Via the comments, and the pages of Gay Community News, more attempts to justify the odd and improper:

Ah, a glimmer of realism, one might think. Perhaps the fever is passing.

Or put another, less dramatic way, cross-dressing men will be excluded from ladies’ toilets.

And yet.

You see, not being allowed to violate the intimate boundaries of other people – specifically, women – in order to exult in a deception, a sexual fantasy – is deemed both oppressive and terribly unfair. Indeed, “cruel and demonising.”

We’re then told, in ways both emphatic and unconvincing, that restoring normal proprieties to toilets and changing rooms is “actually dangerous for cis people as well.”

If a law keeping weird, cross-dressing men out of ladies’ toilets and changing rooms doesn’t sound obviously dangerous to women – unlike those aforementioned weird, cross-dressing men – an attempt at persuasion is made. Or at least some crumbs are scraped into a pile:

As you might imagine, the word many is doing some heavy lifting, to a degree one might call deceptive. However, we’re steered towards a handful of examples, spread over a decade, in which actual women were mistaken for cross-dressing men and questioned on their use of female spaces:

A slightly absurd situation, granted. Though readers will note the phrase a man twice her size – and perhaps ponder how that phrase might inform objections to men intruding in women’s intimate spaces. Including rape shelters, where, as we’ve seen, events much like a nightmare can rapidly unfold.

Because it turns out that when forcing brutalised women to share a space with mentally ill men, the result is not, amazingly, one long, girly pillow-fight.

Oh, and we mustn’t forget Mr Morgane Oger, mentioned here, who spends his time campaigning to financially cripple women’s rape shelters, on grounds that said shelters don’t also cater to cross-dressing men, i.e., men much like himself. A preoccupation that possibly tells us quite a bit about the kind of man he is.

The author then performs a bold rhetorical manoeuvre:

Female readers – sorry, “so-called ‘biological women'” – are welcome to say whether they would feel safer in toilets and changing rooms with or without the presence of weird, cross-dressing men who feel entitled to violate normal boundaries. And whether the overlap of cross-dressing and unsavoury phenomena is a thing one might wish to bear in mind.

Unsurprisingly, the piece includes many questions of a somewhat disingenuous nature. Among which,

And,

Regarding the latter, it turns out that human beings are actually quite good at determining the sex of other people, especially of adults, and especially men. With studies suggesting an accuracy very close to 100%, even in restricted conditions – i.e., no visible hair, no make-up, no facial hair, ears hidden, no movement, etc.

The author of the quoted piece, Mr Sophie Molly, aka Sophie Sparkles, aka Euan Weddell, is, you’ll be shocked to hear, one of those weird, cross-dressing men. The ones that women and girls should welcome into their toilets and changing rooms. His activities include boasting of demanding needless bra fittings from lingerie department shop assistants, and sharing photos of himself wearing only a ball gag and improvised nipple-clamps.

So, hey, nothing to worry about, ladies.

At which point, readers may wish to consider some of the factors pointedly not mentioned by Mr Molly. Among which, the fact that the incidents he refers to, in which actual women have been challenged on their use of female spaces, are not only extremely rare, but have only occurred since cross-dressing men – men much like Mr Sophie Molly – have started barging into women’s spaces, heightening sensitivities. Which one might think has some bearing on the case he’s trying to make.

As commenter Ollq puts it,

Indeed.

Should any readers be blissfully unfamiliar with the boastful, territory-marking nature common to such boundary violations, a compendium of intrusions can be found here. Though I should add that the linked video, while strongly recommended, is rather vivid and not for the faint of heart.

Update:

One of Mr Sophie Molly’s favoured slogans is “Trans led journalism that reports the truth behind the lies.” Which is almost funny, in a grim kind of way.

Setting aside Mr Sophie Molly’s implausible omissions, contrived framing and ludicrous hyperbole, we’re left with a claim that a law keeping mentally ill men and cross-dressing perverts out of spaces where women and girls get undressed is “actually dangerous” for women and girls and should therefore be abandoned.

Why, it’s almost as if men who lie continually – whose “identity” is premised on an attempt to deceive – and to coerce – are not entirely trustworthy.

Fancy that.

A tale of tax, utopia, and human faeces:

The fragrant sentiments above, mouthed by Danish couple Flemming Hansen and Mette Helbæk, concern their creation, in Sweden, of a “forest resort” named Stedsans, one met with much acclaim:

Dish magazine hailed the project as “Seasonal, sustainable, organic, artisanal, waste-free, foraged.” While readers of EasyJet Traveller magazine were told that the resort is “A new way of living that’s as sustainable as it is delicious.”

