
I've given you my definition of "woman" - it's the WHO definition, the UK law's definition.
The law says that a trans person's gender identity is protected. Excluding someone from a space on the basis of that trans status is not lawful.
In response to your question about when I would doubt someone's gender identity claims, I used their sincerity as my personal test for agreeing with the gender identity of person. If the person appears to be sincere in their statement, then I choose to accept it. If you can't imagine what I mean by that, I really don't know how I could possibly explain it to you.
There is no such thing as an "insincere trans woman". Such a person is lying - they are not a trans person.
I'm only responding to you here because originally you called me out by name in your post to that TERF's blog, and made bad faith arguments against a principle I advocate.
If you're going to continue to brush off the legal definitions I've presented, then I can only assume you're not interested in discussion.
( , Sun 15 Aug 2021, 17:23, Reply)

" If you can't imagine what I mean by that, I really don't know how I could possibly explain it to you.
There is no such thing as an "insincere trans woman". Such a person is lying - they are not a trans person."
I admire this allyship, but in practice how on earth can it possibly be actioned? This is where it all breaks down for me. There is absolutely no objective truth in this concern, it's all based on personal testimony and how you interpret the validity of that testimony. That makes it incredibly difficult ethically for healthcare professionals involved in trans care if they are required to supervise any kind of medical transition (yes, I know not all trans people seek medical transition - but it is increasing) or authorities for allowing Self ID trans people access to women and girl only spaces.
Why would someone lie? Because people lie all the time. Obviously they're "fake trans people", as you sort of claim, but even so - it's still proves there's no objective truth here. The fact a rapist can change from a male to female prison shows their Self ID claims were believed by the system sincerely and that it caused untold harm. It'd be great to live in a society where we can spot liars, but I think you'd have to be incredibly naive to believe that utopia exists. I'm sure it's a rare occurrence, like much crime thankfully, but that's not how we mitigate risk in terms of sex-based divisions.
( , Sun 15 Aug 2021, 18:34, Reply)

You're posting links from Mermaids, a 'charity' even the BBC disowned, a 'charity' that has a laissez-faire attitude to personal data and was fined for it, a 'charity' that lost it's interfering challenge in the Keira Bell case, and yet here you are calling people out for quoting, in your words, a "TERF's blog".
As others have pointed out, you have supplied no credible rebuttal to the encroachment on female's safe spaces, in fact you reiterate it here.
Quite apart from your crusade, it seems to me you simply want to pile opprobrium on those who oppose your unsupportable views by lobbing around pejorative terms like TERF while quoting from discredited organisations, all the while barely disguising a wish to erode further the hard-fought rights of females to their own safe spaces.
( , Sun 15 Aug 2021, 18:42, Reply)

Single-sex service providers can choose to exclude transgender people where there are ''proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim''.
An example given by the Equality Act is that organisers of group counselling for female sexual assault victims could exclude a trans woman if they judged that clients would be unlikely to attend the session if she was there.
However, refusing a trans woman entry to the women's toilet in a pub is likely to be unlawful.
( , Sun 15 Aug 2021, 21:27, Reply)

Then how is it even possible for that testimony to be a lie?
( , Mon 16 Aug 2021, 12:41, Reply)