Evidence Against Trans?

 

chatgpt & liz lucy robillard, April 21st, 2025


It's natural to want to protect women from harm, especially from serious threats like rape. Some argue that to prevent even one assault, trans women (biological males) should be excluded from female-only spaces like toilets and prisons. 


While this comes from a place of caution, it doesn’t hold up under evidence or ethical scrutiny.


*Studies consistently show that inclusive policies do not increase assault rates in restrooms or changing rooms*


Trans women using female spaces *does not* correlate with higher risks of violence against cisgender women according to studies. 


The idea that cis men might pretend to be trans to access women’s areas is *extremely rare* and laws already exist to punish such behavior. 


Are those laws effective enough?


On the other hand, trans women face high rates of violence when forced into male-designated spaces, especially in prisons or public areas. 


Denying them access often puts them in real danger. Thus, blanket exclusions risk causing more harm than they prevent.


Ethically, using a “one harm justifies exclusion” approach leads to dangerous generalizations. By that logic, we’d have to ban many things that statistically cause harm — like cars, parks, or men altogether — which is neither practical nor just. Policies based on outliers often punish the innocent majority.


A more balanced and humane solution is to protect all vulnerable groups. In prisons, this means assessing individuals case-by-case, considering safety risks rather than just identity. In public facilities, privacy features like stalls and gender-neutral options can increase comfort without targeting anyone.


Should we ban men from parks as assaults happen there often? Dig and you will find plenty more examples. 


Protecting women from violence is absolutely essential — but policies should be built on facts and fairness, not fear of identity. The goal should be to *address behaviors*, not to exclude whole groups based on who they are.



---


References:


https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/transgender-toilet-access/


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5178031/


https://www.vox.com/identities/2016/5/15/11660304/bathroom-laws-sexual-assault


https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/03/02/us-trans-women-face-extreme-violence-men-prisons


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Witchhunt

From my upcoming memoir: 'My son suffers from severe autism or possibly Angelman syndrome (which wasn't definitively excluded when he underwent genetic testing). As a concerned parent, I reached out to several specialists in the field of autism, desperate to know how best to support him. In 1994, when my son was two, I started an information service called Autistic Information Matters to seek answers, provide support, and share facts. After much difficulty with professionals—including a Professor Ben Sacks who cruelly suggested I send my two-year-old to an institution (I told him to get out)—I discovered Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA). At the time, I believed it might be a miracle cure that could help my son begin speaking. However, after extensive research and insights from other parents, I came to realize that autism is an umbrella term, encompassing a variety of conditions rather than a single disorder. (I have written more about this elsewhere.) During this time, I wa...
Read more

Honouring Abused Women

  The idea that vulnerability disqualifies you from safety is perverse. It’s a cruel inversion of morality, peddled by the very professions sworn to protect. Social workers (not all, but enough to matter), lawyers, psychiatrists, police—these institutions too often treat a traumatised woman as a nuisance, a liability, or worse, a fantasist. If you flinch, you’re dramatic. If you weep, you’re unstable. If you speak up, you’re paranoid. This grotesque logic renders a woman’s suffering not only invisible, but suspect. They do not ask, What happened to her? They ask, What is wrong with her? It’s psychiatry’s favourite bait-and-switch. Diagnoses fly like confetti—borderline, histrionic, treatment-resistant—as though medical jargon could smother the stench of misogyny. And the legal profession is no better. A woman under siege is told to document everything while her stalker moves freely, slipping through legal loopholes like grease through fingers. The solution is not to plead more pre...
Read more