quarter.

I don’t care, I knew I was right.

Don t think that JK et al are done.

Stonewall/mermaids etc are in the crosshairs and there will be backlash for the damage caused by certain groups.

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 hour ago, doctor jambo said:

No dragging.

merely pointing out the truth of it.

transwomen want into female only spaces, yet appears that they are more of a risk than just allowing all men in.

Women would be safer if all men were allowed to shower and change with them than transwomen .

thems the facts

Truth 

Edited April 11 by JudyJudyJudy

[JudyJudyJudy]

2 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

No dragging.

merely pointing out the truth of it.

transwomen want into female only spaces, yet appears that they are more of a risk than just allowing all men in.

Women would be safer if all men were allowed to shower and change with them than transwomen .

thems the facts

Where is he getting those stats ? 

[Ked]

2 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

Indeed.

for ages have been citing studies , reviews , evidence and concerns.

 

And acccused of transphobia and bigotry .

People have lost jobs, marriages and careers over this.

The TRA gave no quarter.

I don’t care, I knew I was right.

Don t think that JK et al are done.

Stonewall/mermaids etc are in the crosshairs and there will be backlash for the damage caused by certain groups.

Certain posters on here were happy to toe a line that was political.

Given the mutilation of children and drug induced physical alteration you'd have to wonder at the collective idiocy.

 

You may well have been well informed mate.

It's a sign of the time when you're identified as right wing when you don't think a man can give birth.

How any evidence was needed otherwise.

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 hour ago, Ked said:

Certain posters on here were happy to toe a line that was political.

Given the mutilation of children and drug induced physical alteration you'd have to wonder at the collective idiocy.

 

You may well have been well informed mate.

It's a sign of the time when you're identified as right wing when you don't think a man can give birth.

How any evidence was needed otherwise.

The “ right wing “ smear is now being seen for what it is 

[doctor jambo]

9 hours ago, Ked said:

Certain posters on here were happy to toe a line that was political.

Given the mutilation of children and drug induced physical alteration you'd have to wonder at the collective idiocy.

 

You may well have been well informed mate.

It's a sign of the time when you're identified as right wing when you don't think a man can give birth.

How any evidence was needed otherwise.

THe thing is that even the GIDS service KNEW that there was no evidence - from its own study- that puberty blockers did no good at all , yet continued to do it.

This was years ago.

They knew they were doing harm, had no evidence for what they were doing, had multiple whistle blowers from within their own services flagging this up and being concerned about the harm being done, yet continued regardless.

This is, frankly, malpractice on a massive scale .

Its utterly appalling.

Its the post office all over again.

there needs to be a public enquiry, heads should roll, jobs lost and sanctions applied.

Mermaids and Stonewall should be defunded and removed from public life.

You should read "TIme to Think"  by Helen Barnes- its the story of the collapse of GIDS.

Its awful to read. Really awful

[JudyJudyJudy]

3 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

THe thing is that even the GIDS service KNEW that there was no evidence - from its own study- that puberty blockers did no good at all , yet continued to do it.

This was years ago.

They knew they were doing harm, had no evidence for what they were doing, had multiple whistle blowers from within their own services flagging this up and being concerned about the harm being done, yet continued regardless.

This is, frankly, malpractice on a massive scale .

Its utterly appalling.

Its the post office all over again.

there needs to be a public enquiry, heads should roll, jobs lost and sanctions applied.

Mermaids and Stonewall should be defunded and removed from public life.

You should read "TIme to Think"  by Helen Barnes- its the story of the collapse of GIDS.

Its awful to read. Really awful

👍👍

[Ron Burgundy]

21 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

Three times more likely than men, 

nowhere near the levels of the sex they identify with

Well that's not something the trans activists seem to mention. Wonder why?

[doctor jambo]

2 minutes ago, Ron Burgundy said:

Well that's not something the trans activists seem to mention. Wonder why?

well there are a few questions need asked and have not been asked based on that data

A- does being a sex offender make you more likely to be a transwoman?

B- does transitioning increase your likelihood of becoming a sex offender?

c- Why do large numbers of sex offender transition?

 

It could be any or all of the above, but accepting the fact that amongst the transwomen group are a disproportionately high  number of high risk sexual predators.

[Ulysses]

22 hours ago, Hmfc1965 said:

 

What about not hiring Unionists or Nationalists because by definition they're mentally deluded?

 

I know I shouldn't, but .

 

 

[Ulysses]

21 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

Three times more likely than men, 

nowhere near the levels of the sex they identify with

 

17 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

No dragging.

merely pointing out the truth of it.

transwomen want into female only spaces, yet appears that they are more of a risk than just allowing all men in.

Women would be safer if all men were allowed to shower and change with them than transwomen .

thems the facts

 

You need to be careful not to misrepresent your facts.  

 

What your numbers show me is that then who identify as transgender are 2.5 times more likely to be sex offenders than men generally - and also that a woman is 205 times more likely to be sexually attacked by a man who doesn't identify as transgender than by one who does.

 

Assuming those figures are correct, there is a higher rate of sexual offending among the population of men who call themselves transgender, but because their numbers are small compared to the male population overall, that male population contains a far higher absolute number of sex offenders.

 

In other words, based on the figures presented I'm not disputing what's in your first post above.  But based on the same figures your second post simply isn't right.

[doctor jambo]

37 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

You need to be careful not to misrepresent your facts.  

 

What your numbers show me is that then who identify as transgender are 2.5 times more likely to be sex offenders than men generally - and also that a woman is 205 times more likely to be sexually attacked by a man who doesn't identify as transgender than by one who does.

 

Assuming those figures are correct, there is a higher rate of sexual offending among the population of men who call themselves transgender, but because their numbers are small compared to the male population overall, that male population contains a far higher absolute number of sex offenders.

 

In other words, based on the figures presented I'm not disputing what's in your first post above.  But based on the same figures your second post simply isn't right.

it kind of does.

men are dangerous to women, of course

it appears that men who identify as women are even more dangerous than men who dont.

I agree that this needs looked into,  and as that "super dangerous" group are strolling into changing rooms/ dorms/ bathrooms/ womens aid shelters and rape crisis centres, then surely all of that needs paused until someone can work out what the problem is.

 women are at high risk from men- that is why "we" are not allowed in, despite the fact most of us present no threat at all.

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

8 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

it kind of does.

men are dangerous to women, of course

it appears that men who identify as women are even more dangerous than men who dont.

I agree that this needs looked into,  and as that "super dangerous" group are strolling into changing rooms/ dorms/ bathrooms/ womens aid shelters and rape crisis centres, then surely all of that needs paused until someone can work out what the problem is.

 women are at high risk from men- that is why "we" are not allowed in, despite the fact most of us present no threat at all.

 

Yep most sex offenders have one thing in common . They are men . 

[lou]

1 hour ago, Ron Burgundy said:

Well that's not something the trans activists seem to mention. Wonder why?

Very dubious about this, do you have the link? Meant to post in reply to the post with the picture 

Edited April 12 by lou

[Ron Burgundy]

6 minutes ago, lou said:

Very dubious about this, do you have the link? Meant to post in reply to the post with the picture 

I didn't post the link, just replied to Doc Jambo's post

[lou]

20 minutes ago, Ron Burgundy said:

I didn't post the link, just replied to Doc Jambo's post

Yeah, I did say that I had replied to the wrong post 👍

[Ked]

6 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

THe thing is that even the GIDS service KNEW that there was no evidence - from its own study- that puberty blockers did no good at all , yet continued to do it.

This was years ago.

They knew they were doing harm, had no evidence for what they were doing, had multiple whistle blowers from within their own services flagging this up and being concerned about the harm being done, yet continued regardless.

This is, frankly, malpractice on a massive scale .

Its utterly appalling.

Its the post office all over again.

there needs to be a public enquiry, heads should roll, jobs lost and sanctions applied.

Mermaids and Stonewall should be defunded and removed from public life.

You should read "TIme to Think"  by Helen Barnes- its the story of the collapse of GIDS.

Its awful to read. Really awful

100% .

 

[Spellczech]

2 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

 

You need to be careful not to misrepresent your facts.  

 

What your numbers show me is that then who identify as transgender are 2.5 times more likely to be sex offenders than men generally - and also that a woman is 205 times more likely to be sexually attacked by a man who doesn't identify as transgender than by one who does.

