What do you think?
Rate this book
Defending Women's Spaces
Who counts as a woman? This question lies at the heart of many public debates about sex and gender today. While we increasingly recognise the desire of some to eliminate the sex binary in law, a particular boiling point emerges through conflicting demands over women’s spaces. Which should govern access to these – sex or gender identity?
Karen Ingala Smith, a veteran campaigner for women’s and girls’ rights, opts for the former. In this trenchant critique of inclusivity politics, she argues that we cannot ignore the wealth of evidence which shows that people of the female sex have a unique set of needs which are often not met by mixed-sex spaces. Drawing on her 30 years of experience in researching and recording men’s violence against women and girls, she outlines how certain spaces, including refuges, benefit from remaining single sex – and what they stand to lose. Written with sensitivity and respect for all concerned, this book nevertheless dismantles the idea that we have reached a post-sex utopia.
Karen Ingala Smith, a veteran campaigner for women’s and girls’ rights, opts for the former. In this trenchant critique of inclusivity politics, she argues that we cannot ignore the wealth of evidence which shows that people of the female sex have a unique set of needs which are often not met by mixed-sex spaces. Drawing on her 30 years of experience in researching and recording men’s violence against women and girls, she outlines how certain spaces, including refuges, benefit from remaining single sex – and what they stand to lose. Written with sensitivity and respect for all concerned, this book nevertheless dismantles the idea that we have reached a post-sex utopia.
181 pages, Kindle Edition
First published November 25, 2022
6 people are currently reading
164 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
July 27, 2023
Clear explanation on why women only spaces matter
I found this illuminating. Women's rights is now a contested subject, and women fighting to retain what has been won are called bigots.
Defending Women's Spaces talks mainly about violence against women but does discurse I to other areas, such as sport.
Very much worth reading.
I found this illuminating. Women's rights is now a contested subject, and women fighting to retain what has been won are called bigots.
Defending Women's Spaces talks mainly about violence against women but does discurse I to other areas, such as sport.
Very much worth reading.
January 15, 2023
Anti-trans bigoted zealotry.
October 29, 2023
A very thoroughly researched book looking into women only spaces. From the numbers of women killed every year by their male partners, to the amount of assaults women are victims of, and comparing them to female offenders, populations in prison, and linking them with the cases of trans population which seem to make the biggest noise, yet have very few actual reported cases compared to women victims. She makes a very compelling argument for the need to have women only spaces which, as a woman, I am 100% for. It is very disheartening to read about other groups trying to reduce a woman from being a women and a subcategory of their own sex. She highlights the potentially harmful effects should sex at birth not be recorded for example in medical settings. We can't change our genes, and I find it quite baffling the extent to which people feel they need to go to not conform with their sex, which is only now possible due to the development of medicine and people capitalising on potentially other mental health issues.
My main quarrel with the book is the relentless mention of her work with nia in the first quarter of the book. It was just too much and unnecessary.
And another main takeaway is the bizarre outcry from other activists against women only spaces. These are not happening on the account of anyone else's space. One can't fight for their rights by taking it away from someone else. Live and let live. There is much work to be done to challenge gender norms in general, if they were more fluid, not associating certain looks with a specific gender, there may not be the surging number of gender dysphoria in the society that we're seeing right now.
My main quarrel with the book is the relentless mention of her work with nia in the first quarter of the book. It was just too much and unnecessary.
And another main takeaway is the bizarre outcry from other activists against women only spaces. These are not happening on the account of anyone else's space. One can't fight for their rights by taking it away from someone else. Live and let live. There is much work to be done to challenge gender norms in general, if they were more fluid, not associating certain looks with a specific gender, there may not be the surging number of gender dysphoria in the society that we're seeing right now.
May 10, 2023
This book does a good job of explaining the concerns around single sex spaces and opening these spaces up, it gets to the point of these arguments which often get swallowed up and misrepresented in wider discussions around trans women accessing women-only spaces.
The main and perhaps most pertinent discussion is around the safety aspect for women who have been subject to men’s violence in terms of domestic abuse and sexual abuse, and the reality of admitting people born male into these spaces. In my opinion this book does a good job of discussing this and many other factors of opening women-only categories to trans women, eg sports, in a reasonably balanced way. The author discusses points in a factual and realistic way and with consideration to the needs and benefits for all concerned.
However, there are some elements of this book which I personally found jarring at points and can see could be perceived with offence. The author lays plainly what she believes the categories of gender and sex to be, and in discussing cases from the media she does refer to trans women by their born names in places. I also feel her near constant reference to the organisation she leads is unnecessary at best, and big headed at worst. But that’s personal preference I suppose. That being said, this book has helped me to understand the perspective of many gender critical feminists a lot better, I only wish that all of those that claim to be GC feminists were so clear in their arguments.
The main and perhaps most pertinent discussion is around the safety aspect for women who have been subject to men’s violence in terms of domestic abuse and sexual abuse, and the reality of admitting people born male into these spaces. In my opinion this book does a good job of discussing this and many other factors of opening women-only categories to trans women, eg sports, in a reasonably balanced way. The author discusses points in a factual and realistic way and with consideration to the needs and benefits for all concerned.
However, there are some elements of this book which I personally found jarring at points and can see could be perceived with offence. The author lays plainly what she believes the categories of gender and sex to be, and in discussing cases from the media she does refer to trans women by their born names in places. I also feel her near constant reference to the organisation she leads is unnecessary at best, and big headed at worst. But that’s personal preference I suppose. That being said, this book has helped me to understand the perspective of many gender critical feminists a lot better, I only wish that all of those that claim to be GC feminists were so clear in their arguments.
March 22, 2024
If you’re confused by what you hear in the media about the debate between women and trans people over refuges, rape crisis centres, prisons, toilets, changing rooms, sports, and even women’s prizes, or you’re a left-leaning person who instinctively knows women’s rights are under a new threat, but have been told worrying about that makes you ‘right-wing’ or ‘bigoted’, then this book is a must-read. It’s an excellent comprehensive introduction to what’s really going on and why it’s far from a marginal ‘culture wars’ issue.
Firstly, it’s quite short, easy to read and written in a clear, sober and factual way. And secondly, it’s by a working-class socialist intersectional feminist (in its proper, original sense). Karen Ingala-Smith understands that females, whatever their ethnicity, class or culture, can be disadvantaged in more than one way, but all are oppressed on the basis of their sex by gender (sex-stereotypes), “the biggest tool in the oppression box”. As a woman from a working-class Asian family and community myself, I say she’s spot on.
I was very impressed by how thoroughly researched this book was - not surprising, since Ingala-Smith IS the research and has lived it. Her credentials are impeccable. She founded Counting Dead Women and the UK Femicide Census, worked for decades in organisations dealing with men’s violence against women, and is now CEO of nia, a service for abused women and girls. It’s so obvious reading the many shocking facts and case studies in this book that she knows better than most why females need women-only spaces, how hard-won they were by women building them up from scratch, and why they’re now under threat from authorities forcing them to include transgender males.
A couple of critical facts she points out (with supporting evidence) are that most people still don’t realise the majority of ‘transwomen’ haven’t had genital surgery, or that “criminal behaviours of those who had legally and medically transitioned from men to transwomen follow male pattern offending”. She explains how that’s because they still have their male physiques, strength and years of socialisation, and of course you can’t actually change sex, whatever ‘gender’ you identify as. She argues therefore that individual risk assessments on transgender males just don’t work. All this makes sense to me - otherwise why do we have any single-sex services, for example, women’s toilets? When almost all men understand they have to stay out, we know the minority who violate that space can only do so because they’re prioritising their own feelings over women’s needs.
I found this book a real eye-opener. It’s incredible that the writer has had to expend so much time and energy restating basic biological facts and common sense just to make the most modest of cases: the need to simply defend women’s existing legal right to single-sex spaces (in the Equality Act 2010) for their safety, privacy and dignity. The book is also a history of the ways many feminist and women’s groups have spent the last decade resisting encroachments on their spaces. So as an important matter of historical record she recounts how feminist organisations like her own nia project and Aurora New Dawn were the first to bravely insist on exercising their legal right to keep their services for women single-sex. This is in stark contrast to how most others capitulated under threat of losing their funding from local authorities, who were content to blindly tick every inclusivity box with no care for the impact on women.
The most compelling part of the book for me was Chapter 4 on male violence and women’s single-sex services. Considering the epidemic levels of men’s unpunished violence, rape and sexual assault of women, she gives a really shocking example of how little women are asking for: that of Sarah Summers, fighting for just one female-only rape crisis service she can use in Brighton, an area where all others accept males. This chapter is especially powerful for her bottom-up understanding of what the majority of women say they desperately need to recover from trauma. That is, safe female-only places to heal well away from any male bodies and voices, where those in charge won’t gaslight them by including men - and worse, abuse their power by telling them those men are ‘women’, and that if they object, they’re being “irrational”. Instead, abuse victims want to be supported to “trust themselves again - not to replace the lies with which their abuser has filled their head with a new version”. As someone who once had to spend a week in a refuge like this, I know first hand how every woman’s safety relies on collective confidentiality and trust, and if even a single person had let a male in there, I’d have been angry, frightened and unable to move on. The political really becomes personal when she quotes one victim-survivor who is on guard when she’s given no choice except gender-neutral services: “I often struggle with knowing when I am entitled to have boundaries. I really need the law to be on my side”.
It follows then that ‘single-sex’ must mean on the basis of biological sex, not gender. So I was pleased to see the writer include an even more horrific case of gaslighting that I saw reported a couple of years ago in the national press of a woman shamefully told (as per NHS policy at the time) that she could not have been raped on her ward because it was ‘single-sex’, yet CCTV footage later supported her claim that her accused was a transgender male. It’s clearly to highlight absurdities and gross injustices like this - perpetrated in the name of ‘inclusivity’ - that she’s been driven to write this book, but it’s a wonder her tone and style are so calm.
In some of the data-rich chapters, I would have found it helpful to have additional tabular layout, with key numerical percentages in at-a-glance bold eg women make up only 5% of prisoners (for mostly non-violent crimes), but 70% are victims of domestic violence and abuse. I also didn’t agree with every single word choice or detail. For example, I agree that third spaces for transgender people and their specific needs is the answer, but I’m not sure how practical her suggestion is of extra fourth spaces to cater separately for both male and female transgender / detransitioning people. Having said that, it’s a mark of her generous spirit to suggest that some women would be willing to share their expertise and help trans people set up these spaces.
The key strength of the book is Ingala-Smith’s coherent socialist feminist analysis; she has a deep understanding of all the inter-connected ways women are oppressed in our capitalist society. She totally gets how it’s working-class and minority women who suffer the most from the loss of single-sex spaces, shown by her honouring the resistance work of organisations like Southall Black Sisters. Ultimately, she offers an optimistic egalitarian vision of a world in which women are liberated to be authentically themselves. But in the meantime, I think she’s right to insist women need female-only spaces where they can gather together, feeling safe and free to enjoy themselves, like the wonderful account she includes of a woman at a women-only disco who was for the first time able to close her eyes and have fun, knowing “no man could grope me or grind on me’. Almost every woman I know wants that kind of feeling.
As the book title suggests, Ingala-Smith is resolutely pro-woman, not anti-trans or denying anyone’s existence, and I get the impression she just wants a world in which all groups can peacefully co-exist by respecting each others’ boundaries. I honestly think this is an essential book for all moderates and progressives to read. It deserves to be on university reading lists, alongside other feminist books like Caroline Criado-Perez’s Invisible Women.
Firstly, it’s quite short, easy to read and written in a clear, sober and factual way. And secondly, it’s by a working-class socialist intersectional feminist (in its proper, original sense). Karen Ingala-Smith understands that females, whatever their ethnicity, class or culture, can be disadvantaged in more than one way, but all are oppressed on the basis of their sex by gender (sex-stereotypes), “the biggest tool in the oppression box”. As a woman from a working-class Asian family and community myself, I say she’s spot on.
I was very impressed by how thoroughly researched this book was - not surprising, since Ingala-Smith IS the research and has lived it. Her credentials are impeccable. She founded Counting Dead Women and the UK Femicide Census, worked for decades in organisations dealing with men’s violence against women, and is now CEO of nia, a service for abused women and girls. It’s so obvious reading the many shocking facts and case studies in this book that she knows better than most why females need women-only spaces, how hard-won they were by women building them up from scratch, and why they’re now under threat from authorities forcing them to include transgender males.
A couple of critical facts she points out (with supporting evidence) are that most people still don’t realise the majority of ‘transwomen’ haven’t had genital surgery, or that “criminal behaviours of those who had legally and medically transitioned from men to transwomen follow male pattern offending”. She explains how that’s because they still have their male physiques, strength and years of socialisation, and of course you can’t actually change sex, whatever ‘gender’ you identify as. She argues therefore that individual risk assessments on transgender males just don’t work. All this makes sense to me - otherwise why do we have any single-sex services, for example, women’s toilets? When almost all men understand they have to stay out, we know the minority who violate that space can only do so because they’re prioritising their own feelings over women’s needs.
I found this book a real eye-opener. It’s incredible that the writer has had to expend so much time and energy restating basic biological facts and common sense just to make the most modest of cases: the need to simply defend women’s existing legal right to single-sex spaces (in the Equality Act 2010) for their safety, privacy and dignity. The book is also a history of the ways many feminist and women’s groups have spent the last decade resisting encroachments on their spaces. So as an important matter of historical record she recounts how feminist organisations like her own nia project and Aurora New Dawn were the first to bravely insist on exercising their legal right to keep their services for women single-sex. This is in stark contrast to how most others capitulated under threat of losing their funding from local authorities, who were content to blindly tick every inclusivity box with no care for the impact on women.
The most compelling part of the book for me was Chapter 4 on male violence and women’s single-sex services. Considering the epidemic levels of men’s unpunished violence, rape and sexual assault of women, she gives a really shocking example of how little women are asking for: that of Sarah Summers, fighting for just one female-only rape crisis service she can use in Brighton, an area where all others accept males. This chapter is especially powerful for her bottom-up understanding of what the majority of women say they desperately need to recover from trauma. That is, safe female-only places to heal well away from any male bodies and voices, where those in charge won’t gaslight them by including men - and worse, abuse their power by telling them those men are ‘women’, and that if they object, they’re being “irrational”. Instead, abuse victims want to be supported to “trust themselves again - not to replace the lies with which their abuser has filled their head with a new version”. As someone who once had to spend a week in a refuge like this, I know first hand how every woman’s safety relies on collective confidentiality and trust, and if even a single person had let a male in there, I’d have been angry, frightened and unable to move on. The political really becomes personal when she quotes one victim-survivor who is on guard when she’s given no choice except gender-neutral services: “I often struggle with knowing when I am entitled to have boundaries. I really need the law to be on my side”.
It follows then that ‘single-sex’ must mean on the basis of biological sex, not gender. So I was pleased to see the writer include an even more horrific case of gaslighting that I saw reported a couple of years ago in the national press of a woman shamefully told (as per NHS policy at the time) that she could not have been raped on her ward because it was ‘single-sex’, yet CCTV footage later supported her claim that her accused was a transgender male. It’s clearly to highlight absurdities and gross injustices like this - perpetrated in the name of ‘inclusivity’ - that she’s been driven to write this book, but it’s a wonder her tone and style are so calm.
In some of the data-rich chapters, I would have found it helpful to have additional tabular layout, with key numerical percentages in at-a-glance bold eg women make up only 5% of prisoners (for mostly non-violent crimes), but 70% are victims of domestic violence and abuse. I also didn’t agree with every single word choice or detail. For example, I agree that third spaces for transgender people and their specific needs is the answer, but I’m not sure how practical her suggestion is of extra fourth spaces to cater separately for both male and female transgender / detransitioning people. Having said that, it’s a mark of her generous spirit to suggest that some women would be willing to share their expertise and help trans people set up these spaces.
The key strength of the book is Ingala-Smith’s coherent socialist feminist analysis; she has a deep understanding of all the inter-connected ways women are oppressed in our capitalist society. She totally gets how it’s working-class and minority women who suffer the most from the loss of single-sex spaces, shown by her honouring the resistance work of organisations like Southall Black Sisters. Ultimately, she offers an optimistic egalitarian vision of a world in which women are liberated to be authentically themselves. But in the meantime, I think she’s right to insist women need female-only spaces where they can gather together, feeling safe and free to enjoy themselves, like the wonderful account she includes of a woman at a women-only disco who was for the first time able to close her eyes and have fun, knowing “no man could grope me or grind on me’. Almost every woman I know wants that kind of feeling.
As the book title suggests, Ingala-Smith is resolutely pro-woman, not anti-trans or denying anyone’s existence, and I get the impression she just wants a world in which all groups can peacefully co-exist by respecting each others’ boundaries. I honestly think this is an essential book for all moderates and progressives to read. It deserves to be on university reading lists, alongside other feminist books like Caroline Criado-Perez’s Invisible Women.
February 22, 2025
This was very good. At times, a slightly tough read (it tended, in moments, toward reading like a textbook), though so many insightful, important points were made in this book that I had not thought of or known prior to reading it. An important, thought-provoking book on a timely issue, I'd recommend this one.
November 3, 2023
This book is insanely self-centered and is just a fundamental misunderstanding of feminism, gender, and abuse. It's offensive to abuse victims that Smith claims to be helping and it's offensive to women everywhere.
November 24, 2023
Didn’t buy this it was just as the library so I had a look and to be frank. If you read a book that equates denial of hate crime related murder to someone dying because they ate too much chocolate and agree you’re a very sad person and I wish nothing good to you! That’s all :)
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews