Non-binary colleague using disabled toilet

I don't blame them, the disabled toilets tend to be be much nicer.

If the employee toilets are single cubicles then arguably there is no need to label them m or f and just have them available for everyone. Problem solved.

Well. We don't know the pronouns do we? No one wishes to presume. How very transphobic

Exactly- but then lots of people on here would have to find something else to be performatively offended about and then where would we be?

Well, you’re determined to think so. I say live and let live so long as they’re not hurting anyone, which they’re not.

All this stuff about non-binary people being performative and thinking they’re ’special’ speaks volumes about how nasty some people on here are.

I remember in the old days when gays was all people whined about, nowadays gays are relatively accepted and protected, so gotta pile up on the next more vulnerable smaller group since whining about the gays isn't as popular or as accepted anymore.

Whether PPs like it or not, gender reassignment (including identifying as non-binary) is a protected characteristic in the UK, so your outdated views will, I hope, one day be viewed in the same way as racism and homophobia are today.

@verysmellyjelly
If you had read the thread, you would see that this affects disabled people and that we care. It's sad that you think that doesn't matter.

OP said they saw the non binary person use the toilet and that's it, so in this case there's literally no proof anyone got affected because she never saw any disabled person waiting for their turn.

Also fact that we don't really know if the person is disabled or not.

@Coconutter24
But in this case they’re not disabled and the commenter didn’t say that non-binary people can’t be disabled

OP says they're not disabled, assumption, not fact, as far as we know they might have a invisible disability.

And before anyone tries to say otherwise, OP is clearly not friends with the person, and as proven by many posters one can have invisible disability and nobody would know.

@PurpleSparkledPixie
Transmen are biologically female.
Transwomen are biologically male.

They are still the same sex they had at birth. It really isnt that difficult to understand.

Can you please clarify your post? Because if I understand correct you want trans to use the bathroom of their birth sex.

But that opens a big issue, because by your logic a transmen, who depending on how far enough they're in the transition would look like a man, should then use the women bathroom because it's their birth sex?

I'm 100% sure women wouldn't like that, the logic that trans should only use the bathroom of their birth sex simply doesn't work either because the issue is not black and white.

Gender reassignment is a protected characteristic.

Gender identity (including made up bullshit like non-binary) is not a protected characteristic.

Apart from their ableistic actions in using disabled toilets you mean?

“OP says they're not disabled, assumption, not fact, as far as we know they might have an invisible disability.”

OP said they are not disabled and don’t consider themselves to be. So maybe they’ve spoke about disabilities? Maybe they are or maybe not either way it was non of OPs business to report this person using the disabled toilet

Using an empty toilet to have a wee is really, really not the big deal you want it to be.

Using an empty toilet to have a wee is really, really not the big deal you want it to be.

Disabled toilets exist because there are disabled people who either (or both) can't use a non-accessible loo or can't wait in a queue and might need to go to the loo as a matter of urgency. So it's totally inappropriate for someone who isn't disabled - regardless of their gender identity beliefs - to use that loo and potentially stop a disabled person from getting what they need.

Feeling uncomfortable because you are on your own in a loo as described by the OP is spectacularly silly IMO. That said, I'd think the best solution would be to make the men's toilet cubicle gender-neutral. That would be inclusive for the non-binary individual, men, and women and the disabled.

I looked again and you're right, they don't consider themselves disabled.

I actually went to check OP exact words:
FYI this person is not disabled and does not consider themself to have a disability

"does not consider themself to have a disability" is a very interesting choice of words, because as we saw in this thread some people have problems that are disabilities but they don't consider it a disability cause it's not as bad as it could be.

So going literally by OP words the person probably has a disability, they simple don't consider themselves to have a disability.

OP words are kind of contradcitory, either the person don't have disability or don't consider themselves to have one, why would OP say the second part if the person don't have disability?

Kinda points out to the person having invisible disability but not considering it bad enough to call themselves disabled.

Ah, you are another ableist who has no regard for the needs of disabled people.

Use either of the two single occupancy employee toilets. They have male and female written on the door but are identical single occupancy units and it’s not uncommon for people to use the “wrong” one when the other is occupied.

No, I’m really not. It’s an empty toilet.