There's something racist about toilet provision in the UK.

We don't know what they said but that was the argument they were supporting (the argument the government was making).

The Scottish government. Just to clarify.

👏 👏 👏

Thanks.

We don't actually know what Amnesty's intervention to the court was, because unlike Sex Matters and the lesbians interveners, Amnesty has chosen to keep their intervention confidential. All we know is that it was in support of the word sex in the Equality Act being based on what it says on a government certificate, rather than on biology.

The effect of that , if the judges had been swayed by it, would have been women not being entitled to single sex spaces, because those spaces would also have been for men with gender recognition certificates. We don't know what they said but that was the argument they were supporting (the argument the government was making).

They literally spoke at the Supreme Court stating women in the uk do not deserve single sex spaces. I just want to know why that is. Surely all women deserve privacy, safety dignity of single sex spaces?

This isn't accurate, and for the sake of accuracy I hope you don't mind if I correct it. Interested organisations were invited to submit legal arguments to support their application to have their evidence considered by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is all about clarifying the law: it doesn't make new law.

The SC considered all the submissions from interested parties and decided which had merit based on the legal arguments put forward. A number of submissions were discounted, including the Amnesty International argument which I suspect (happy to be corrected if I'm wrong) was binned because it was based on Stonewall Law. Stonewall Law is a mashed-up version of the law that Stonewall has been saying is 'the law' for years. It's not the actual law and it has brought a number of organisations into disrepute when they've followed it. Sussex University and the Open University are two organisations that have lost millions because they preferred to believe in Stonewall Law rather than the law itself.

I'm not sure they are. I think the point is that if you're a person arguing that British women do not need single sex toilet provision so we should allow transwomen in, or only have unisex toilets, then why are you not arguing also that women in other countries don't need single sex provision? What so special about UK men compared to men from abroad that they are safe? And are you ideas that they are safe based in racism against men from abroad. It's a convoluted way of coming at it, but I think the point actually is, if women from other countries need single sex spaces then so do we.

No, the countries are not being racist. Amnesty are being racist by claiming women in developing countries need single sex provision but women in the western world do not. They literally spoke at the Supreme Court stating women in the uk do not deserve single sex spaces. I just want to know why that is. Surely all women deserve privacy, safety dignity of single sex spaces?

They're not being racist.

Most people agree that we need single sex spaces here.

The issue has been over the past 10 years or so that 'woman' was redefined as a category that also included any man who declared himself to be a woman.

The West still recognises the risk to women from men but contorted itself into all manner of pretzels to pretend that some men had become women in order to silence women's objections and allow those men to do what they wanted.

It wasn't that they decided that British/Western men were less of a risk than men from other cultures but that they pretended some men were no longer men.

Thanks for making it clearer.

I think it's an insult to UK women. We're seen as a soft target (liberal, mostly non religious, probably think we're all 'easy' with loose morals so don't deserve protecting) we as a nation don't command respect. It's why we're not given it.

Minorities living in the UK command respect, they make sure our society adjusts for them. We do it, everytime, even when it doesn't suit the majorities needs.

And that's where we need a backbone and to care less what we might be labelled as and say "yes ok, that sounds reasonable, we'll try that " or "no, a full burkha won't work in this society " (for example. But, people are too scared. It's balance what we're looking for. And sometimes the means "no". Other countries dare say it. We don't.

Women are viewed as lesser and are seen as a man's possession in some cultures/countries. It's not too hard to see that some men from certain non westernised/non first world countries may not have the moral /societal barriers in place around rape.

We may have legislation in place to give women equal status in the Wsetern world, but plenty of men in the western world still view women as lesser, still see women as a man's possession, still lack the moral /societal barriers in place around rape.

Or are you implying that rape is an issue specific to the developing countries?

This is exactly the racism that the OP is pointing out!

She didn't say other countries but organisations may be.
Demanding mixed spaces in UK but segregated elswehere suggests they think men in UK are not danger but the ones elsewhere are.

Women are viewed as lesser and are seen as a man's possession in some cultures/countries. It's not too hard to see that some men from certain non westernised/non first world countries may not have the moral /societal barriers in place around rape.
Not all cultures abide by UK laws and values you know ?

UK rape stats are not exactly shining example of respect towards women or aboding by law or having moral/societal barriers around rape... Looking at overal UK sexual asaault and harassment rates, we absolutely should have segregated safe spaces and harsher laws.
At least 25% women over 16 have been assaulted or raped. Some reports indicated 90%+ being sexually harrased. The rape per capita here is masaive for western developed democracy

The quoted person had stated that other countries were being racist by segregating males from female toilets.

Western organisations such as Amnesty are being racist about 'other countries' by segregating males from female toilets in those countries.

I think you've got the wrong end of the stick (though the OP is worded confusingly).

It's not 'other countries are being racist by sex segregating their toilets'. It's 'how come people think mixed toilets are safe here when they acknowledge they're not safe in developing countries '?

Women in all countries are safest in single sex facilities, but how come it's not ok to point that out about the UK but it is OK to about other countries? Do people who think mixed sex is fine here but not somewhere else think UK men are safer to women than foreign men are?That's the racism bit.

I don't think anyone on this thread is so thoughtless or unaware that they don't understand the difference between the situation for women in developing or war-torn countries and here in the UK and Western Europe.

What you are using this patronising argument to avoid discussing is the fact that when they are working in the developing world these aid charities can clearly. define what a woman is, and what dangers she faces. But here in Europe it suits them to argue, in court, that men who identify as women are women and should have access to spaces where women with their pants down, or naked in changing rooms and showers. They are discounting the risks and the feelings millions of women in order to pander to the feelings of a small number of men.

Can we get something straight?

There is no such thing in UK law as 'gender neutral toiets'.

Unisex/mixed sex toilets by law must be individual enclosed single occupancy spaces opening out onto a concourse which means no external/additional door leading to an enclosed 'toilets' space/room. Those individual cubicles should contain a sink, sanitary bin and be enclosed from floor to ceiling on all sides. I've been to many restaurants and cafes that offer this and, other than piss on the seat/floor, are fine.

Toilets in public spaces (including work and schools) that do not meet these standards but have been designated 'gender neutral' (usually by no more than switching the sign on the door to the women's toilets are not compliant with the law.

No woman should ever find herself in a public toilet standing next to a man washing her hands at the sink.

The provision for single sex or legally compliant single sex toilets in the UK exists for everyone over the age of 8.

Ah okay, got it

Do you mean the same people who are in support of seperate facilities for women from developing countries, because they see 'foreign' men as a danger to women, are also arguing we don't need them here, because British men are 'perfectly safe'? If that's the thinking then yes, that is racist, playing into ideas of civilised westerners and foreign 'savages', when it's being male that poses this risk regardless of nationality.

No..... All women need protection from men in women's toilets. The quoted person had stated that other countries were being racist by segregating males from female toilets. I have no idea where race is even coming into it to be honest. It kind of reminds me of that old saying "and that's got what to do with the price of fish ?"

I'm sorry, what now?

Are you saying that men in UK culture always abide by the law and therefore UK women don't need protection from rape? Seriously?

Amd that it's only white middle class women's sensibilities that are in danger of getting hurt here? Christ on a bike 🤦‍♀️

Wondered when Reform would be introduced into the thread. 🥱

You do realise that men and women are not given equality in other cultures right ?

Women are viewed as lesser and are seen as a man's possession in some cultures/countries. It's not too hard to see that some men from certain non westernised/non first world countries may not have the moral /societal barriers in place around rape.

Not all cultures abide by UK laws and values you know ?

But you carry on. Let's not let protecting women get in the way of potentially offending someone (usually a white UK born middle class woman on someone elses behalf)

I have just gone on there and searched for 'women's toilets' and haven't found anything about a specific campaign for single-sex toilets.

There's several articles about refugee camps which refer to overflowing toilets and women attacked whilst having to pee in a field, as well as one about women in camps being afraid to go to the toilet at night because they might be attacked on the way there, but nothing specifying creating single sex toilets.

I'd heard some years ago about a WHO campaign for toilets in general, and educating people on why they should use them where they are available on the grounds of health.

Have you any article links where it explicitly states Amnesty are campaigning for single sex toilets rather than simply toilets with lockable doors, or more toilets in people's own homes?
There was an article I saw in looking at the site just now about some women being attacked when they went to use a field because they hadn't a toilet at home.

I just don't get all this. All we have to share in a gender neutral toilets is fucking wash basin and hand dryer.

There speaks the voice of ignorant innocence. Or disingenuousness.

Many men get their kicks out of hearing women pee, intimidating women, seeing women vulnerable, rummaging for used sanpro in sanitary bins. Because toilets are relatively isolated places, men will lurk around or actively follow women into toilets to assault them. And that's not even mentioning their merely unpleasant toilet behaviours, such as peeing with the seat down, missing the toilet, not flushing, and leaving cubicle doors open while using them.

These are our lovely Western men. This is why I agree that it is racist to claim that 'brown' women need single-sex provision to protect them from 'brown' men, while claiming that 'white' women are not at risk from 'white' men. 'Brown' men are not more dangerous than 'white' men. 'White' men are just as bad as 'brown' men.

Misogyny is not racist.

Isn’t it? Surely suggesting men of some cultures are more dangerous to women than men of other cultures is racism? Isn’t that one of the talking points Reform spew out? How is it ok for Amnesty International etc to imply that but Reform rightly get condemned for it?