Skeletons, Ladies’ Toilets, and the Abuse of Rights

It’s been a long while since I pontificated on this blog, but I’ve had another Thought that might perhaps be worth sharing. It’s to do with women’s rights, trans rights, and the perceived clash between the two. Now, there are many who would point out that the last thing either women or trans people need is a cis-gendered male telling them their own business, and they’re absolutely right. With this in mind I’ve hesitated for a long time to publish this, and consulted with a few people with more right than myself to have an opinion on the subject to make sure that what I was thinking wasn’t complete nonsense. Nevertheless, I had the Thought, and I’ve decided to finally put it out there to be ignored or not as people see fit.

I’m coming at this one via a rather circuitous route, and with a bit of a run-up, but bear with me and I’ll get you there in the end.

 

Of Skeletons and Salvation

A while ago, the BBC published an article about the Salvation Army in the early 20^th century, and the problems they had with a parodic counter-movement who called themselves the Skeleton Army. Their Modus Operandi was to form mobs and follow Salvationist marches, shouting, singing, hurling missiles and generally being a serious nuisance to all concerned.

However, rather than simply deal with the hooligans, various local authorities took it as an opportunity to do something about the rather unpopular Salvationists too.

To quote the article:

“The board tried to ban "marching with music on a Sunday" on the grounds it attracted Skeleton troublemakers. But it was later ruled that a lawful activity (marching with music on a Sunday) was not made unlawful by the unlawful actions of others (Skeletons rioting).

In terms of freedom of expression, this principle is still the benchmark in constitutional law.”

 

Of Toilets and Terror

There are feminists (I use the term somewhat loosely) who claim that trans women shouldn’t be allowed into women-only spaces such as toilets, changing rooms or shelters. A common argument in defence of this seems to be that if you start allowing trans women to enter such spaces, predatory cis-het men might take the opportunity to disguise themselves and enter those places to commit assaults and other abuses.

In fact, to quote a certain Ms Rowling:

“When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman ... then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside.”

The statistics show that in those places where trans women are allowed to use such spaces, there has been absolutely no increase in sexual violence or public safety issues. However, it also made me think of the passage quoted above. The argument is essentially, ‘Trans women shouldn’t have the right to enter women-only spaces, because then cis men might abuse those rights.’ It’s as daft (and as wrong) as saying ‘Some people shouldn’t be allowed to parade, because other people might riot’.

Indeed it’s an argument against allowing anyone to do anything. ‘Chefs shouldn’t be allowed kitchen knives, because gang members might stab people’.

Let’s be clear. Trans women are women, but if your argument is that the rights of trans people should be restricted and curtailed because other people might misuse them, then you are factually, morally, ethically and legally wrong, and that’s all there is to it.