For Ms Helbæk and Mr Hansen, the name of the resort, which is Danish for “sense of place,” reflects “which direction we need to go as a society.” The couple, who refer to themselves as “soul-driven entrepreneurs,” shared their vision:

All terribly inspiring. Scenes of this idyll can be savoured here.

However,

The output of those sixteen charming cottages, one assumes. I’ll let any passing enthusiasts of arithmetic have fun with that one.

Ah yes. “A way of living that respects all forms of life.” Conjured into being by “soul-driven entrepreneurs.”

Readers will doubtless be intrigued by the “foraged” food – i.e., carrots and leaves, served repeatedly – plus the unheated rooms, the lack of running water, and the whole shitting-in-a-barrel thing. For a mere £900 a night, one can’t expect luxuries like plumbing, protein, or the prospect of heat.

And for those inclined to squint, there may be a rustic charm to things being a loose approximation of what is claimed. And so, just as unheated fishing huts with no plumbing or sanitation are framed as “luxury,” seemingly random objects on a plate are hailed as meals, as “artisanal” and “delicious.”

According to an investigation by Dagens Nyheter and Politiken, Ms Helbæk and Mr Hansen had left Denmark owing “millions of kroner in debt to Danish tax authorities,” before moving to Sweden, where they accumulated further tax debt of six million SEK.

Sustainability, baby.

You may now resume your humdrum, unenlightened, non-artisanal lives.

Via Samizdata.

A territorial struggle of sorts:

⚠️EXTREMELY GRAPHIC AND DISTURBING⚠️

A trans activist using the women’s bathroom slides his phone under the stall to film a woman.

These are the people who want to share a bathroom with your daughters. pic.twitter.com/T8NKAnK4Vk

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) February 14, 2024

And remember, ladies, when a male bedlamite pushes his phone camera under an occupied bathroom stall in order to livestream to his admirers a woman who is unhappy about a male bedlamite’s presence in a ladies’ toilets – and when said bedlamite’s phone is kicked away and he then claims victimhood, specifically injury to his penis, which he mentions quite a lot – this is totally normal and nothing to worry about.

It’s just how things are now. Embrace all that progress.

A word of caution. The link immediately above contains graphic content.

Update, via the comments:

Mags notes our bedlamite’s livestreaming of his bathroom adventures, and of his victim, adding,

Well, quite. As a way to convince women that they’ve nothing to fear, that any concerns they might have are merely bigotry, and that you’re not at all unhinged and a danger… it does leave something to be desired.

Also, open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

From the high-security wing of transgender TikTok:

Tara, the “poly trans lesbian” quoted above, has given quite a lot of thought to the subject of forcing his way into women’s bathrooms and other intimate spaces. Perhaps we should be thanking him for clarifying the issue, albeit inadvertently.

Update, via the comments, where Rafi adds,

Not really, no. There is a certain obliviousness. And so, we have a man who considers it his right to be universally affirmed as somehow being a woman – specifically, a lesbian (because of course) – and to be given unchallenged access to women’s intimate spaces, regardless of actual women’s fairly obvious concerns.

Say, concerns regarding the fact that said man boasts about using force to invade women’s toilets and changing rooms – because only “fascists” and “Nazis” could possibly object, you see – and then boasts of using firearms to defend his alleged right to intrude as and when he pleases. A man who says, quite emphatically, that he’s “not afraid to die” while doing so.

Yes. Nothing to be concerned about, ladies.

Update 2, via the ladies at Reduxx:

Previously and somewhat related.

Via Mr Muldoon in the comments.

Further to this recent drama, more overseas toilet-dispute news:

It turns out that a summer dress doesn’t make you a lady.

A female student at the University of Brasilia, the one being harangued and threatened, was seemingly unaware that the university has organised its bathrooms by “gender identity, not sex,” and so lively scenes are to be expected. The gentleman in question, Tulio Henrique Carvalho dos Santos, has, we learn, a history of difficult behaviour. Including hair-trigger aggression and denouncing any interruption of his loud and lengthy pronouncements as “transphobia,” akin to “racism,” and therefore a basis for legal action.

The University of Brasilia has subsequently issued a statement declaring the campus a “tolerant and plural place that values the richness and potential of diversity and respect for differences.” Which would presumably explain all the shoving, screaming and threats of violence.

Update, via the comments: