No. When transwomen enter women’s single-sex spaces, whether prisons, shelters, sport, or changing-rooms, women lose their rights, also safeguarding. This is UNLIKE gay rights, etc. You’ve bought into this canard - it’s all part of ‘no debate’, aka ‘shut up women’.
Women belong in women's spaces. The only way you can argue otherwise is if you don't actually believe trans women are women, and at that point you're a transphobe. And statistically, trans women are much, *much* more likely to be a victim of things like domestic violence than the perpetrator.
So the safeguarding argument is also moot unless you believe trans women are uniquely dangerous to cis women.
Not at all. Once acceptable for any males to enter female single sex spaces, you reduce the ability to challenge. (Not to mention that quite a few men charged with rape, then decide they’re trans, get to serve their sentence in a women’s prison. Win/win for them, lose/lose for women) Gatekeeping???
If a woman is trans, then she's not male. The idea that predatory men are walking around in women's clothing for the opportunity to assault someone is an anti-trans stereotype. Do you think the female sign on a door is magically going to stop someone when a law doesn't?
That women’s safety, women’s rights are irrelevant, ignored in pro-trans arguments is one of the things that distinguishes the trans rights campaign from previous gay rights, anti-racism campaigns
Irrelevant, ignored and dismissed
I think it's convenient for you to imagine that the campaign for trans rights is different than the one for gay rights. Except that one of the key points anti-gay rights activists made was that putting them in with straight people, in places like changing rooms...
...was dangerous because they would be attracted to the people in there, and they would prey on them. It's literally the same bigoted point reheated for a different minority. Also, most prisons in the UK have a separate wing for people convicted of sexual crimes.
There are women currently in Scottish prisons sharing shower blocks with biological males. That you don’t think this matters shows, very clearly, your priorities. Which is why the trans rights campaign can be described as a Men’s Rights Campaign. Name-calling is no argument - shows you lack one.
Prison rape is horrific and we should all be working towards a world in which it's never allowed to happen to anyone, of any gender. Using it as an excuse to segregate trans people for the protection of cis people makes exactly as much sense as segregating gays so they don't rape straights.
And, you know, it's your right to believe that we should segregate people based on gender, sexuality, race etc. I'm not telling you to shut up! I'm just pointing out that it's a very right-wing view of the world.
As a leftist, I believe we should be massively reducing the number of people in prison, which would also reduce prison rape. As a right-winger, you believe we should be segregating people to make sure prison rape doesn't happen to the wrong people. We can agree to disagree.
If they aren't convicted of sexual crimes, then yeah, that makes sense. What unique danger does a trans woman represent in that situation, that couldn't be applied to a cis lesbian?
I'd also like to point out that trans men also exist. It can hardly be described as a men's rights campaign when it affects both genders.
If anyone is being raped at a higher rate in prisons, it's trans people. "Corrective rape" (uh) is a terrifying reality for trans women, especially. We don't have separate women's spaces for no reason - it's because there are countless scientific studies showing that it's dangerous if they don't.
We should also follow the science on trans people, who are victimised at an even higher rate than cis women - up to four times (!) as much in some studies.
I get it that the only women you think matter are trans women. Fortunately, the Supreme Court judged that ALL the protected characteristics in the Equality Act were deserving of equal consideration; and that trans people’s rights did not (and never have, in law), trump the rights of women.
Except it was a nonsensical ruling that ignored that trans women had been able to be legally considered women since 2004. Go on, scream the people who had marriages annulled because they were considered same sex marriages and got birth certificates contradicting you didn't have either happen.
I think ALL women's rights matter, and that we should follow the science on how best to protect people. Also, you chastised me for name-calling earlier, but here you make a clear distinction between "trans people" and "women". If you don't want to be called a bigot, stop using bigoted language.