 

Assuming those figures are correct, there is a higher rate of sexual offending among the population of men who call themselves transgender, but because their numbers are small compared to the male population overall, that male population contains a far higher absolute number of sex offenders.

 

In other words, based on the figures presented I'm not disputing what's in your first post above.  But based on the same figures your second post simply isn't right.

But neither is your reading of the facts correct.

1) The data is about sex offenders not sex offences. Some offenders commit multiple offences.

2) The data is about sex offenders so you cannot imply how likely women are to be the victim from these, as women are not the sole victims of sex offences - some are men, some are children and some are even animals...

3) Some of these offenders will even be in prison because they are murderers who are also sex offenders. If they'd just been sex offenders they would be out of prison by now, but the murder has kept them in (to be included in the stats)

Edited April 12 by Spellczech

[Ulysses]

2 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

it kind of does.

men are dangerous to women, of course

it appears that men who identify as women are even more dangerous than men who dont.

I agree that this needs looked into,  and as that "super dangerous" group are strolling into changing rooms/ dorms/ bathrooms/ womens aid shelters and rape crisis centres, then surely all of that needs paused until someone can work out what the problem is.

 women are at high risk from men- that is why "we" are not allowed in, despite the fact most of us present no threat at all.

 

 

You agree that what needs to be looked into?  I don't recall saying that anything "needs to be looked into".

 

And when you say "it kind of does", what does that mean?  It kind of does what? 

[doctor jambo]

1 minute ago, Ulysses said:

 

You agree that what needs to be looked into?  I don't recall saying that anything "needs to be looked into".

 

And when you say "it kind of does", what does that mean?  It kind of does what? 

what need to  be looked into is why, it appears, that transwomen are the most likely people in the country to be sex offenders.

that needs examined.

is it the treatment?

does it mean transition makes it worse?

is there a rump of sex offenders transing for what purpose?

does transition increase or decrease offending behaviour?

what is it about these men that makes them worse than other men with regards of offending behaviour?

and "it kind of does"  means the stats back up what I said, which you disputed, before going off on a tangent.

 

[doctor jambo]

1 hour ago, lou said:

Very dubious about this, do you have the link? Meant to post in reply to the post with the picture 

source is in the picture

[lou]

23 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

source is in the picture

Doesn't work for me, but still a lot more cis male perpetrators than trans women, in my line of work, I hear both sides of the trans debate every day and it's nowhere near as black and white as some posters on here seen to think and a lot of feminist organisations are far from being anti trans

[Ulysses]

25 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

But neither is your reading of the facts correct.

1) The data is about sex offenders not sex offences. Some offenders commit multiple offences.

2) The data is about sex offenders so you cannot imply how likely women are to be the victim from these, as women are not the sole victims of sex offences - some are men, some are children and some are even animals...

3) Some of these offenders will even be in prison because they are murderers who are also sex offenders. If they'd just been sex offenders they would be out of prison by now, but the murder has kept them in (to be included in the stats)

 

I'm not implying anything. And in any case the figures that were posted relate to convictions, and as we know not all sex offences lead to convictions, so the numbers and ratios for sex offenders or potential sex offenders who aren't in prison could well be completely different. That's why my post said "assuming your figures are correct" and "based on the figures as presented".  I haven't tried to validate or counter the figures posted by doctor jambo; but I've accepted them at face value, as they are the figures he presented, and used for his analysis. I'm not arguing for or against his figures, I'm taking issue with his analysis of them.

 

doctor jambo posted figures which were accompanied by the statement that the most common sex criminal is a man who identifies as a woman, even though the figures actually say there are 56 of those compared with 11,502 men who don't. 

 

doctor jambo then makes the accidental contention that opening women's spaces up to 11,558 sex offenders (11,502 plus 56) would be safer than opening them up to 56.

 

By the way, doctor jambo doesn't actually think that, and I don't think he actually thinks that.  But that's what he managed to convey, based on the numbers he posted.

 

I'm not trying to claim that my read of the figures means anything in particular. I'm just pointing that doctor jambo can't claim that either.

 

So I get what you're saying, but you might want to put those points to doctor jambo as well.

[Ulysses]

59 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

what need to  be looked into is why, it appears, that transwomen are the most likely people in the country to be sex offenders.

 

Thanks for clarifying.  But that's you agreeing with someone else.  I didn't make that point.

 

 

59 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

 "it kind of does"  means the stats back up what I said

 

 

There's no "kind of does" about it.  The stats simply don't back up what you said.  Based on the numbers you posted, for every one sex offender you could encounter who is a man who identifies as a woman, there are 205 who are men who don't.  

[Ulysses]

22 hours ago, cazzyy said:

 

While we're at it, gay men are more likely to molest children than straight men, an inconvenient truth.

An estimated 12,000 men are raped every year and 76,000 are sexually abused or assaulted, guess who by? Another inconvenient truth.

 

 

I'm not looking to start fights here, but if I was going to say this stuff about gay men, I'd make sure to back it up with sources.  These kind of claims (especially the one about children) have been used to discriminate against gay people, and are still either claimed or implied as an excuse for blocking marriage equality and adoption by gay couples.

 

Like I said, I'm not having a go, but fair's fair.

[JudyJudyJudy]

[Spellczech]

3 hours ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Should parks become female-only spaces?

 

i am of course joking, but I tend to think that the whole issue loses its focus when it asks "What is a woman?". Why should women have to establish what they are and why they are different, and why people born with penises are not women, etc...? 

 

Trans people ought to be under the burden of proof, not women. They ought to be having to justify why they need to use female toilets rather than male ones? Are they in danger in male toilets? I doubt it. Men are fantastically unsociable and uncommunicative in toilets - we don't go there in pairs; we feel uncomfortable if another guy comes and uses the urinal which is not the furthest away one from us; We certainly never join a pal in the cubicle (some of us don't ever even use public cubicles unless we literally have the shts! or there are no urinals at the work toilets); In short we get in and out as quickly as possible (some of us don't even spare the time to wash our hands!). If I was in a bar toilet and a man in a dress came out the cubicle, or was standing at the mirror applying lipstick, I would probably raise an eyebrow of surprise, perhaps might even check the door or look for the existence of urinals to ensure I haven't made a mistake, and then mind my own bloody business, as that is what we (men) do in toilets.

 

If people want to sort the toilet problem then they should perhaps look to give trans their own special facility like disabled people have - and yes I'm well aware that some people don't respect disabled toilets as exclusive either. You don't hear the disabled moaning about it. I suspect they are simply glad that the facilities are there...

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Spellczech said:

Should parks become female-only spaces?

 

i am of course joking, but I tend to think that the whole issue loses its focus when it asks "What is a woman?". Why should women have to establish what they are and why they are different, and why people born with penises are not women, etc...? 

 

Trans people ought to be under the burden of proof, not women. They ought to be having to justify why they need to use female toilets rather than male ones? Are they in danger in male toilets? I doubt it. Men are fantastically unsociable and uncommunicative in toilets - we don't go there in pairs; we feel uncomfortable if another guy comes and uses the urinal which is not the furthest away one from us; We certainly never join a pal in the cubicle (some of us don't ever even use public cubicles unless we literally have the shts! or there are no urinals at the work toilets); In short we get in and out as quickly as possible (some of us don't even spare the time to wash our hands!). If I was in a bar toilet and a man in a dress came out the cubicle, or was standing at the mirror applying lipstick, I would probably raise an eyebrow of surprise, perhaps might even check the door or look for the existence of urinals to ensure I haven't made a mistake, and then mind my own bloody business, as that is what we (men) do in toilets.

 

If people want to sort the toilet problem then they should perhaps look to give trans their own special facility like disabled people have - and yes I'm well aware that some people don't respect disabled toilets as exclusive either. You don't hear the disabled moaning about it. I suspect they are simply glad that the facilities are there...

All very valid points but doesn’t answer the question why do trans people want to use womens toilets . 

[Spellczech]

5 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

All very valid points but doesn’t answer the question why do trans people want to use womens toilets . 

I haven't a clue TBH. It cannot be because they are cleaner, as when I was a student barman I had to don the shoulder-length rubber gloves and hose down both male and female toilets, and the women's were far worse! - freaking toilet paper all over the place!

 

I can only suggest that it is to reinforce IN THEIR OWN HEADS that they are women?

 

 

Edited April 12 by Spellczech

[JudyJudyJudy]

Just now, Spellczech said:

I haven't a clue TBH. It cannot be because they are cleaner, as when I was a student barman I had to don the shoulder-length rubber gloves and hose down both male and female toilets, and the women's were far worse! - freaking toilet paper all over the place!

 

 

👍

[lou]

18 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

All very valid points but doesn’t answer the question why do trans people want to use womens toilets . 

If a trans woman has been through gender realignment surgery and is living as a woman, I would imagine they would feel quite uncomfortable going to into a mens toilet 

Edited April 12 by lou

[JudyJudyJudy]

2 minutes ago, lou said:

If a trans woman has been through gender realignment surgery and is living as a woman, I would imagine they would feel quite uncomfortable going to into a mens toilet 

They are very much a minority in the trans community . “ trans “ is defined as anyone who “ identifies “ as female . 
 

ps how do you “ live as a woman ?” 

[JudyJudyJudy]

https://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Portals/0/CandIGDivision/documents/Trans Umbrella Resource Sheet ILACADA 2014-1.pdf
 

 

[doctor jambo]

40 minutes ago, lou said:

If a trans woman has been through gender realignment surgery and is living as a woman, I would imagine they would feel quite uncomfortable going to into a mens toilet 

Honestly , who cares how uun comfortable they are - compared to the discomfort women feel , it’s irrelevant.

As a married dude -

women are always right

[lou]

27 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

Honestly , who cares how uun comfortable they are - compared to the discomfort women feel , it’s irrelevant.

As a married dude -

women are always right

Well being a woman, who has never been through trauma at the hands of a man but who works in Gender based violence, I could never nail my colours to the mast oh this one, there are compelling views on either side of the divide.  yes,cis  women need a safe space but there also needs to be safe spaces for trans women.  

 

Edited April 12 by lou

[lou]

57 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

They are very much a minority in the trans community . “ trans “ is defined as anyone who “ identifies “ as female . 
 

ps how do you “ live as a woman ?” 

I will trust you oh that ine, but they do exist and they do matter.

[doctor jambo]

27 minutes ago, lou said:

Well being a woman, who has never been through trauma at the hands of a man but who works in Gender based violence, I could never nail my colours to the mast oh this one, there are compelling views on either side of the divide.  yes,cis  women need a safe space but there also needs to be safe spaces for trans women.  

 

Transwomen (men) are the most likely subgroup to comit sexual offences.

they can have their own space, separate from women.

[lou]

Just now, doctor jambo said:

Transwomen (men) are the most likely subgroup to comit sexual offences.

they can have their own space, separate from women.

And what space is that? Nothing exists at the moment

[doctor jambo]

10 hours ago, lou said:

And what space is that? Nothing exists at the moment

The men’s?

Trans men , men and transwomen can all freely use them.

No bother.

Or make everything gender neutral with single cubicles and floor to ceiling doors .

no open changing areas in schools etc.

but that’s not what trans want.

a swathe of them demand into women’s spaces, not creation of their own or a neutral space,

then want woman only spaces and they want in them

see giggle vs tickle 

[lou]

25 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

The men’s?

Trans men , men and transwomen can all freely use them.

No bother.

Or make everything gender neutral with single cubicles and floor to ceiling doors .

no open changing areas in schools etc.

but that’s not what trans want.

a swathe of them demand into women’s spaces, not creation of their own or a neutral space,

then want woman only spaces and they want in them

see giggle vs tickle 

Have you surveyed this swathe? or are you just going by what you see in the media? I think there are many who would appreciate a safe space of their own 

[doctor jambo]

45 minutes ago, lou said:

Have you surveyed this swathe? or are you just going by what you see in the media? I think there are many who would appreciate a safe space of their own 

You a neither have a safe space for women ( actual women)

or you can have a not quite as safe space for women and some may be raped or assaulted by that is acceptable as long as it’s inclusive and feelings don’t get hurt, unless it’s women’s feelings in which case who cares as long as men get to watch you getting changed 

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 hour ago, doctor jambo said:

The men’s?

Trans men , men and transwomen can all freely use them.

No bother.

Or make everything gender neutral with single cubicles and floor to ceiling doors .

no open changing areas in schools etc.

but that’s not what trans want.

a swathe of them demand into women’s spaces, not creation of their own or a neutral space,

then want woman only spaces and they want in them

see giggle vs tickle 

Yep. There is absolutely zero compromise with them . It’s their way or nothing .